Upgrade Mac MSO v.X To Mac MSO 2004 To Mac MSO 2008

[kurttodoroff]

I own a G4 iMac 15-inch which runs 10.4.11. I plan to purchase an
Intel iMac 24-inch soon.

I am a registered user of MSO v.X. I wish to purchase the MSO 2004
upgrade at the discounted upgrade price which often sells for
$203.99. Then I wish to upgrade MSO 2004 to MSO 2008 for the $6.99
upgrade price.

Does my MSO v.X version qualify for the MSO 2004 upgrade price? Will
the MSO 2004 installer recognize my MSO v.X installation as a
qualifying upgradeable package? Is my MSO v.X to MSO 2008 upgrade
path legitimate?

On a sidebar, I plan to perform a fresh installation of MSO 2008 on
the Intel iMac and then make the MSO settings match the MSO v.X
installation on the G4 iMac. Is there a compelling reason to:

1: Install MSO 2004 over MSO v.X on the G4 iMac.

2: Use the Migration Assistant to transfer the G4 iMac settings and
applications to the Intel iMac. I perform a full bootable backup from
the G4 iMac to an external Firewire hard drive every night. I would
connect this hard drive to the new Intel iMac to perform the data and
application transfer.

3: Install MSO 2008 over MSO 2008 on the Intel iMac.

Thank you for your assistance.

Regards,

Kurt R. Todoroff
(e-mail address removed)

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Kurt:

Very, very good questions! So often we get wails of misery in here from
people who switched their brain off and stuck the CD in the hole.

The leap from Power PC to Intel is a very big change. The difference
between OS 10.3 and OS 10.5 is a very big change. The difference between
Office 2004 and Office 2008 is a huge change. Trying to import from one to
the other is suicide

Let's take your questions one at a time:

Does my MSO v.X version qualify for the MSO 2004 upgrade price?
Yes.

the MSO 2004 installer recognize my MSO v.X installation as a
qualifying upgradeable package?
Yes.

Is my MSO v.X to MSO 2008 upgrade path legitimate?

Yes, and encouraged by Microsoft.

Is there a compelling reason to:

1: Install MSO 2004 over MSO v.X on the G4 iMac.

No. It will make no difference whether you do that or not. However, if you
intend to leave the G4 in service, you will burn up a licence key and have
to buy TWO licences of Office 2004 .

2: Use the Migration Assistant to transfer the G4 iMac settings and
applications to the Intel iMac.

WARNING: Do NOT do that!!!

That's very important. The Office 2004 settings from the G4 are not
compatible with the Office 2008 settings needed on the Intel. If you
transfer them, expect constant problems with Office 2008.

Instead, perform a clean install of Office 2004 on the new machine, and a
clean install of Office 2008. It only takes a moment, and the system will
then run sweet and clean forever.

Everyone: DO NOT ATTEMPT TO USE APPLE'S MIGRATION TOOL TO TRANSPORT OFFICE
2008. IF YOU DO, YOU WILL BE SORRY!

I perform a full bootable backup from
the G4 iMac to an external Firewire hard drive every night. I would
connect this hard drive to the new Intel iMac to perform the data and
application transfer.

Don't even think of doing this for Microsoft Office. I would suggest that
you don't do it for "anything". A 10.5 Intel is a very different beast from
a 10.3 PPC. The preferences that come across do not make sense on OS 10.5
and are likely to cause constant misery: crashes, hangs, failures to update,
permissions problems, etc.

3: Install MSO 2008 over MSO 2008 on the Intel iMac.

If you meant install 2004 over 2008, I suggest that you do not do that
either. You will get the best performance from 2008 by installing 2008
first, THEN installing 2004 afterward

However, the one you install last will take over the shortcuts, so be
prepared for that if you do it that way. If you simply install 2004 then
2008 immediately afterward, the problem does not exist. The problem is if
2008 tries to use customisations from 2004. It does not always succeed

Do not forget that you need to run all of the updates for 2004 from 11.3.5
onward once you install. This is particularly important on the Intel, an
one of the reasons why you should not attempt to migrate: you would end up
with PPC components in an Intel machine, which is a guaranteed source of
severe stomach ache

Cheers

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

 

[John McGhie]

I made a mis-type! I should have said:

Everyone: DO NOT ATTEMPT TO USE APPLE'S MIGRATION TOOL TO TRANSPORT OFFICE
2004 from PPC to Intel. IF YOU DO, YOU WILL BE SORRY!

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

 

[kurttodoroff]

I made a mis-type!  I should have said:

 Everyone:  DO NOT ATTEMPT TO USE APPLE'S MIGRATION TOOL TO TRANSPORT OFFICE
 2004 from PPC to Intel.  IF YOU DO, YOU WILL BE SORRY!

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here:http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group.  Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltdhttp://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia.  S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

Hi John,

Thank you for your prompt and comprehensive answers. Given your
replies to my questions regarding qualifying software for purchasing
and installing upgrades, since I possess qualifying software (MSO v.X)
can I streamline the upgrade and installation process by:

1: Taking delivery of MSO 2004, but just let it sit on my desk
without ever installing it on my Intel iMac, then

2: Subsequently taking delivery of MSO 2008 and then install it on my
new Intel iMac?

This would certainly be the most simple method. However, I am
concerned that if I skip all of the intermediate MSO 2004 installation
steps, that MSO 2008 won't install on my Intel iMac since it won't
find any qualifying software there. Perhaps I'm exercising too much
caution and over-analyzing this issue. Will my suggested two step
installation approach (above) work? I don't have a need to install
and use MSO 2004. I can continue to use MSO v.X on my G4 iMac for the
foreseeable future until I transfer all of my data to the Intel iMac.
(Thank you for the advice to not use the Migration Assistant on MSO,
and on the PPC Mac to Intel Mac settings.) I would prefer to migrate
from MSO v.X directly to MSO 2008 and avoid the middleware, if
possible.

By the way, I wish to ask you two questions regarding MSO 2008. I
assure you that I will not pose a plethora of questions to you
regarding its new features and capabilities. I'll be patient.

1: Does MSO 2008 have a backup settings wizard as does my MSO on my
Windows machine at my business?

2: Does Word 2008 and Powerpoint 2008 support tabbed sheets as Excel
has for quite some time?

I made these two suggestions to Microsoft a couple of years ago and
was curious if I would see them in the new Mac MSO release. The way
that I often use Word and Powerpoint, tabbed sheets inside one file
would be invaluable to me, and would streamline much of my workflow.

Again, thank you John.

Best wishes.

Regards,

Kurt R. Todoroff
(e-mail address removed)

 

[Diane Ross]

If you meant install 2004 over 2008, I suggest that you do not do that
either. You will get the best performance from 2008 by installing 2008
first, THEN installing 2004 afterward

If you want to run two versions of Office for Mac, I would use a new User to
install Office in the User's application folder. Fast User Switching makes
it easy to switch over. This way there is no conflicts.

I agree with John's advice to install your applications from scratch. Also
don't do the upgrade from Tiger to Leopard. Although in theory this should
be safe for everyone, third-party system add-ons, as well as damaged system
files that aren't replaced, can cause problems.

Archive and Install: This method installs a complete, new version of
Leopard, using none of your older OS installation files. It keeps all of
your older system files on your hard drive-in a folder called Previous
System. This method avoids many problems because the contents of your old
System folder, including some third-party system add-ons, are archived in
the Previous System folder.

Erase and Install: This method actually erases your entire hard
drive-deleting all your data and installs Leopard. (Be sure you have a
backup of your data to use this option.) This is useful if your current OS X
installation has been having problems, as it guarantees that any disc or
file corruption is eliminated. You'll need to either recreate your user
accounts in Leopard and restore your data from a backup, or use OS X's Setup
Assistant to transfer those accounts and data over from another computer or
from a full backup. (Very similar to an Archive and Install with the
Preserve Users and Network Settings option-but with the added bonus of a
new, clean hard drive.)

Backup your data before installing. Verify your data after making backup.
Important!!!! One user reported they did a backup only to find that some
files like their Identity folder was empty.

Recommended by users for backup in Tiger:

SuperDuper! <http://www.shirt-pocket.com/>

Carbon Copy Cloner <http://www.bombich.com/software/ccc.html>

SuperDuper has not yet released a Leopard version and CCC has, but with
reports of problems. Be sure to set up Time Machine in Leopard.

 

[Diane Ross]

1: Taking delivery of MSO 2004, but just let it sit on my desk
without ever installing it on my Intel iMac, then

2: Subsequently taking delivery of MSO 2008 and then install it on my
new Intel iMac?

That should work with no problems. Are you going to get the full version of
Office or the Home & Student version? There is no upgrade path with the Home
& Student, but the price is less than an upgrade to the full Office. Not
having to worry about finding your old CD for a future reinstall makes
getting a version that isn't an upgrade something to consider.

Office will be available in three versions:

Office 2008 for Mac ($400 retail; $240 for the upgrade)
Office 2008 for Mac Home and Student Edition ($150)
Office 2008 for Mac Special Media Edition ($500; $300 for the upgrade)

 

[CyberTaz]

Since John's probably napping right now;-)...

Hi John,

Thank you for your prompt and comprehensive answers. Given your
replies to my questions regarding qualifying software for purchasing
and installing upgrades, since I possess qualifying software (MSO v.X)
can I streamline the upgrade and installation process by:

1: Taking delivery of MSO 2004, but just let it sit on my desk
without ever installing it on my Intel iMac, then

Yes, you certainly can.

2: Subsequently taking delivery of MSO 2008 and then install it on my
new Intel iMac?

Yes, again - however, if the iMac has Office 2004 Test Drive on it make sure
to use the Remove Office utility to get rid of it before installing either
2004 or 2008 versions. Also, when you install 2008 - since it will probably
be an Upgrade Package - you'll need to have the install disk for either 2004
or X handy when you install it. You will be prompted to point to the prior
qualifying version if it can't be found on the system... Just insert the CD
so the 2008 Installer knows it's a legit install.

This would certainly be the most simple method. However, I am
concerned that if I skip all of the intermediate MSO 2004 installation
steps, that MSO 2008 won't install on my Intel iMac since it won't
find any qualifying software there. Perhaps I'm exercising too much
caution and over-analyzing this issue. Will my suggested two step
installation approach (above) work? I don't have a need to install
and use MSO 2004. I can continue to use MSO v.X on my G4 iMac for the
foreseeable future until I transfer all of my data to the Intel iMac.
(Thank you for the advice to not use the Migration Assistant on MSO,
and on the PPC Mac to Intel Mac settings.) I would prefer to migrate
from MSO v.X directly to MSO 2008 and avoid the middleware, if
possible.

See above, of course ;-)

By the way, I wish to ask you two questions regarding MSO 2008. I
assure you that I will not pose a plethora of questions to you
regarding its new features and capabilities. I'll be patient.

1: Does MSO 2008 have a backup settings wizard as does my MSO on my
Windows machine at my business?

2: Does Word 2008 and Powerpoint 2008 support tabbed sheets as Excel
has for quite some time?

These are feature detail about 2008 which anyone who knows is not at liberty
to say. However, if you're referring to Word's Always create Backup Copy
feature my guess would be yes since 2004 already has that feature. OTOH, if
you're referring to the Save AutoRecover Data feature the answer is also
Yes, but that is *not* for backing up nor is it an automatic save.

My guess on the tabbed sheets - No. The document structure of Word is
totally different than Excel's so that concept really doesn't apply. However
there may be other features that will work just as well or better for the
purpose.

I made these two suggestions to Microsoft a couple of years ago and
was curious if I would see them in the new Mac MSO release. The way
that I often use Word and Powerpoint, tabbed sheets inside one file
would be invaluable to me, and would streamline much of my workflow.

Again, thank you John.

Best wishes.

Regards,

Kurt R. Todoroff
(e-mail address removed)

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[kurttodoroff]

On 1/5/08 2:08 PM, in article C3A64AF4.D7B1%[email protected], "John McGhie"

<snip great replies>

Diane and Bob,

Thank you for your contributions.

I plan to purchase the MSO 2008 for Mac Special Media Edition because
the Microsoft promotion allows us to upgrade to it from any MSO 2004
version for $6.99.

Great idea suggesting that I remove the Office 2004 Test Drive from my
new Intel iMac using the Remove Office before installing MSO 2008
SME. I've added this to my list of things to do. If the MSO 2008 SME
installer prompts me to validate the upgrade with the MSO 2004 disk,
I'll have it ready. (I've done this before several times.)

I just checked my Windows computer. The proper tool name that I
should have used is: Save My Settings Wizard. The Save My Settings
Wizard collects all of the MSO component settings for all components
and then bundles them into a single file. I have two businesses at
separate locations, each with its own Windows computer. Each business/
location/computer has its own licensed copy of MSO installed on it. I
configured my MSO application settings and toolbars on business/
location/computer number one, ran the Save My Settings Wizard on it,
then copied that settings file to business/location/computer number
two and used the Wizard on this machine to transfer all of these
settings to it in order to mirror all of the settings and toolbars on
system one. It works great with one significant problem. All of the
MSO applications on #2 now say that they are licensed to business
number one, which clearly they are not. The Wizard overwrote the
licensing information, much to my dismay.

It's unfortunate that the tabbed sheets feature is not in Word and
Powerpoint. Regardless of document structure, I could put this
feature to very good use.

I will not be installing both MSO 2004 and MSO 2008 on the new Intel
iMac. Just MSO 2008. However, I really liked your idea about
installing a different version via a different User account. Great
thinking.

I have concluded from both of you and from many user experience
articles that I have read online, that I will indeed install
everything on the new Intel iMac from scratch. (Leopard is pre-
loaded. I'm leaving Tiger on my G4 iMac.) That leaves me with the
issue of fonts. Starting with my first Macintosh IIx a million years
ago, I have accumulated a large collection of fonts (legally) through
application installations and OS upgrades. Assuming that the Leopard
font folders do not contain a true superset of my existing font
collection (a pretty safe bet), I am inclined to transfer the excess
of my collection (the difference between what is in Leopard and what I
have) to the new Intel iMac. Since I am the only person who uses, and
who will use this computer, I plan to transfer them to /Library/Fonts
and keep ~/Library/Fonts empty, notwithstanding any applications that
install their own fonts in their own special nonstandard location. I
think that MSO is the only application that I use that does this.
Possibly Adobe Acrobat Professional, too. I think that I'll also
place all of my screen savers in /Library/Screen Savers instead of ~/
Library/Screen Savers. I'll use my .Mac account to resync all of my
Bookmarks, Calendars, Contacts, Keychains, Mail Accounts, Mail Rules
Signatures Smart Mailboxes from my G4 iMac to my Intel iMac.

I've used SuperDuper! for some time now, and I love it.

I've gotten well off subject here. Thank you for indulging me.

Best wishes.

Regards,

Kurt R. Todoroff
(e-mail address removed)

 

[Diane Ross]

I'll use my .Mac account to resync all of my
Bookmarks, Calendars, Contacts, Keychains, Mail Accounts, Mail Rules
Signatures Smart Mailboxes from my G4 iMac to my Intel iMac.

Be very careful using sync with .mac. The new .Mac sync is big on syncing
everything between different Mac's including preferences. It seems that this
preference sync is far from being intelligent (at least it seems like that)
but more like a raw dump. The multitude of possible hardware software
combinations that are possible seems to be too diverse especially if you are
mixing different operating system versions (10.4.x - 10.5 ). I would
recommend disabling the "Preference" sync feature on .Mac until applications
on all machines are updated.

I would imagine that Keychains could also have some problems with
permissions. Permissions issues seem to be one of the top Leopard bug
problems. A lot has changed under the hood from Tiger to Leopard. I don't
pretend to be an expert, but Permissions, AppleScripts, Automator actions
and commands in the Terminal are different. I believe Leopard is all Unix
now. New with Leopard is the use of "access control lists" (ACLs).

Unix FAQ - The macosxhints Forums

I've used SuperDuper! for some time now, and I love it.

It's been called the gold standard of backup applications.

I've gotten well off subject here. Thank you for indulging me.

This is the way we learn from each other. I'm sure readers on the newsgroup
will appreciate your comments.

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Kurt:

I see Bob has done most of the hard work for me ‹ Thanks Bob

can I streamline the upgrade and installation process by:

1: Taking delivery of MSO 2004, but just let it sit on my desk
without ever installing it on my Intel iMac, then

Yes you can, but NO you don't want to. Office 2004 has features that Office
2008 does not, particularly if you are inter-working with Windows machines.
For example, as has already been announced by Microsoft, Office 2008 has no
VBA interpreter, so ALL macros will stop dead, in both Word and Excel,
unless you keep 2004 handy.

2: Subsequently taking delivery of MSO 2008 and then install it on my
new Intel iMac?

Yes, you can, but see above

concerned that if I skip all of the intermediate MSO 2004 installation
steps, that MSO 2008 won't install on my Intel iMac since it won't
find any qualifying software there.

The Microsoft "qualifying mechanism" will look on your hard disk for the
qualifying version. If it does not find it, it will ask for it. At that
point, you can offer the Office 2004 CD (just eject the Office 2008 DVD, pop
in the Office 2004 CD, then put the Office 2008 DVD back in when it asks for
it). It will burp happily and carry on with the install.

Perhaps I'm exercising too much
caution and over-analyzing this issue.

No, you are not. The people who do not do this level of analysis will serve
to keep us happy with their questions and wails for help for the next year
or so. We are depending on them to keep the number of questions up in this
news group, so that we can all earn our awards again next year

Will my suggested two step
installation approach (above) work?

Yes it will, BUT...

I don't have a need to install
and use MSO 2004.

Yes, you do, but you have not compared the feature tables of the two
products yet so your analysis has not revealed that need yet

I would prefer to migrate
from MSO v.X directly to MSO 2008 and avoid the middleware, if
possible.

In which case, put 2008 in first, then 2004 second.

However, if you Install 2004 and upgrade it, but do not USE it, then install
2008 immediately, you will achieve the same effect without having to
subsequently correct all of your file associations so the files open in the
later version.

The last one installed captures all the file associations, so if you do them
in reverse order, all double-clicks will be directed to 2004

By the way, I wish to ask you two questions regarding MSO 2008. I
assure you that I will not pose a plethora of questions to you
regarding its new features and capabilities. I'll be patient.

Don't be patient. We NEED the questions. Without the questions, we would
have nothing to do, and would thus not be able to qualify for our MVP awards
We need you more than you need us!

1: Does MSO 2008 have a backup settings wizard as does my MSO on my
Windows machine at my business?

I am not allowed to say. But I would strongly suggest that you acquaint
yourself with the workings of Time Machine

2: Does Word 2008 and Powerpoint 2008 support tabbed sheets as Excel
has for quite some time?

I am not allowed to say. However, I would point out that those tabbed
sheets are an Excel Anachronism bought to us because the Windows Excel team
ran out of time converting their application to Multi-Document Interface,
then tried to turn necessity into a virtue.

In my rarely humble opinion, tabbed sheets is a bloody nuisance in Excel, I
really hope it never infects any further applications on either Windows or
the Mac

I really believe that the Task Bar (in Windows) or the Dock (in Apple) do a
much better job than those tabs, which I find both counter-intuitive and
fiddly on a small screen.

In Windows, you can actually revert to the old Single Document Interface if
you are persistent enough. Which in conjunction with the Task Bar gives you
the interface you are after.

In Mac, I am afraid you will have to wait and see Ask us again when you
see the product go on sale. We are not allowed to tell you until then.

Cheers

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Kurt:

I just checked my Windows computer. The proper tool name that I
should have used is: Save My Settings Wizard.

There is no Microsoft equivalent for that on the Mac. That functionality is
not needed, because it is provided by Apple OS X.

The "preferences" that occur in Microsoft software on the Mac are simply not
that complex: re-create them on the new machine. The complex preferences
are stored in the Operating System, as they are on Windows, and so on the
Mac the system utilities will handle them for you.

Don't try to migrate your Microsoft application settings from one Mac to
another, or your new machine will never run properly until you do an Archive
and Install of the operating system. You will waste days trying to get it
to go, and fail.

But I make no suggestion about migrating all the other settings you want to
keep. Some folks say "do", some say "don't". I "didn't", but I haven't
gone up to 10.5 either (because I am too mean to pay for it...)

That leaves me with the
issue of fonts. Starting with my first Macintosh IIx a million years
ago, I have accumulated a large collection of fonts (legally) through
application installations and OS upgrades. Assuming that the Leopard
font folders do not contain a true superset of my existing font
collection (a pretty safe bet), I am inclined to transfer the excess
of my collection (the difference between what is in Leopard and what I
have) to the new Intel iMac.

Be very careful how you do this. Note that both OS 10.5 and Microsoft
Office now rely on Unicode versions of various fonts to get their work done.

It is critical to your health and well-being that you end up with the LATEST
version of each font in your font folders, so you have all the Unicode
characters the new applications need to function.

The way I would do it is this:

1) Install everything except your fonts on the new computer (that will
bring in the new fonts from Microsoft and Apple).

2) Take a copy of your font folder from your old machine.

3) Copy the fonts from the font folder of your new machine over the top of
the copy of your old font folder. This ensures that each font is at the
most recent version, regardless of its source.

4) Copy the result back into your new machine's font folder.

Doing this means that each time you had a name duplicate, the font you get
left with is the most recent version that contains the Unicode character
set. Be very careful with the suitcase and bundle fonts.

You can get some very entertaining (and difficult to diagnose...) bugs in
Office 2008 if you have an old non-Unicode version of a font enabled.

Since I am the only person who uses, and
who will use this computer, I plan to transfer them to /Library/Fonts
and keep ~/Library/Fonts empty, notwithstanding any applications that
install their own fonts in their own special nonstandard location. I
think that MSO is the only application that I use that does this.

I do not think you need to worry about this going forward.

I'll use my .Mac account to resync all of my
Bookmarks, Calendars, Contacts, Keychains, Mail Accounts, Mail Rules
Signatures Smart Mailboxes from my G4 iMac to my Intel iMac.

Hell, I wouldn't, you'll be there forever. Copy them to a USB data key and
copy them from there to the new machine. Or network the two machines and
just drag them across.

I've gotten well off subject here. Thank you for indulging me.

You have? I never noticed! The subject is "Upgrade to MSO 2008". Isn't
that what we're talking about??

Hope this helps
--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

 

[CyberTaz]

Just a follow-up thought on why I believe this will never be functional in a
Word Processing Program - if for no other reason:

2: Does Word 2008 and Powerpoint 2008 support tabbed sheets as Excel
has for quite some time?

[First, I'm not sure why PPt was included in the mix - the windowing of
individual slides - one at a time - is about as close to sheet tabs as you
can getBetter, in fact, because it's more focused than a huge worksheet.]

<Begin Rant>

In a spreadsheet your content is placed within the grid on a specific
sheet... And it stays there. Entering & removing content *does not* cause
the remaining content to shift unless you insert or delete cells. Even if
you do, the content of one sheet doesn't shift to another.

In a word processor your content is a continuous flow from beginning to end.
Therefore, any time you add or remove content, change formatting or impose
any number of other changes the pagination is affected accordingly. IOW, the
content on "tab XYZ" may not be on that tab the next time you go to it.

The tab effect would only prove usable in a finalized project [i.e.,
facilitating navigation for a reader] - for which there is already a viable
& more appropriate solution [as opposed to the software engineering need to
add such functionality to Word] - it's called PDF For ongoing revision or
editing purposes there is also the realm of DTP software - of which Word
*isn't* a part - where content "stays where you put it" so you can click a
tab to go back to it. Even so, in a DTP program you may become a bit
misdirected if you employ Linked Text Frames... Even though the frame stays
on page X the content within it may very well not be the same after revising
the story.

Furthermore, for comparable & more accurate functionality Word already *has*
a number of navigation features that serve the same purpose even more
effectively. If a doc is properly constructed, using the Document Map,
Outline View, Browse Options, Bookmarks, TOC, Index & Footnote/Endnote
hyperlinking, etc. will all do a far more efficient job of getting you where
you need to go than clicking a tab that represents an assumed location where
you "thought" the stuff you're looking for used to be

Not to offend anyone, but I truly believe that those who call for this type
of feature have simply not yet been able to come to grips with the fact that
there are no _physical pages_ in a Word doc (although most users 'think' in
those terms). Quite frankly, Word is - IMHO - junked up enough with
superfluous fluff that deceives & confuses & misleads... Not to mention
adding to the fragility of a file. Adding more crutches for those who
choose to use only the most obvious & convenient "features" thrown in their
faces won't make it a better program

<end of Rant>

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[Michel Bintener]

Hi Kurt,

while it is impossible not to agree with Bob, as usual, you may find it
interesting to know that there is a feature in Word 2004 (and 2008,
according to the preview on <http://www.macoffice2008.com/> ) called
Notebook layout view which presents your document in a layout that
mirrors the looks of an actual notebook, and this document view actually
contains tabs. However, Bob hasn't mentioned it because it isn't a word
processing feature per se; it's more like some kind of stripped-down
outliner with a healthy (over)dose of eye candy (I like it
nonetheless!). This view won't help you if you need to write long
documents or flowing text; however, if all you do is take notes and
structure them, the notebook layout view may come in very handy.

<http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/word2004/highlights.aspx>

--
Michel Bintener
Microsoft MVP
Office:Mac (Entourage & Word)

***Always reply to the newsgroup.***

Just a follow-up thought on why I believe this will never be functional in a
Word Processing Program - if for no other reason:

2: Does Word 2008 and Powerpoint 2008 support tabbed sheets as Excel
has for quite some time?

[First, I'm not sure why PPt was included in the mix - the windowing of
individual slides - one at a time - is about as close to sheet tabs as you
can getBetter, in fact, because it's more focused than a huge worksheet.]

<Begin Rant>

In a spreadsheet your content is placed within the grid on a specific
sheet... And it stays there. Entering & removing content *does not* cause
the remaining content to shift unless you insert or delete cells. Even if
you do, the content of one sheet doesn't shift to another.

In a word processor your content is a continuous flow from beginning to end.
Therefore, any time you add or remove content, change formatting or impose
any number of other changes the pagination is affected accordingly. IOW, the
content on "tab XYZ" may not be on that tab the next time you go to it.

The tab effect would only prove usable in a finalized project [i.e.,
facilitating navigation for a reader] - for which there is already a viable
& more appropriate solution [as opposed to the software engineering need to
add such functionality to Word] - it's called PDF For ongoing revision or
editing purposes there is also the realm of DTP software - of which Word
*isn't* a part - where content "stays where you put it" so you can click a
tab to go back to it. Even so, in a DTP program you may become a bit
misdirected if you employ Linked Text Frames... Even though the frame stays
on page X the content within it may very well not be the same after revising
the story.

Furthermore, for comparable & more accurate functionality Word already *has*
a number of navigation features that serve the same purpose even more
effectively. If a doc is properly constructed, using the Document Map,
Outline View, Browse Options, Bookmarks, TOC, Index & Footnote/Endnote
hyperlinking, etc. will all do a far more efficient job of getting you where
you need to go than clicking a tab that represents an assumed location where
you "thought" the stuff you're looking for used to be

Not to offend anyone, but I truly believe that those who call for this type
of feature have simply not yet been able to come to grips with the fact that
there are no _physical pages_ in a Word doc (although most users 'think' in
those terms). Quite frankly, Word is - IMHO - junked up enough with
superfluous fluff that deceives & confuses & misleads... Not to mention
adding to the fragility of a file. Adding more crutches for those who
choose to use only the most obvious & convenient "features" thrown in their
faces won't make it a better program

<end of Rant>

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[Kurt]

Just a follow-up thought on why I believe this will never be functional ina
Word Processing Program - if for no other reason:

2:  Does Word 2008 and Powerpoint 2008 support tabbed sheets as Excel
has for quite some time?

[First, I'm not sure why PPt was included in the mix - the windowing of
individual slides - one at a time - is about as close to sheet tabs as you
can getBetter, in fact, because it's more focused than a huge worksheet..]

<Begin Rant>

In a spreadsheet your content is placed within the grid on a specific
sheet... And it stays there. Entering & removing content *does not* cause
the remaining content to shift unless you insert or delete cells. Even if
you do, the content of one sheet doesn't shift to another.

In a word processor your content is a continuous flow from beginning to end.
Therefore, any time you add or remove content, change formatting or impose
any number of other changes the pagination is affected accordingly. IOW, the
content on "tab XYZ" may not be on that tab the next time you go to it.

The tab effect would only prove usable in a finalized project [i.e.,
facilitating navigation for a reader] - for which there is already a viable
& more appropriate solution [as opposed to the software engineering need to
add such functionality to Word] - it's called PDF For ongoing revision or
editing purposes there is also the realm of DTP software - of which Word
*isn't* a part - where content "stays where you put it" so you can click a
tab to go back to it. Even so, in a DTP program you may become a bit
misdirected if you employ Linked Text Frames... Even though the frame stays
on page X the content within it may very well not be the same after revising
the story.

Furthermore, for comparable & more accurate functionality Word already *has*
a number of navigation features that serve the same purpose even more
effectively. If a doc is properly constructed, using the Document Map,
Outline View, Browse Options, Bookmarks, TOC, Index & Footnote/Endnote
hyperlinking, etc. will all do a far more efficient job of getting you where
you need to go than clicking a tab that represents an assumed location where
you "thought" the stuff you're looking for used to be

Not to offend anyone, but I truly believe that those who call for this type
of feature have simply not yet been able to come to grips with the fact that
there are no _physical pages_ in a Word doc (although most users 'think' in
those terms). Quite frankly, Word is - IMHO - junked up enough with
superfluous fluff that deceives & confuses & misleads... Not to mention
adding to the fragility of a file.  Adding more crutches for those who
choose to use only the most obvious & convenient "features" thrown in their
faces won't make it a better program

<end of Rant>

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

Hi Bob,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this subject.

No offense taken. Your description of tabs and spreadhsheets and
grids and cells and their usage is more than obvious, and I would
contend that few people think otherwise. Perhaps your support
experiences bear out a different conclusion. However, given that it
is axiomatic that
"there are no _physical pages_ in a Word doc"
I contend that your assertion that
"(although most users 'think' in those terms)"
is inaccurate and perhaps off base. Then again, perhaps your
assertions reflect more of the real world user base than I am
considering. I may be giving more credit to users than I should.

I will share one example (of many) of how a tabbed Word document would
benefit me. I send a marketing package to potential customers. It
consists of the marketing documentation, the cover letter, and the
custom designed envelope. These three documents are mutually
exclusive and possess no commonality or dependencies vis-a-vis
pagination. I have created one template for each of these three items
in three MSW documents. When I identify another potential customer, I
make a copy of each of these three templates, edit them with the
necessary changes, print them, and send them via U.S. Mail. I would
rather maintain one MSW template document that contains three tabs:
one for the marketing documentation, one for the cover letter, one for
the envelope. This would simplify housekeeping and document
generation. The contents of each tab would possess its own page
attributes (as in Excel, i.e. portrait/landscape, others). I have a
similar process that I follow when I generate a Powerpoint franchise
presentation package from two separate PP template files, that I would
rather store in one document via two tabs.

Your description of how users would use tabs in MSW is not consistent
with my desired usage. Frankly, I don't know why somebody would use
Word tabs or PP tabs in this fashion. It seems as though you and I
approach this issue from opposing views. My view is from a user's
perspective. Your view may be from a technical and developmental
perspective. You have cited technical issues of inter-tabbed linked
data, etcetera. From a user's perspective, this is a non-issue. I
only want it to work in a fashion that simplifies my use of the tool
in arriving at my desired solution and end result.

Thank you for offering your thoughts.

Regards,

Kurt R. Todoroff
(e-mail address removed)

 

[CyberTaz]

Hi Kurt -

Thanks for the detailed description.

To my way of understanding your description, what you are looking for really
amounts to having 3 separate documents stored within the same *file*.
Unfortunately that capability is inconsistent with the design of software in
both Windows as well as Mac OS. Many people attempt to obtain a similar
effect through the use of Section Breaks which usually proves to be a
nightmare in practice. And although I can appreciate how it may sound
appealing the practicality of such a file structure probably wouldn't prove
as beneficial as one might think - especially given the disparity between
the different document structures you described. To my feeble mind it is far
preferable to be able to store the files separately, open as many as I need
at one time (having stored them in a job-specific folder) and toggling
between the separate windows as necessary. In fact, the Window menu allows
me to quickly Arrange the separate doc windows in order to compare and/or
work back & forth from one to another quite effectively. Perhaps we'll just
have to "agree to disagree", but I find that method to be far more
conducive to an efficient workflow than having to jump back & forth between
various segments of the same file - even if there were tabs available for
doing so. To me they'd just be another bit of clutter in a limited space.

The Project Gallery in Word was designed [at least in large part] to
accommodate exactly the type of workflow you describe. Are you familiar with
its use? If not you may want to have a look at the Word Help which pertains
to "About the Project Center" as well as the associated topics. The feature
was enhanced in 2004 and may very well be a viable alternative for you while
allowing each type of document (not just Word files but your PPt files as
well) to maintain their own integrity.

Additionally, in PPt you might consider the Custom Shows feature if you
aren't familiar with it. It allows keeping all related slides in the same
file but designating whichever ones you wish - including their presentation
order - as part of as many different Custom Shows you wish. The one
shortcoming is that you can't display only one specific set of slides
(Custom Show) for other than presentation purposes.

As to our different perceptions of the proficiency level of Word users...
Well, that is also one of perspective, exposure, & experience I guess
anyone with some degree of carpentry skills finds it hard to conceive of
anyone else not having any idea which is the "business end" of a hammer.

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[Kurt R. Todoroff]

Hi Kurt -

Thanks for the detailed description.

As to our different perceptions of the proficiency level of Word users...
Well, that is also one of perspective, exposure, & experience I guess
anyone with some degree of carpentry skills finds it hard to conceive of
anyone else not having any idea which is the "business end" of a hammer.

You employ a very interesting metaphor which made me grin. I spent a
few years in the hardware and software development business. I've known
quite a few people both inside and outside of the IT business who were
quite good (proficient) at what they did, but didn't have the slightest
inkling (and could care less) about how their tools and the associated
support structure worked. Regarding your very last statement, you are
right of course, insofar as those skills are accompanied by a knowledge
and appreciation of their requisite tools of the trade. However, such
is not always the case. Some (dare I say "consummate professionals"?)
people are quite good at what they do and they know every last detail of
the ins and outs of their work, their processes, their tools, and their
methods. Others are still quite good but lack that detailed knowledge
of the hows and the whys. Yet, they still produce wonderful end
results. I suspect that you and I have seen both types.

I've enjoyed our chat very much. Thank you for that.

By the way, I've decided to stop using Google and have returned to using
MT-Newswatcher. I used Google for this NG as a test. I don't care for
it.

Regards,

--


Kurt Todoroff
(e-mail address removed)

Markets, not mandates and mob rule.
Consent, not coercion.

 

[Diane Ross]

It is critical to your health and well-being that you end up with the LATEST
version of each font in your font folders, so you have all the Unicode
characters the new applications need to function.

Found this page that has some useful info on fonts in Leopard.

Your Multilingual Mac <http://homepage.mac.com/thgewecke/mlingos9.html>

 

[Diane Ross]

Is it possible to get an equivalent upgrade price going directly from
Office v.X to Office 2008? I don't see any official upgrade paths on
the Microsoft site outside of the Super Suite Deal.

If you don't need Exchange I would forget upgrading and buy the Home &
Student version for $150.

Office will be available in three versions: Office 2008 for Mac ($400
retail; $240 for the upgrade), Office 2008 for Mac Home and Student Edition
($150), and Office 2008 for Mac Special Media Edition ($500; $300 for the
upgrade).

I'm not sure how the Special Media version works as this is the first time
it's been offered. The special deals offer a free upgrade that includes
Special Media, but would require you to buy Office 2004. Not sure what 04 is
going for on places like eBay. Be sure you read all the fine print so you
make sure you qualify.

Links to promotions:

1) Super Suite Deal: (upgrades to full version) If you acquire a qualifying
Microsoft® Office 2004 for Mac product listed below between November 1, 2007
and January 14, 2008 you are eligible to receive Microsoft® Office 2008 for
Mac Special Media Edition for the cost of shipping and handling ($6.99 US/
$10.00 CDN), plus applicable taxes

<http://www.microsoft.com/mac/go/promotions/supersuitedeal/>

2) Technology Guarantee program: The Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac
Technology Guarantee program allows customers who purchase an edition of
Office 2004 for Mac to receive an edition of Office 2008 for the cost of
shipping, handling and applicable tax. This offer is valid for products
purchased between September 25th, 2007 and March 31st, 2008.

<http://www.microsoft.com/mac/go/promotions/>

Note, the Super Suite Deal has different dates. If you purchased Office 2004
before the Nov. 1 date, then you could only use the technology guarantee
coupon.

 

[Clive Huggan]

I don't need Exchange at the present time. I would like to have the
Automator Actions available. I also want the ability to write
AppleScripts for Office. Will the Home edition have AppleScript support?


To the specific point, can Office v.X be upgraded to Office 2008 for
Mac (standard) for the $240 upgrade price? That is where I don't find
any official statement.

Matt

Nor can I -- and it would appear to be extraordinarily generous if it
existed.

Cheers,

Clive Huggan
Canberra, Australia
(My time zone is 5-11 hours different from North America and Europe, so my
follow-on responses to those regions can be delayed)
====================================================

 

[Diane Ross]

I don't need Exchange at the present time. I would like to have the
Automator Actions available. I also want the ability to write
AppleScripts for Office. Will the Home edition have AppleScript support?

I don't know why they excluded the automator actions. You can download and
add them to Automator.

All versions will have AppleScript support.

To the specific point, can Office v.X be upgraded to Office 2008 for
Mac (standard) for the $240 upgrade price? That is where I don't find
any official statement.

The above was official prices. I searched for a statement, but find nothing
but the promotions. All of this might be more clear when it's officially
released.

I just searched Amazon and they have lots of Office for Mac 2008 deals. You
can pre-order.

Home & Student is $130.99

Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac Upgrade $214.99

Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac $354.99

Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac Special Media Edition $449.99