[billearl]

I can't see AppleScript being sufficient to replace VBA in a spreadsheet from M$ or Apple. It looks like I'll be running Office 2004 for the foreseeable future.
Incidentally, I wasn't happy with having to convert all my Excel macros from Excel 4 macro language to VBA either.

[Diomedes]

How many of th posters here work in a LARGE (10,000) enterprie environment? How many mail administrators or IT support departments have had to deal with malicious VBA macros? I had to direct my mail admins to turn on virus filtering for Office documents with VBA code, since we couldn't verify that macro security was enabled on each workstation. It caused a mild uproar, but not enugh to make us change our policy.

VBA is a relic, a dinosaur...and while Microsoft may be including support in Office 2007 Windows, they aren't substantially enhancing it. In fact, I've seen indicators that they will be advocating something else to provide automation within Office (I don't know what they are pointing to). I don't think VBA has much life left in Office for Windows. Can VBA macros exists reliably in Office XML documents, or in the ODF format? I'm inclined to think they won't. (On a tangent, the delay between Mac XML converters will really mean nothing the majority of early Office 2007 users will still save files in 2003 format.)

VBA support in Office for Mac was always a version (or two, or more) behind its Windows counterpart. In my 12 years of IT support on myriad platforms, applications, and businesses, VBA has been use in isolated pockets. It's never been an enterprise concern, or a requirement for an application.
I HARDLY think the loss of VBA in Office Mac signals the beginning of the end for the suite. If anyone has beta tested Office 2007, you will have noticed LOTS of features "missing" that could make one running back to Office 2003. If Office Mac 2007 has the new XML format; connecivity to Office Server systems (Excel Server, as an aexample); majority feature parity with Windows, I think it's future remains solid.

[nmpike]

Quote:

---

If Office Mac 2007 has the new XML format; connecivity to Office Server systems (Excel Server, as an aexample); majority feature parity with Windows, I think it's future remains solid.

---

I think Google and others are going to kill MS's Excel server idea before it takes off... Google Spreadsheets already are superior... and they run under any platform.
We have to keep in mind that Office 2007 could be a total flop... I have Office 2007... and while it is cool to look at, most users do not like re-learning anything... and Office 2007 confuses most novice average users that see it.

[iron_chef]

just for yucks, apple should release Pages for WIndows, keynote for windows, and their spreadsheet for windows and charge less than that bloated office.
itunes seems to dominate music on the pc. why shouldn't office like apps?

[Nobody]

The sad thing is that the whole Office package is horrible, anti-intuitive and buggy, but we must use it for compatibility with the Windoze world. A shame.

[osxfoundry]

>>> Considering that but a small percentage of Macs in the universe are Intel-powered, Parallels and Win Office won't be a valid answer for the majority for quite a while.
It's not a win-win; it's a big win for Microsoft, and a lose for the OS X platform, as a key piece of software vanishes.
People who are currently running G5, G4, or G3s are using last or old MS Office.
Sooner or later, these people will have to update their machine and Intel Mac will be the only choice.
MacMall is bundling Windows with most of the Macs, so the user has both OS on the best computer.
More and more windows user are actually switching to Mac for that reason: being able to still run windows and discover what the Mac is all about.
For the die hard Mac who are allergic to windows, then they'll have to keep a copy of old Office version.
Anyway, I don't see this a big issue. We can leave without Office. I barely use it on my mac.
Excel does not behave same way as on windows.
This is a great opportunity for Apple or another company (like OmniGroup) to come up with a really cool Spreadsheet app.
Apple could have FileMakerPro add a SpreadSheet module and problem would be solve. Replacing MS Access and Excel in one shot !!

[spiderbat]

Creating a big source of inter-platform incompatibility is clearly a bad move. My concern is: besides creating a problem for users of m$-office on the Mac, will it hurt more Apple or m$?
The scenario where Mac users are forced to buy 'windoze' to use m$-office on their machines is very disgusting, but whenever a single user, a firm, a municipality, a state understands that it is possible and advantageous to do without m$ applications, a step is done towards a cleaner computing environment.

[horvatic]

So there vision of an upgrade is to break everything that office ever was. There not going forward, they're going backward. In the corporate world this won't fly and there will be a lot of companies NOT upgrading because of incompatabilities with older software and there documents which rely heavily on macros. I think the people at Microsoft have lost there minds! I really don't know what they are thinking.

[trip1ex]

Just the usual MS tactics. Keep the moat wide. Protect the castle.
They do just enough to have their software on the Mac, but not enough that their 99% of their customers would ever switch to the Mac platform.
Classic MS.
Good news is Bootcamp and Parallels. And maybe this will cause Apple to work all the harder on the next version of iWork with a spreadsheet program included.

[MrMe]

Quote:

---

....
VBA is a relic, a dinosaur...and while Microsoft may be including support in Office 2007 Windows, they aren't substantially enhancing it. In fact, I've seen indicators that they will be advocating something else to provide automation within Office (I don't know what they are pointing to). I don't think VBA has much life left in Office for Windows. Can VBA macros exists reliably in Office XML documents, or in the ODF format? I'm inclined to think they won't. ...

---

This basically confirms my understanding. Microsoft killed VBA for MacOS X because the technology is being EOL'ed anyway. It makes no sense to port a what would essentially be a maintenance release to a new architecture. For all of the catawauling in this article, it was years after the release of VBA that I saw it used for anything besides virus creation. That some users have found a constructive use for it is commendable. However, the vast majority of users--be they on the Mac or Windows--could not develop a VBA macro if their lives depended on it. For those who currently need it, alternatives will be found, they will live, and the Sun will rise tomorrow.

[glj]

Is it possible to write an application that runs on a Mac, and that translates a VB script into AppleScript, and vice versa?

[kill953]

Office on the Mac has consistently been deficient relative to Office on a PC for every single version ever released (Office 2004 is pretty dire IMO - slow, buggy, can't handle symbols in Windows documents and vice versa, Entourage lacks basic functionality compared to Outlook which prevents it from being used - my workplace relies on Outlook running under Classic instead ffs rather than use Entourage, formatting issues in powerpoint presentations, incompatibility with basic image formats, etc.). There is nothing new to this. It is MS's means of putting doubt in the mind of potential switchers (I would switch, but I have heard that Office on the Mac isn't as good/has problems/isn't fully compatible... which is the gist of something a friend said to me a year or so ago and I simply couldn't disagree). Now they are doing it for potential corporate customers sick of the MS tax too... "we would switch, but we have to guarantee 100% compatibility" etc.

[Frank153]

Microsoft can create a wizard that converts Microsoft Visual Basic 6.0 code to Microsoft Visual Basic .net code. Why Microsoft can't create a wizard that converts VBA to AppleScript and vice versa?

[deemery]

Almost every document I get these days has Word Macros in it. (God only knows why, most of what I see has no 'behavior' in it...) This means that I'll either
a. remain on current Mac Office, and 'demand' people use Office compatability (Microsoft makes sure that's a difficult strategy)
b. buy Parallels, XP and then Office on XP. That's I'm sure what Micro$oft is REALLY HOPING FOR. They make a ton of $$$$ on retail XP/Office.
c. pray someone (Apple? OpenOffice?) develops something that is compatible with MS Orifice including macros.
Bad choices all around.