Discuss: Microsoft Office 365

Hewlett-packard / Hp pavilion g6 notebook p...
September 21, 2012 at 05:42:50
Specs: Windows 7, 1.4 GHz / 5610 MB
Hi all,

This week's poll is about news that Microsoft has announced family subscription pricing for Microsoft Office 365. Discuss here if you'd consider buying a subscription instead of a stand-alone Microsoft Office product, and, if you like, the poll results themselves.

Thanks!
Justin


See More: Discuss: Microsoft Office 365

Report •

#1
September 21, 2012 at 09:10:49
I don't subscribe to anything & I plan to keep it that way. It doesn't make sense financially. Some people might compare it to leasing a car. It's easier but it costs more.

How do you know when a politician is lying? His mouth is moving.


Report •

#2
September 21, 2012 at 15:10:27
If the price to a small business is $100/year I can see where that may be a good alternative to buying.

I am still using Office 2000 for the little I use Excel and Word, so I am not interested in buying or subscribing.


Report •

#3
September 21, 2012 at 15:53:22
I'm a home user and see no value in a subscription service. I'm not into clouds or any other online form of data storage.

Goin' Fishin' (Some day)


Report •

Related Solutions

#4
September 21, 2012 at 18:41:23
As long as OpenOffice/LibreOffice is free, no way.

"Channeling the spirit of jboy..."


Report •

#5
September 22, 2012 at 06:29:16
T-R-A wins!

Report •

#6
September 22, 2012 at 07:10:47
LOL T-R-A and riider

I work for a university so I get a "student" copy of the office suite for free. So as long as I'm employed here, I'll keep using it. If the day should come when I move on, or retire, I'll be switching to open source myself. I see no sense whatsoever in paying for it when I can load it on Linux or PC_BSD for free.

It matters not how straight the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate;
I am the captain of my soul.

***William Henley***


Report •

#7
September 24, 2012 at 10:29:38
I still use Office 2007 and will continue to do so until Microsoft releases Office 2015 for their Metro-free Windows 9 OS.

DOS/9x Gaming Rig | Athlon 600 @ 672MHz w/ Golden Orb HSF | 384MB | 60GB
Voodoo2 SLI + GeForce 256 DDR | SB Live | Asus K7V | 21" NEC CRT | Win98SE


Report •

#8
September 24, 2012 at 12:30:08
I have Office 2003 on one computer and 2007 on another. Both given to me by schools I attended. Given what I use it for I don't really see a difference in the two and for my needs I am way more than covered. I see no need to upgrade further let alone pay a monthly fee.

Likely


Report •

#9
September 25, 2012 at 21:33:43
In my opinion Office 97 does anything the average Office user needs. I'm amazed Microsoft is still able to sell copies of Office.

All of the Office files in my company, when created under Office 2007 and newer, must be sent in the Office 97-2003 compatibility format because of a mismash of different Office versions and also to ensure our clients can open the files.

http://sdfox7.com


Report •

#10
September 26, 2012 at 07:21:04
I don't know if MSoft is still using docx as the default format for word docs but it creates nothing but problems for users with older versions. I think MSoft shot themselves in the foot by constantly changing everything with each new version of Office.

Report •

#11
September 26, 2012 at 13:34:48
They never seemed to care about backwards compatibility. So far not one person here said that they would take the subscription. There might be some companies who would do it but it won't be mom & pop businesses.

How do you know when a politician is lying? His mouth is moving.


Report •

#12
September 27, 2012 at 12:56:32
guapo: They never seemed to care about backwards compatibility.
I too am annoyed about how I must throw away every program I've ever purchased, downloaded, or written every time there's a new version of Windows. Also, I'm saddened whenever a new version of Office is released because I must print out every document I have and manually type it in again under the new Office.

OtheHill: I think MSoft shot themselves in the foot by constantly changing everything with each new version of Office.
Didn't they do that to get the EU off their backs? I seem to remember hearing that was one of the major reasons they moved away from the .doc format. Another was .doc/.xls was more or less a memory dump of the application's memory structures, and it was getting harder to work on Office without messing up those old memory structures. Both seem plausible to me. Also, there's a free download from MS that'll add OOXML support to the older Office products.

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way


Report •

#13
September 27, 2012 at 13:39:59
The EU wanted Internet Explorer unbundled.

MSoft was trying to get the thier version of Word files and Excel files to become the open source standard. They would not release all the code though, so that didn't happen. See the two links below.

They were not completely successful with the attempt to become the defacto standard for office software.

Using the file conversion from docx to the older versions of Word results in a different layout for each version

Had occasion a few years ago to work on a document with 4 other users that each had different versions of MS Word. A file was sent to us by an attorney in docx format. each of us downloaded the conversion file. The result was that every one ended up with slightly different results. Notes in the margins that couldn't be turned off, for instance.


http://filext.com/file-extension/DOCX
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office...


Report •

#14
September 27, 2012 at 14:23:36
I don't think it was lawsuit related. I seem to recall a number of countries in the EU suggesting a move from MSO to OO, claiming it was because doc/xls were closed formats, and that prompting the change to XML. Basically what I'm saying is MS is a slave to its corporate and government customers.

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way


Report •

Ask Question