[griffman]

And because you have everything you need, that means that nobody else requires anything else? Right, got it.



-rob.

[pauldfullerton]

To say that MS-Access is a killer application is a bit of a stretch. For all those who need to develop databases more complex than can be easily handled with Filemaker, you should have a close look at 4th Dimension www.4d.com. Admittedly it does have a substantial learning curve, but it is cross-platform, fully relational and a whole host of features that enable it to tackle just about any application development task you want to throw at it. Most importantly, it is not written by Microsoft, so it doesn't require psychic powers to get anything to work.

[griffman]

I don't think you're seeing the big picture (or I didn't convey it clearly enough) -- it doesn't matter that there are good database development apps on the Mac. If you work in a corporate environment, more than likely you are going to run into Access databases. The greatest Mac app in the world isn't going to help when you need to directly access, modify, or create an Access database.


-rob.

[Martian]

{quote:title=griffman wrote: }{quote}
Using NeoOffice, OpenOffice, Pages, or even Word from Office 2008 isn't going to do the trick if you need features that only exist in the PC version, or must work with files that use things like VBA.

Do you think with further development OpenOffice will be able to do the trick before MS comes out with Office 201? for the Mac? At least to replace Word and Excel?

[bigpics]

griffman said:

I don't think you're seeing the big picture (or I didn't convey it clearly enough) -- it doesn't matter that there are good database development apps on the Mac. If you work in a corporate environment, more than likely you are going to run into Access databases. The greatest Mac app in the world isn't going to help when you need to directly access, modify, or create an Access database.




-rob.

There's the "big picture" and then there's the "whole picture":



Exchange is ubiquitous in large orgs -- and non-Exchange users are a) second-class digital citizens, and b) place more stress on IT staff. So we're probably talking millions (10 of millions? more worldwide?) of users for whom that's the killer reason to virtualize. At least in orgs who use the advanced features you covered -- and I'm betting many smaller orgs use mostly simple e-mail functions at least for most of the staff.



But as for the rest of Office, the same argument (most people and even most companies don't use much of the advanced Win-specific functions) applies in spades: I'm willing to bet the great majority of Word, P-Point and Excel docs created can be handled by Mac Office, iWork, Openwhatever, even a number of the online suites, and in virtualization mode, better by WordPerfect, etc. -- and that the fraction of users who absolutely need specific WinOffice features is actually quite tiny.



As for Access, only a small proportion of WinOffice users have the version which includes it, and of those fewer use it with any facility. I found databases more powerful and logical than spreadsheets, which I've never really liked, but in fact database developers (even casual) are outnumbered by spreadsheet users by at least 10 to one. And I'd guess considerably higher.



So except for high-end Win users and high-end Win-centric companies, I say re "killer," Exchange maybe, and Office... ...well, not so much, i.e., the average user (even a Mac Office power user) can do just as well or better without sending more shekels to M$oft. And yeah, I felt the description of MS Office here bordered on supercalifragilisticexpealidociousness -- these programs have never been and still aren't the best tools in their class and they have many MSish drawbacks, few of which were even touched on.



Point being, if you can't keep up with your peers unless you absolutely have a function that reveals a document is a final draft, or need to schedule meetings in Exchange, by all means, for you it's killer. But WinOffice is not the second suite for "the rest of us."



But there are some cool Windows programs. Like iTunes, QuickTime, Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool........ ....(LOL)



Actually there are: like WordPerfect Office (far superior word-processor, better presentation program, at least as good a spreadsheet, competent database, half or much less the cost)



And like Alpha Five -- a fully professional database environment "accessible" to mere mortals, with scripts and genies and much tighter, more efficient app assembling that cuts down development time amazingly compared to Access -- and there are others, but WP and Alpha are two that will let you do some things that are cool not easily replicated on a Mac.



Which will be my killer reasons to virtualize.....

[BradPDX]

I wasn't arguing that the "features" or applications that are missing from the Mac Office are bad or unneeded - they have become part of the business landscape for better or worse.
I will admit that in my work life, these specific items have never been used in such a way that they provided unique value; for whatever Outlook/Exchange may be capable of, most business do pretty basic implementations.
My point is only that Microsoft chooses to keep those items "Windows only" in order to increase our costs and their revenue. There is no purely technical necessity, they simply treat customers this way as a business decision.
And it stinks. It makes me feel "used" when I use a Microsoft product, a purely emotional reaction because of my knowledge of the subject. I solve that personal issue by using iWork, which is a delight to use.

[lkrupp]

When Apple first announced the availability of Boot Camp to run Windows on Intel Macs a few of us fanboys said they would rue the day. We predicted that major developers like Microsoft, Adobe, and Intuit might just cease development of their OS X versions and tell users to just "run the Windows versions" on their Macs. We were laughed at as, well, fanboys. Fast forward and today we have a major Macintosh magazine and it's editors recommending just that with their list of must have Windows programs. So has MacWorld been lying to Mac users all along about how good the Mac platform is?
Oh, and by the way, if you want to run the latest version of Quicken you'll have to do it on Windows. There is no Mac version available and no sign of one showing up any time soon either. So when it's time to buy a new computer should I just get a Windows box and forget about OS X? MacWorld now seems to indicate I would be better off doing so.

[Gary54]

One word for this series of articles: "Stinks".
Whoever cooked up this idea should be spending time behind the wood shed.

[wogsinheat]

My apologies in advance for a very long post - but this series got me extremely annoyed.
At the end of the first part, I said I was waiting for the killer apps that would make Windows worth running on my Mac, I seriously thought there would be killer apps. Not ms office - which I and many others are happily able to do without.
Why do I say that?
There is nothing (worth using) that word does that cannot be read or dealt with in NeoOffice. If open source makes you squirm, use Pages instead.
Why ever would anyone in their right mind pay for powerpoint (on windows at that) when there's Keynote which is miles better (or neooffice, which is good and free)?
I can understand Excel, particularly if you have lots of special scripts or formulae in the spreadsheet, but even there, while Numbers clearly has catching up to do, the Open office spreadsheet is probably at par as far as the Mac is concerned.
Access: Filemaker is simpler, MySql is considerably more powerful. Both run native and don't need windows.
Outlook/Exchange. Bah. And only if some trogolodyte in an IT department insists on it. Not having worked in large, non-creative companies, I can only sympathise if someone is forced to use this instead of using ical, address book etc in combination or using online apps.
Don't know about Quicken etc - never had to go near them, thankfully.
But NOT ONE of the apps listed is really a killer app... you can get by very easily without them and windows unless:
1. You are in a large organisation that is still, in this day and age, so completely Windows centric that they force you to use something they call "standard" (sub-standard?).
2. You need to run a very specialised piece of software (e.g scientific/engineering/legal/medical/3d or such which is not available on the Mac.
3. You need to access files which are untranslatable to commonly available formats.
4. You are a hard core gamer.
Unfortunately 2 and 3 apply to me. So this comes with some experience and lots of annoyance at being forced to run windows
And to follow up on what lkrupp wrote: I think the big developers are either pulling back on Mac software (features wise) or forcing us to use Windows like UIs (can you hear me Adobe, I'm talking to you). The most innovative work is coming from small developers and the open source community.
Just think:
• when GIMP (eventually, sigh) supports CMYK, will we really need Photoshop so desperately? when people try out and buy Pixelmator or any of the other fine pieces of image enhancing software will we still need to pay with an arm and leg for Photoshop?
• when inkscape runs native or intaglio comes of age, will we need illustrator?
• when openoffice or iwork add a few more features will we still need lame reasons to use msoffice?
• when the mac community decides that small developers deserve their dollars and support (rather than adobe, ms or intuit - to all of whom we are at best an necessary evil) will we still need articles like this one?
P.S. Someone please tell me that the inclusion of IE 7 is an elaborate joke. If a site won't work in Safari or Firefox on the Mac or Firefox on Windows, it is being run by someone who does not even begin to understand customers - and probably doesn't deserve your business.
Thanks to everyone who reads this rant.

[griffman]

Every point in your rant is valid, of course, but it doesn't apply, because of the very conditions you also include: there are a group of users for whom the Mac-only solutions don't apply. For those users, Pages and NeoOffice won't cut it as Word replacements (neither program offers 100% Word compatibility, especially if those documents include Word macros). Keynote doesn't offer full PowerPoint compatibility, and PowerPoint offers a number of features not found in Keynote. Access is the standard in any Windows-centric office that I've visited that uses databases, so FileMaker Pro isn't relevant.

Yes, there are a large number of users for whom there isn't a need to run WIndows applications. This series isn't targeted at those users -- we're not trying to tell people "to use a Mac, you really should also run WIndows alongside OS X." We're saying "if you have to run Windows, for some of the reasons we've enumerated, then here are some things to keep in mind as you work with Fusion and Parallels."

-rob.

[wogsinheat]

Rob

"This series isn't targeted at those users -- we're not trying to tell people "to use a Mac, you really should also run WIndows alongside OS X." We're saying "if you have to run Windows, for some of the reasons we've enumerated, then here are some things to keep in mind as you work with Fusion and Parallels."

My apologies.

I just wish this had come out more clearly in the series. But you know, it didn't, really. It came out more as "here's why if you really want to fit in with the world at large / not feel left out, you must not only run windows but use ms office (for windows) on your mac."

I was trying to make a point, that it is possible - even in a windows (and windows software) centric world that treats mac users like irritating vermin - to manage most (not all) computing tasks without having to install windows or expensive software from Adobe and the like.

But I don't want to argue with one of the mac journalists I admire most (macosxhints has saved my life more often than I can pay tribute to). Instead here's a request. Can you (or someone else) do a series on the applications that will help you survive in a windows world without having to ever, ever use anything branded microsoft. Please?

Thanks for reading.

ashok

p.s. plain text markup help doesn't work (in safari 3.1.1) and my html skills are worse than non-existent, so this is going to come out as a rather nasty block of text. Sorry about that.

[Herkimer]

Office 2007 is not a killer app, it is just Office 2003 with minor updates and with a Playskool interface that appeals to ten-thumbed executives who want to make sumpin purdy without larnin' anythin' first, but is harder to use past the demo. I've used Word since version 0.9, and this is the first time I've been bamboozled by the user interface.
The difference between the features in Office 2007 and 2008 are not cause to run Windows on a Mac. They are cause for us villagers to storm the Microsoft castle with pitchforks and torches.
Microsoft deliberately dumbed down Office for the Mac. They have the resources to do it right, but they chose not to. They think we are a bunch of ignorant yokels who will misread Microsoft's malfeasance as Apple's limitations. In the case of the writer of this article, they were right.
Microsoft is constantly trying to manipulate me and they insult me at every turn. Vista phones home every two weeks to check if I'm a thief. One time I had to phone in for authorization, and they accused me of stealing it until they verified that I had not. Add up the cost of Vista and Office and tell me it's worthy trading my human dignity for them: Vista, which is spyware disguised as an OS, and Office, which does not let me press F10 to reveal the menus. They insult me and coerce me at every turn.
I tried Office 2007 at work, but prevailed upon the powers that be to switch me back to Office 2003. My time is better spent doing my job than learning that insulting new UI. I got Vista for free because I was a beta tester. That was an even worse experience than using Vista. So I bought a Mac and my Dell sits in the corner unused.
I don't do business with companies that insult me and try to coerce me. I just want Microsoft to go away--and if they keep this up, they will.

[whitedog]

The level of animus toward Microsoft being expressed here is hard to discount. Many of those complaining are experienced Windows and Office users who are clearly gagging on the necessity that compels them to continue to use Microsoft products.

The people who should be reading these comments are those at the MacBU who are responsible for bringing us the Mac version of Office. When Microsoft made the decision to not commit the resources and manpower required to develop VBA for Office '08, they poured high-octane jet fuel on the fires of anti-Microsoft sentiment in the Mac community. Even though a clear majority of Office users on both platforms never use Word and Excel macros, withdrawing one of the core functions of Office from the Mac was an obvious slap in the face of every Mac user. The explanation that they didn't have time to do VBA for Office '08 is disingenuous at best. Translated from MS doublespeak, what they are really saying is that the powers that be at MS didn't want to give the MacBU the wherewithal to make Office '08 all it should be.

The MacBU have recanted to a degree - the outrage they created clearly took them by surprise and has moved them to go ahead with development of VBA for the next Mac Office upgrade. But that's years and an additional upgrade charge away. By the time it returns, it may matter even less than it does today. You can be sure the competition won't be sitting idly by while Microsoft gets its Mac act together.

I haven't tried Office 2007 on Windows. But from descriptions here - and my experience with Vista and IE 7 - we should be grateful indeed they didn't hash up the latest Mac Office as badly as they did the Windows version - missing features and functions notwithstanding. Though there are differences between Office 2004 and 2008, Office '08 didn't get the Vista treatment and is still a Mac friendly (more or less) suite of applications. I know there are those who will take exception to this observation, but compared to the drastic interface changes in Office 2007, the latest Mac Office is a relatively painless upgrade.

In any case, I was glad to read Rob's articles on Windows apps - killer or not. While I have both Windows XP and Vista installed on my Mac Pro, I haven't loaded them up with software. I use them sparingly, but I still like to know what's happening on that side of the world, and I don't have either the time or the money to test it all myself.

[Herkimer]

{quote:title=Whitedog says:}The level of animus toward Microsoft being expressed here is hard to discount.{quote}

Microsoft worked hard to create and cultivate that animus. I bought every version of FrontPage, hoping it would get better, but it didn't. That's why I use Dreamweaver. Microsoft used Money to experiment with new ideas for a UI--on the only "home" product that is mission-critical. I had problems with it, and Microsoft valiantly tried to help me, but Money forced me into the arms of Quicken. Now Office insults my intelligence. I don't use Vista because I was a beta tester and I know how lousy and unnecessarily complex it is. I relented when they gave me Vista for free, then they accused me of stealing it. I went back and forth between XP and VIsta too often and it is too hard to reinstall all my software. I haven't reverted to XP because I'm tangled up in license issues. All that forced me into the Mac, which I previously hated because of the fanboys. Now I'm looking for a replacement for Word 2008 because it is go-get-a-cup-of-coffee slow at startup and is the only application that can't redraw the screen.

The last straw, I think, came when I created a very large document in both DOC and DOCX format. DOCX is allegedly the native file format for Word 2008. The DOC version loads instantly. The DOCX version loads so slowly I get to watch a progress bar. If Office 2008 is not just Office 2004 with a gussied up UI and a file converter, they did a good job of simulating it. Do they think I'll buy any future version of Office after that trick?

Microsoft has changed its focus from customers to partners; their software is designed to demo, not to use; and they are spiraling downward in quality.

It wasn't long ago that I loved Microsoft and at one point I owned every software package they made. I always preferred Microsoft over the competitor. But Microsoft struggled mightily to destroy that relationship. It took a number of years, but they finally succeeded.

Microsoft is its own worst enemy. Those of us with animus toward Microsoft are lovers whom they've spurned.