Microsoft Office 2007 SP2 Released, Supports ODF Out of the Box 274
shutdown -p now writes "On April 28, Microsoft released service pack 2 for Microsoft Office 2007. Among other changes, it includes the earlier-promised support for ODF text documents and spreadsheets, featured prominently on the 'Save As' menu alongside Office Open XML and the legacy Office 97-2007 formats. It is also possible to configure Office applications to use ODF as the default format for new documents. In addition, the service pack also includes 'Save as PDF' out of the box, and better Firefox support by SharePoint."
Great (Score:4, Funny)
Now we're gonna get the swine flu spread all over from the flying pigs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Embrace.
Extend.
Extinquish.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Great (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
First, although I don't really doubt you, do you know that Office '07 SP2 saves ODF formulas incompatibly or are you speculating?
Second, is there a mechanism to deprecate 1.1 and force Microsoft to support 1.2 if they want to continue to claim "ODF support"?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Great (Score:5, Informative)
From Wikipedia:
"OpenDocument 1.2 is currently being written by the ODF TC. It is likely to include additional accessibility features, metadata enhancements, spreadsheet formula specification based on the OpenFormula work (ODF 1.0 and 1.1 did not specify spreadsheet formulae in detail, leaving many aspects implementation-defined) as well as on some suggestions submitted by the public. Originally OpenDocument 1.2 was expected to become an OASIS standard by October 2007 but later it was expected to become a final draft in May 2008 and an OASIS standard in 2009 and a new ISO/IEC version some months later.[13] However currently there is no final draft of ODF v1.2 yet."
Short version: you don't deserve to be modded anything better than -1 Flamebait.
Re:Great (Score:5, Interesting)
It allows them into markets they were being shut out of in europe. Plus ATM they don't have much to worry about, openoffice is clearly lagging behind and the other OSS suits while strong in some areas are significantly lacking in other. Additionally due to the lack of innovation in office suites it's unlikely that a something will take them away from number #1 spot quickly and they are unlikely to be caught off guard like they were by firefox, if they start seeing a major competitor then they can go back to their old techniques.
So while they opening themselves up to competition, they are so far ahead (in terms of market share and in some senses their product is also superior), that it's worth it in order to not get shut out of certain markets that require open documets.
Its not like this is their first effort to open up there formats either, i think they contributed to apache POI used to stand for "Poor Obfuscation Implementation", but that's not mentioned on their website much anymore ;)) as well. There is also the iso that while not entirely open does force them to be somewhat more open.
In some senses? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And $150-$600, depending on whether you want anything in addition to Word, Excel, and PowerPoint.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, aside from the money, I find having to buy and keep track of licenses is a hassle. I find it liberating to be able to just reinstall or upgrade my software any time without that hassle.
I also find OpenOffice is superior in file format backward compatibility. MicroSoft has played the file format of the week game enough rounds that even office has trouble opening its old documents. OO's import isn't perfect, but it's track record on old documents is definitely better for me lately. With ODF, i
Re:Great - but of course... (Score:5, Insightful)
Damn, good thing OpenOffice doesn't do this with .doc files. Oh wait...
Re: (Score:2)
Look at it from the other side.
Maybe they think this will let them put their foot in some doorway otherwise slapped on them.
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Repeatedly being fined for many hundreds of milions?
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
Ironically, they did it precisely the other way - they've implemented the ODF spec to the letter [archivum.info], and ignored any conformance bugs in OpenOffice (and in pretty much all other existing ODF implementations, which tend to follow OpenOffice behavior). The result is that you will have problems moving ODF documents between MSOffice and OpenOffice, but Microsoft gets to point a blaming finger at OpenOffice guys if asked.
I wonder, also, how it will affect any government tenders on Office suites. If one of the requirements is support for ODF, then Microsoft can just say that they're the only ones on the market with a fully compliant implementation, and point out flaws in OO.org...
It's a trap? (Score:4, Interesting)
Strict compliance seems to be a new Microsoft strategy: look at their dogged adherence to CSS 2.1 standards in IE8, including adding a formidable number of new CSS tests to the W3C test suite. It's hard not to suspect that they're up to something, but I don't think anyone has quite nailed what it is yet. With ODF, at least, it seems they are obliged to follow the spec to the letter.
Microsoft's strict compliance probably a good thing if it forces other developers to bring their apps more into line with the specs (although it will be interesting to see how OO copes with legacy documents while sticking to the spec).
Re: (Score:2)
Now we're gonna get the swine flu spread all over from the flying pigs.
I didn't think we would see this day. So either its flying pigs or hell freezing over. Then again maybe there is a side to Microsoft that we weren't even aware of.
"Freezing: Microsoft's Answer to Global Warming!!!! (c)"
Re:Great (Score:4, Interesting)
I guess they couldn't get OOXML working properly and decided to give in and use ODF instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot is turning into Windows Update (Score:5, Funny)
IE8, Office 2007 SP2. Only difference is that it works in Firefox.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It also doubles as a Linux update manager as well. Remember when Ubuntu 9.04 was released? :)
Re: (Score:2)
IE8, Office 2007 SP2. Only difference is that it only works in Firefox.
There, fixed that for you.
As always, Microsoft coming late (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Great (Score:5, Interesting)
Now having PDF as a "native" option (and , as a minor option, odf as well) without installing extra software , this is a real winner. Good work.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
M$ made a HUGE mistake not having a 'classic menu' option in Office 2007.
Re:Great (Score:4, Insightful)
M$ made a HUGE mistake not having a 'classic menu' option in Office 2007.
Why was it a mistake? Why was it a mistake to leave behind something that was no longer working as intended? 73% of all new features that the public requested were command that already existed in the programs. The menu structure clearly wasn't letting people find these features.
All you need to do is put your common commands on the quick access toolbar, hide the ribbon and you have something that looks a lot like the old menu/toolbar scenario. Don't get me wrong, I loathed the change at first. But after 2 years of teaching 2007, and seeing the feedback of users who were as equally entrenched in the old system, there is barely anyone I know who yearns or pines for the old menu.
I did try open office at home. The word processor was ok, but not robust, and the spreadsheet module would crash whenever I tried opening anything beyond a basic invoice with only sum functions. They need to work on that if they want it to be taken as a serious competitor to Excel. It is barely robust enough for a home budget file.
Re: (Score:2)
I use Open Office exclusively now at home. Albeit mostly on a MAC and Ubuntu, but my son uses a XP machine without any issues. OpenOffice is not a serious competitor for excel, it is a replacement for 80% of the users who don't need all the fancy things excel can do, and for 100% less.
If the menu system worked for millions of people why would you yank it out? Transition it out. Can the a
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, and apparently for Windows 7, they have finally given in to reason and dropped the classic start menu. Just because you're used to something doesn't mean it's better, it means that right now, its better for you, because you aren't familiar with anything different and potentially better. I'm sure that for at least 90% of users, once they've been using the new interface for a week or two,
Victory is ours! (Score:5, Insightful)
Small as it may seem, a major victory has been won, here.
Ever notice that the price of MS Office exceeds the price of the rest of the computer? Whole swaths of public records stand at risk, tied to a format that's both obsolete and undocumented. But, by commoditizing the document format with open standards, this has the effect of requiring Microsoft to compete on real terms - stability, usability, features, price - rather than by effective lockout through underhanded OEM de3als and shady use of their Monopoly status.
This is a very, very good thing for everybody. (Even Microsoft - if they aren't forced to compete on real terms, they will atrophy and wither, eventually losing their monopoly and going the way of DEC)
As always, the ball's not out of the park yet, we must remain ever vigilant and work to preserve a competitive marketplace....
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know. With Microsoft at least we're dealing with one entity: in the event it is needed the government can go to Microsoft and say "hey, we need you to support your older formats better so we can ensure they're accessible and/or move them to newer ones"; there's someone definite to deal with, entrenched so they're strong to a great extent (and not likely going anywhere), with all the incentive in the world to ensure they please such requests (which when governments request something of Microsoft, req
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You are insane. Office 2007 was a horribly slow, buggy nightmare. SP2 is wonderful, though. Finally, I don't have to deal with Outlook freezing on me for 2+ minutes several times per day.
Office 2007 was crap from the start. Only now is it even usable.
Re: (Score:2)
Forget menus and toolbars. The ribbon is a great thing when you understand that they are somehow like toolbars, but they are dynamic as well. When you realize how the thing work, then you cannot live without it.
This is a serious question from somebody that's never seen this ribbon thing: What does it do for you that was so hard (or impossible) in previous versions of MS Office or in other word processors?
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, what's a home tab?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Forget menus and toolbars.
No. Toolbars and menus worked well. In fact, for every other application out there, they still work well. And they stay out of the way of whatever I'm working on.
Ribbons take up entirely too much space on the screen. I need them to be hidden/minimized/whatever for two reasons: (1) My work, the main thing I'm focusing on, gets more space on the screen and (2) it gives me the illusion that I still have some sort of menu.
When I have a series of words on a bar at the top of my window, I expect them to yield
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but my experience is the opposite. Our university department also had our lab machines upgraded to Office 2007 due to pressure from our IT personnel. It was promptly rejected by all the students and all the staff as frustrating and incompatible. Nobody liked it.
It was frustrating because commonly-used options were hidden away (no "Office classic" mode? What were they thinking?), and incompatible because there were enough changes in Excel (for example) to break tools
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you need to think different here
I don't want to think different to do something I've been doing perfectly fine since the mid-nineties. I have more important things to do.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
double-click the ribbon categories. they hide.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Its a myth that Office 2007 takes up more UI space than Office 97 or 2003. Office 2007 UI takes up slightly less vertical space than Office 97 out of the box. If the user displays a few toolbars, as most users do, Office 97 consumes far more space than 2007. Here is a post which goes into the detail measurements: http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/04/17/577485.aspx [msdn.com]
Anyways, you can always minimize the ribbon.
Re:Great (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Press alt; it shows a letter for each menu and function. Thus, most functions can activated with a 3 button combination.
This not only makes every function easy to get to via keyboard, it makes memorizing shortcuts unnecssary. Although I assume eventually these shortcuts would become second nature.
Re:Great (Score:5, Informative)
Perhaps you can explain to me how to do everything in Office 2007 without a mouse
You're using windows without a mouse? Ok, whatever.
Press the ALT key. Office 2007 will show you a list of shortcut keys, over every icon visible.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why can't you select text in a PDF? it works for me...
Digital restrictions management (Score:2)
Why can't you select text in a PDF?
Because the PDF has been saved with the "copy to clipboard" permission turned off.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. I like the ribbon.
If you double click on the title (i.e. "Home", "Insert") the ribbon auto-hides much like a menu, giving you even more screen real estate than Office 2003
Keyboard shortcuts are very accessible, for example: Press Alt + H to get the home menu with a visual list of access keys.
I can't really say that I share your pain. I find the ribbon very usable and there's no way I'm going back to OpenOffice or Office 2003.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
What lack of keyboard shortcuts? MS Office 2007 supports every single shortcut that MS Office 2003 did. Even if the menu is no longer there it still respects the old shortcut. Microsoft did this on purpose. You didn't even bother to check, did you?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
I will tell you one thing that is not great about Office 2007 - lack of keyboard shortcuts.
You're trolling.
Name one -- ONE -- keyboard shortcut that went away in 2007 that you used.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Uhh, but Office 2007 has exactly the same shortcuts as Office 2003. Here is a list for Word: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290938 [microsoft.com]
And here is a list of the changes between the 2 versions: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926809/ [microsoft.com] I count a total of 6 items on the list. In fact MS added Keytips for better keyboard navigation of UI: http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2005/10/13/480568.aspx [msdn.com]
Embrace... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Starting up the latest version of Ubuntu Linux, logging in and starting up OO.o is faster than starting the latest version of Windows up, without logging in and starting up MSOffice.
While leaving OO.o minimised and running Linux is still faster than Windows without MSOffice running.
In the mean time you can just do whatever you want with Linux, while you have some registry cleaning up, defragging, malware and virusscanning to do.
Then you need to update. Just go ahead with Linux but with Windows you need to r
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Embrace... (Score:4, Informative)
Kill X, login in the console, rmmod the kernel module, insmod the new one, start X.
Voit-lá, no reboot for upgrade of graphics card driver.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Vista, 30 seconds to get to the PLEASE WAIT screen. Get coffee, still wait. Login. Wait. Have start menu, click Firefox, wait. Usually takes over a minute and a hald to turn on PC and open firefox or anything else.
Open Office is slow because Windows does not handle Java apps very well, since they removed the VM for it.
Still not free software. (Score:2, Troll)
Does your support of free software end when non-free software has the features you've come to enjoy?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Far from it. But at least now I can send collaborative documents in their native ODF instead of having to convert them to the binary formats first.
Should install MsOffice 2007 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Should install MsOffice 2007 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Should install MsOffice 2007 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Should install MsOffice 2007 (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, it's a big step up from Office 2003 where OOo could open up Word documents that Office couldn't.
I lost whatever lingering dregs of respect I had for Microsoft when writing a Word document on the Mac, and Word crashed, corrupting the saved document as well. This was in 2005. I can't even remember the last time an app crashed _and_ managed to toast the document on disk too. Probably in 80's. After I rewrote the document from scratch (in OOo, where is was so much easier to make simple table it wasn't funny, and it wasn't modal for crying out loud, why is Word modal, especially since it's in really subtle ways?!), someone suggested that OOo possibly could have opened the document since it had a reputation of not being as bad as Microsoft at their own format.
Of course, with Microsoft you're always dealing with crap you thought you'd never see again 10 years ago.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I would say open it in OOo, but since that can open MSdoc files that MS Office can't, it's probably not the best yardstick.
Re:Should install MsOffice 2007 (Score:5, Informative)
http://tools.services.openoffice.org/odfvalidator/ [openoffice.org]
I need CrossOver compatibility (Score:2)
After MS Office 2007 SP1 was never compatible to CrossOver I hope SP2 will get that soon. The shop I am working for only uses Microsoft Office 2007. They are trained to use it. OpenOffice will not work, because they would need retraining. But I need to maintain their computers. And it would so much easier to do if I could just switch them over to Linux. I also need the Service Pack, because without it the mailboxes in Outlook 2007 are limited to 2GB. Those people send and receive large Powerpoint presentati
Re: (Score:2)
I second that! I just got the student version of Office 2007 and it runs great under Crossover, in fact Office 2007 under Wine is using slightly less memory than native Open Office... just goes to show where the real bloat is. Anyway, having SP2 support would be awesome and would go a long way towards letting me use Open Office when I want to, and MS Office when I have to, with fewer headaches.
Open Office (Score:2)
So, in all seriousness, now, aside from price (free, unless you count 'retraining) - what need for OpenOffice?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It runs on Linux?
Retraining will be needed only once while every new version of Office will cost something like $400. If a few clients upgrade to a new version of Office and send you stuff in an incompatible format you'll be forced to upgrade.
Microsoft Office runs fine on Linux (Score:2)
It runs on Linux?
Both Microsoft Office 2007 and OpenOffice.org can run on Linux on x86, the former under Wine. But I will admit that once the subnotebooks with an ARM Cortex CPU come out, OpenOffice.org will have the advantage that it also runs on Linux on ARM.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Open Office is free software which respects you as the user so that if you have a problem you can fix it yourself.
Sure most of the computer-using world can. Right after they learn Java. And spend enough time with the codebase to understand what the problem is and the correct way to fix it.
This sort of "respect" is worthless to 99% of the computer-using world that does not have the knowledge or the time to fix anything like this. Nor can they hire someone to (a) learn the codebase and (b) fix the problem because learning the codebase is prohibitively time-consuming. Therefore, expensive. Very expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
So, in all seriousness, now, aside from price - what need for OpenOffice?
I have little need for office suites. Text is sufficient for most documents I'm not sharing with anyone else. For people like myself, OpenOffice is overkill*. Why should I waste my employer's money (or my own, at home) on MS Office? Now that ODF is supported, all documents should interoperate just fine (theoretically).
*My 'Documents' folder contains a handful of old ODF files I can get rid of (including an essay I let a family member type at my machine), 2 that I'll keep (my resume, and a letter I am typing
What caused Adobe to back off? (Score:5, Interesting)
Save as PDF was supposed to be a feature in Office from the beginning, but Adobe objected (legally) and forced them to pull it, so MS offered it as a separate download. I wonder why Adobe decided to drop their objection to MS putting this is Office.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
"Formerly a proprietary format, PDF was officially released as an open standard on July 1, 2008, and published by the International Organization for Standardization as ISO 32000-1:2008."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pdf
Re:What caused Adobe to back off? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This may have something to do with recent attacks on Adobe's Reader. People are switching to alternatives that can read PDFs and don't leave them vulnerable to such attacks. So Adobe may be moving from an application domination strategy to a file format domination strategy. Such a strategy would allow and even encourage all applications to support PDF as fully as possible. Another reason may be seeing as how Open Office has has this feature for a while, the legal argument you vaguely refer to may no longer be valid(if it ever was).
These are all silly speculations.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Adobe: Remove "Save as PDF"
Microsoft: Sure would be terrible if something happened to Photoshop in the next update.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why anyone would throw down hundreds of dollars for Acrobat when they can get the same functionality from other software is beyond me.
Re: (Score:2)
If I recall correctly, it was an antitrust complaint: Adobe was complaining that Microsoft was leveraging their Office monopoly to undercut Acrobat Pro with a free workalike. Similar to the complaint Netscape made about Microsoft giving away IE with Windows.
Feature request: Make ribbon optional (Score:4, Insightful)
I am the type of user who types it first, then makes it pretty. Too often in the past going back to WordPerfect5.1 for DOS days, the darned program would try to guess what I wanted to do next and force different styles on me. i.e. bullet points.
Having to stop what I am doing and FIX the errors that computer has made is complete regression in UI design, and 10+ years later they still have not learnt.
So now all of my data input happens in nano. I use OO as needed, as opposed to more regularly.
Re: (Score:2)
What the heck does making the ribbon optional have to do with inaccurate prediction? The kind of prediction you're talking about will be the same with or without the ribbon.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe try latex, it's designed to let you concentrate on content...
PDF Support (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This has been a free download add-on since the release of 2007 and maybe before that.
It might have been nice if it was released with the product, but if you don't understand how this happens regardless of intentions, you don't understand large products.
Not a good start (Score:2)
And boy does it suck at that. We tried it out, and it is extremely unimpressive. Tracked changes are gone when you save to ODT, nested tables from ODT often lose their text, and object positioning is often wrong. Generally speaking, anything more than simple letters requires manual intervention.
Did they just repurpose the open source converter they commissioned? It certainly is the worst filter I've seen from Microsoft in a long
I can hardly wait... (Score:2)
...to see all of the "improvements" Microsoft will make to ODF. Why I'll bet that within three years we won't even be able to recognize it... or inter-operate with it!
Re: (Score:2)
The outlook junk filter has always been nuts. It still filters even when you disable the damn thing.
Re: (Score:2)
To compound the problem, Outlook still doesn't automatically move a junk message to Inbox after you click "Add to safe senders list". I can't understand why I have to go through two procedures to move a "safe sender" from junk to inbox.
However, if you use the "this is not junk" option, there is a checkbox to add the sender to the safe list. This saves a few clicks.
I don't understand either why the two procedures are separate. It's very unlikely you'd want to accept only one specific mail from a sender.
Re:OpenDocument support - Wrong (Score:2, Insightful)
How the shit did you get modded +2 Insightful? You're completely wrong. MS Office 2007 SP2 adds ODF support to Word, Excel and PowerPoint to read and write ODT, ODS and ODP respectively.
OpenFormula is still a draft (Score:2)
Just to clarify, SP2 adds support for OpenDocument Text, not all OpenDocument, no spreadsheets
Microsoft generally doesn't implement other standards bodies' "draft" specs until they're finalized (e.g. "standard" or "recommendation"). OpenFormula [wikipedia.org], an extension to OpenDocument that describes how to recalculate a spreadsheet, is still a draft.
Wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Word SP2 supports OpenDocument Text, Excel supports OpenDocument Spreadsheet, and Powerpoint supports OpenDocument Presentation
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
"File formats
* OpenDocument Format (ODF) support
SP2 lets you open, edit, and save documents in version 1.1 of the ODF for Word (http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/FX100649251033.aspx) , for Excel (http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/excel/FX100646951033.aspx) , and for PowerPoint (http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/powerpoint/FX100648951033.aspx) . Users of these Office programs can now open, edit, and save files in the OpenDocument Text (*.o
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't the EU essentially put a gun to MS's head? That's not usually a precursor to an "embrace".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They put out a new version of "the box" with each service pack, and you can create your own also, with slipstreaming. [softpedia.com]