Upgrading To The New Microsoft Office?

  • 1
    27.26% (477 votes)
    Hell no!
  • 2
    23.14% (405 votes)
    I use something else
  • 3
    17.03% (298 votes)
    Probably won't
  • 4
    13.94% (244 votes)
    You betcha!
  • 5
    8.8% (154 votes)
    Probably will
  • 6
    5.26% (92 votes)
    Who knows? Ask my IT dept
  • 7
    4.57% (80 votes)
    Maybe, not sure

Statistics

Votes: 1750
Views: 2434

Popular tags

Leave comment

Comments

  1. Rich said on May 17 2010, 21:05 PM:

    We have a mix in the office. some use 2003 and others 2007 and the ones using 2007 bother me to no end with things like printing a selection in a multiple reply e-mail because Microsoft decided that feature was no longer needed. Plus the ribbon confuses a lot of people and the default .docx makes it awful when opening inter office files. I hate 2007 and will stay with 2003 til they pry it from my cold dead hands.

  2. John Simon said on May 17 2010, 12:05 PM:

    I use my trusty old Office (Professional) 2000. I like it. It does what I want. When I have to use 2007 (boss's computer; it is nothing but trouble. I have OpenOffice at home. I started with WORD for DOS. Word 2000 is an improvement. I downloaded the docx conversion utility so I can open the lah-de-dah new file format.

  3. Jason said on May 17 2010, 02:05 AM:

    I use 2003 because the exchange supports the https connection to my exchange server. Before that, I was using Office 97. I know that 2010 is x64 (woo) but the x64 versions of Windows run i386 stuff so well, why bother? I can almost bet that excel is still limited to 65535 rows... So really I may as well be using Excel 3.0 on OS/2.

  4. TC said on May 16 2010, 16:05 PM:

    Office 2007 is frightful. I've been using it for about a year and continually have problems and estimate that it has lowered my productivity in Word by 50%. We recently had an issue where my office colleague who uses Office 2000 sent me a document with a lot of styles defined for me to edit. Not only did the styles not work properly in 2007 but we couldn't adjust the settings to make them work properly. I'm going back to 2003 and will stay happily there or go back to Wordperfect or OpenOffice. Either have standard interfaces (ribbons are the bain of my existence) and work very well. Frankly Wordperfect 5.1 was the perfect wordprocessing program, lightweight and powerful. There's no way I'd pay the Bill for yet another MS Office "upgrade..." Actually I only have 2007 because it came with the laptop I bought last year. It's caused me nothing but headaches.

  5. Slatts said on May 16 2010, 12:05 PM:

    As far as I can see 99% of folk were happy with what they used with Windows 3.1. I have seen three upgrades of MS Office since I first used it but yet to see anything in it that I would want/need to use that wasn't in Word Star!

  6. revdjenk said on May 15 2010, 18:05 PM:

    Last MS version I bought and used was Office 95 Pro (which then didn't include Outlook or Publisher). I switched to OpenOffice almost 11 years ago.

  7. H.K. said on May 15 2010, 16:05 PM:

    Open Officce does the trick for me, thank you.

  8. FedUp said on May 15 2010, 12:05 PM:

    Just reverted to 2003 from 2007 so I think not.

  9. JG said on May 15 2010, 12:05 PM:

    In all my experience with office, the only version I actually thought was really useful was the Mac version, ironically enough. Only way I'd get Office for my windows would be from bittorrent or some other download. OpenOffice does everything I need (including opening office files) and doesn't cost 100$, so why pay 100$?

  10. TS said on May 15 2010, 11:05 AM:

    Wouldn't have spent an hour downloading it from Bit Torrent if I didn't plan to upgrade!

  11. JJ said on May 15 2010, 10:05 AM:

    You need a field for 'already upgraded'

  12. clifffton said on May 15 2010, 08:05 AM:

    First!