Slashdot Mirror


Apple's Rumored Office Suite

Several anonymous readers noted that the mac rumor mill is churning already with news for the upcoming MacWorld. The current rumor is a new office suite to replace the incredibly dated AppleWorks and incredibly bloated and slow MS Office.

7 of 863 comments (clear)

  1. Beating MS Office != Trivial by danielrm26 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People need to realize that making a successful Office competitor doesn't equate to making it less "bloated and slow", or adding any sort of all-important feature set.

    The only way any product in this space is going to go places is if it works just like Office, acts just like Office, feels just like Office, etc. Office is the standard, and for 99% of people that use it, it's flawless. Any deviation from this standard suite, even if it's an improvement, is nothing but a nuisance to the average user.

    A common user seeing one single glitch (glitch defined as something different from how it works in Office) will run (not walk) to their standard MS Office icons.

    How do I know this is true? Simple. There are tons of people who are actually into the OSS movement, love Slashdot, run Linux servers, run OS X, etc. that *still* run MS Office when they can run OpenOffice instead? Why is that? It's because even the most open-minded of us are creatures of habit. And if *these* people are resistant, imagine how the masses are.

    --
    dmiessler.com -- grep understanding knowledge
  2. Re:Oh, Please Let It Be So! by sangreal66 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The integration between Apple applications and the system is simply amazing.

    It is amazing when its Apple but evil when its Microsoft?
  3. Re:Oh, Please Let It Be So! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Keynote and Powerpoint make people dumber. I'm too lazy to look up the coresponding Slashdot article.

    Perhaps so. These are philosophical and sociological considerations, and outside the arguments over any relative technical and human-interface merit of the software in question.

    As an aside of my own - I often need "flashy' presentations to compensate for the lacking attention span of those with the fat wallets, not the lacking of my content.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  4. Re:Oh, Please Let It Be So! by Drakino · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is amazing when its Apple but evil when its Microsoft?

    Yep. Because when Apple does it, the end user sees a benefit. When Microsoft does it, their market share increases. There was no logical reason to integrate the entire browser into the OS like it was in Windows 9x. The proper and better way is to embed an API, and put a browser out that works off that, like how OS X (Safari) and 2000/XP do it. Remember how in 98 IE crashes could make the taskbar disappear?

    The integration between the iLife apps is a great example of good integration. On the Windows side, Movie Maker ignores Windows Media Player to find music, and the photo stuff in the OS is horrible and can't be turned into a movie slideshow easially.

  5. Re:Wonder what code base by word+munger · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The only thing it's really missing is table support

    Well, page numbers would be nice, too. And real control over your margins. And footnotes. And mail merge. And maybe headers and footers. Multi-columns would be nice. Okay, so maybe it needs *just* a bit more than tables. But tables would be nice, too.

  6. Re:Oh, Please Let It Be So! by iBod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh come on now!

    You can't say MS's office integration doesn't work, or that it merely ticks a box on some notional feature list.

    The level integration and interoperability of the Office suite is something that most other software vendors aspire to, but few (if any) have achieved.

    It's not an easy thing to acomplish. Which is why MS Office is as popular on the Mac platform as it is on Wintel.

  7. Re:WORDPEFECT by software_trainer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I taught word processing and basic PC skills to paralegals in the 90's. In spite of Word's increasing popularity, many law offices stayed with WordPerfect. Here's what I saw happen:

    Law offices adopted WordPerfect because its style sheets and macro features matured before Word's. In a business that produces massive numbers of identically-formatted documents, with many passages repeated from doc-to-doc, robust stylesheets and macros were a powerful selling point.

    WordPerfect's keystroke shortcuts were also critical to its success in the law field. Most of the typing in law offices was done by secretaries, who were professional typists. They didn't want thier fingers to leave the keyboard for any reason. And they certainly didn't want to have to wait for a menu to pop up or pull down, and then navigate through that menu (even if they could do so without leaving the keyboard). WordPerfect enabled these professional typists to do everything with keyboard shortcuts only, and bypass slower menus. WordPerfect was to legal secretaries what emacs is to programmers.

    Third-party vendors saw the dominance of WordPerfect in the legal profession, and developed thier products around WordPerfect. Whether it was an add-on to produce legal citations more easily, or templates for legal documents, they further supported WordPerfect's dominance in this specialized market.

    After spending years developing thier WordPerfect reflexes, integrating third party products, and even writing thier own WordPerfect macros, legal typists were not going to easily abandon the application. So while most of the rest of the world switched to Word, the legal profession has kept on chugging away with WordPerfect. And now every lawyer I know still uses it.