Microsoft Releases Public Preview Version Of Office 2016

Status
Not open for further replies.
Still rockin" Office 2003, lol. I will check this out but if the Student/Home Office version still doesn't include Outlook, I'll be sticking with 2003. I can't stand webmail and Outlook keeps things clean, easy and efficient. I don't understand why MS thinks only business wants a nice email client and the rest of us should be stuck on webmail unless we pay corporate prices or on a subscription.

Just like I wish I could have for TV, let me buy what I use and you can keep the rest. I just want Word, Excel, and Outlook...maybe Powerpoint. You can keep Onenote, Access, Publisher.
 

Cryio

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2010
881
0
19,160
52
Still rockin" Office 2003, lol.
Then you are using the uglier, more complicated, slower, the one which breaks design and compatibility, the buggier on newer operating systems and the one which no longer receives support, so you are free to hacks and whatnot.

It was released over a decade ago. Don't you think you should move on? Even Office 2007 was released 9 years ago .. sheesh.
 

Cryio

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2010
881
0
19,160
52
So this new one isn't a subscription based product?
The preview one isn't. When it launches, people using Office 365 will upgrade naturally. I still think Microsoft will provide Office 2016 as a stand alone though.
 

cupholder

Distinguished
Nov 13, 2009
14
0
18,510
0
H&S will never include Outlook again, and you may wanna get with the times because you're severely outdated. Hell, even Windows Live Mail likely has more functionality than Outlook 2003.
 
Office 2010 was a decent version were as office 2013 is like Windows 8.x, wildly unpopular. I gave a good friend of mine a copy of office 2013 pro, and after a few months he said he hated it. He's been using excel since it was 1st released so he has experienced about every version MS has release. He won't use it and is using a free office suite he like much better. It seems MS last office was not well received my sales of office drop dramatically. Since MS has decided to sell directly to endusers I have no idea how their overall office sales are faring. I don't like their 3 year cycle it seems to fast when popular versions are current and too slow when turkeys like Windows 8.x, and Office 2013 are current.
 


For my purposes Outlook 2003 is clean and efficient. Yes it's old, but that doesn't mean bad. On Windows 7 it has been 100% stable and from time to time, but rarely anymore, MS will drop out an update for it. I don't need ribbon bars all over the place. I will upgrade when I need to, I don't upgrade just so i can say I have the latest.

I check out the new versions when they come out and if I don't see an advantage to upgrading, I'm fine staying with what I have. Which is why I'm leery of changing from Windows 7 to 10, I want to know if MS is going to make it subscription based before I jump to it.

 

JOSHSKORN

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2009
2,388
19
19,795
1
Then you are using the uglier, more complicated, slower, the one which breaks design and compatibility, the buggier on newer operating systems and the one which no longer receives support, so you are free to hacks and whatnot.

It was released over a decade ago. Don't you think you should move on? Even Office 2007 was released 9 years ago .. sheesh.
Office 2007 was ugly. 2010 was a little better, but damn I still miss Office 2003. I haven't even seen Office 2013, not sure if I'd want to or not. At least in 2003, I could find everything.
 

marraco

Distinguished
Jan 6, 2007
671
0
18,990
1
I'm downloading it to test on windows 10 preview, but I do not have much hopes for it, since all the Office versions since 2007 were worse and worse.

It looks like Microsoft keeps cutting functionality and features with each version of office.

For example, Solver in Excel 2013 is just garbage compared with Excel 2007 Solver.
 

joex444

Distinguished
Feb 16, 2006
1,279
1
19,960
240
At this point what does Word/Excel from Office 2003 do that OpenOffice, LibreOffice, or Google Docs doesn't do?

Outlook only makes sense in context with an Outlook Exchange Server, which almost always implies a corporate account. Outside of that, webmail or Thunderbird are sane alternatives.

Can't comment on open source PowerPoint alternatives. If I need to make slides, I use Beamer and LaTeX which I admit is a niche situation.
 

belardo

Splendid
Nov 23, 2008
3,534
0
22,790
2

1 - The looks is an opinion. I think office 2010 looks slick - I use it, but its not faster and its easier to use some ways. I have my copy of Office 2010 which I've yet to install at home - which I got cheap because Office 2013 is downright ugly and is a rip-off (2 installs with O2010 vs 1 install for O2013). Office 2003 still works for me and lots of others. Buggier? I've never seen Office 2003 crash on my computer... ever. I use it on Win7 of course.

2 - Are you offering to buy the $300+ pro version for him or anyone else?

 

belardo

Splendid
Nov 23, 2008
3,534
0
22,790
2

Its logical that Outlook is no longer included in the H&S version. But it is in the Home&business version does.

How is Windows Live Mail is even close to comparable to Outlook 2003.... yes WLM is a cut-down version of Outlook 2007... but Outlook is integrated into Office... which is one of its selling points.



 

belardo

Splendid
Nov 23, 2008
3,534
0
22,790
2


1 - The templates and some functionality and of course NO MAIL client is the big difference between O2003 and Open Office. ** side note: I disregard the Libre Office fork as many folks went back to Open when Oracle gave it to Apache. Oracle really caused headaches with Open, glad their nose is out of it. OpenOffice is an excellent suite for the price. **

This is something that the OOO community never got through their heads. OOO should included email client - that interfaces with part of the suite. Google Docs... its okay... maybe it better, but I prefer my software running native, than in a browser tab.

2 - Exchange : right, this is why MS removed Outlook from the home & student version as many of us simply use webmail and they want to have a different price point. My Office 2003 was the H&S for $110. O2007/10 = $170 to include Outlook. Good for MS... not so for others.

3 - OpenOffice presentation is decent... it works.

Now, for my clients, friends and family who want a no-cost office suite, I recommend either or both - Open Office and WPS Office. Open Office = for every thing under the sun, as its full featured (minus email client, again) for business. It would cost $300 for MSO2013). WPS for home users is excellent... its free and it comes with UI choices. It can look like Office 2000, 2003, 2013 (They have stupidly removed the 2010 skin)

*update: Latest FREE version of WPS office now includes a watermark when you print. I no longer recommend WPS for free-use. A lot of people are pissed and either go back to the 2013 version (which includes better Office 2010 style skin and O2000 skin) or switch to Open Office. Man, that sucks. How stupid.


PS: Office 2016 looks like the fixed the blindness UI of O2013.
 

thuckabay

Distinguished
Jun 20, 2009
24
6
18,515
0
Absolutely nothing new of interest here. It would be great to see Microsoft add back the filters that enabled importing legacy documents (e.g., Lotus WordPro, WorsStar 6 and 7, etc.) that it removed after Office 2007, and to see Microsoft offer clean export features to ePub, HTML5 and other electronic formats.
 

belardo

Splendid
Nov 23, 2008
3,534
0
22,790
2
Who the hell uses that old crap? WordStar died around 2000. It was a horrible POS word processor, even in its heyday... and it was kicked to the curb in 1985. Year after year before then, it was given BAD reviews. We had better and more advance stuff on our C= 64 and C=128 computers (Especially the C=128). With Mac and Amiga... boom.

Wordstar had its place, because it was SO BASIC.

Also, at the very least, WordStar should have been able to export its files in a TEXT format... especially sine the DOS version doesn't have WYSIWYG and its formatting was so rudimentary. If you're using WorseStar 7, it outputs RTF anyway. Seriously, if you're living on WordStar... you're not concerned with Windows 7 and MSOffice. Of course, there are 3rd party conversion tools you can use... if you must.

Lotous WordPro has been dead since 2007. It was never that good, simply part of IBM's pro suite of software. Also, it has RTF output.

The change of MS-Office in 2007 and newer *IS* to get people to use more functions of the product.

I still use a text editor for most of my needs. MS-Notepad of course, is crap - always was, always will be. So make sure you get the Notepad++ which is FREE, it has 10,000 more functions... its amazing. If MS-Notepad is a 12Mhz 286... then Notepad++ an i5-3750.
 
I've used Thunderbird for those that hate what outlook has become and still want a easy to use mail client. I installed it on a computer using FIOS. It detected it and the severs and configured it self in seconds. The entire installation was less then a couple of minutes. Then I installed outlook also on a computer using FIOS and tried to configure it. It wouldn't detect the service and I had to manually enter the server information. Finally I had to call Verizon to get their help with the installation. After 10 minutes of that they called in via remote service and spent another 10mins to configure Outlook. It took 45mins to configure Outlook which was purchased as part of an office suite. Compared to 2-3minutes to configure Thunderbird which was free. I think that says it all in where MS is going with their Office Suites.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY