Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Office 2019 Will Only Work on Windows 10 (theverge.com)
Microsoft on Thursday provided an update on Office 2019, in which it revealed that the apps will only run on Windows 10. From a report: In a support article for service and support of Windows and Office, Microsoft has revealed you'll need to upgrade to Windows 10 if you want the latest version of Office without subscribing to the company's Office 365 service. It's a move that's clearly designed to push businesses that are holding off on Office 365 into subscriptions, as the standalone Office 2019 software will only be supported on Windows 10 and not Windows 7 or Windows 8.1 machines. Microsoft is also altering the support lifecycle for Office 2019, so it will receive 5 years of mainstream support and then "approximately 2 years of extended support."
I can't imagine business standing for this. I'm sure many would run Office 2016 for 10 years if they had to.
Will Microsoft have Windows on a subscription model soon?
They already do for bigger businesses, it's called "software assurance". Believe you me, if/when they could figure out how to force smaller business users into subscription Windows they will. There's a reason that the commercial software publishers (Adobe, Autodesk, etc.) are all going subscription based, hint, it's not because it's better for consumers. It's because it's much more lucrative for them. These people are in business to make money, which means taking yours. They've just gotten better at it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
protip: it works very well with older MS formats, e.g. Office 97 Excel/Word documents... docx and xlsx formats.... not so much. My experience has been that it tends to crash pretty often with those, so consider saving a working copy in either native or old-microsoft formats.
There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
Yeah, there's definitely no legitimate reason that an upcoming project would decide to deprecate support for an OS that will be 10 years old at the point of release (Win7 came out in '09). Supporting and doing quality assurance on multiple OS targets is totally free from an engineering and testing standpoint. All API features from newer OSes are backported to decades-old ones.
Note that LibreOffice dropped support for OSX 10.8 (2012) and required various Linux components (Kernel/GTK) from 2006.
Removing support for old stuff at the right time is part of the software flow. Supporting the everything-on-everything model means less resources (both development and testing) for other stuff. Surely there's a "too soon" for deprecation" but also a "too late". One decade sounds pretty dang reasonable.
Well I guess you may be able to take a few days to get Wine setup to handle it.
However that is what my experience is.
The Boss gets a document to you and it is slightly screwed up (off fonts, or spacing) they Demand that they send it in that format. You open the file and save it and it goes off again.
Then they find out that you are not Using the newest version of office. So you have an option, upgrade to Office, or downgrade your job.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
h, there's definitely no legitimate reason that an upcoming project would decide to deprecate support for an OS that will be 10 years old
You really need to stop being a voice of reason around here. I mean we can't have these great hate microsoft bashing threads if you keep using your common sense.
Geezz. get with the program.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
You really need to stop being a voice of reason around here.
Somebody has to. You should see my political campaign. I got in an argument with some guy who keeps telling me capitalism is past its end and it's time we moved on; he was very angry when I pointed out that the CEO of Home Depot taking lower pay and fewer bonuses wouldn't "pay for higher wages and benefits" because Home Depot has 300,000 employees and the entire executive suite nets $28/year per employee in cash compensation between them. His argument was I'm wrong because "their wealth is built on the backs of mistreated employees" (notice this ignores the numerical analyses).
Even when you ditch the socialists, that's the voice of today's progressive left movement: make the rich pay, make the businesses pay, make everybody with power pay, make Wall Street pay. I can agree with regulation about banks and such; and I'm interested in something today's progressives aren't talking about: strategies to bring the poor out of poverty and provide more economic fairness to the middle-class.
It makes people angry. It's like the progressive left don't really care about the poor, only about the rich. Somebody's got to say it.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
From my cold dead hands