Discussion on:

Microsoft Office 2013 is now available

Microsoft really wants you to subscribe to Office - are you considering it?

Not on your tintype!

There are no options to upgrade an existing standalone license, e.g., Office Home & Business 2010 to the equivalent 2013 version? Pretty draconian and possible a bad decision on the part of MS.

We went to the subscription model years ago with BPOS and now Office 365. I hope the enterprise solution (Office 365 E3) is coming quickly.

If the purchaser intends to upgrade (again) in three years when Redmond releases the next (2016?) version of Office, assuming they maintain their every-three-years schedule, then the hundred bucks a year for the subscription is the better buy. If, as many tend to do, they choose to keep the professional 2013 version until it/they just can't cope with the differences anymore, then the four hundred simoleans will be far less expensive. Alternatively, if they can get by with a lower-level version, stand-alone is the only way to go - why pay for features and programs they don't use?

The other consideration might be whether or not they have proprietary IP and just don't trust the cloud to keep their information secure from prying eyes. As someone in the throes of two start-up businesses, I personally, as well as my partners, are unwilling to risk our IP to someone else's servers - at least for now.

Having just earned all the MOS certificates for 2010 is also an incentive for me to keep the current version for a while longer, rather than paying either charge.

For home users (up to 5) its $99 with shedloads of bells & whistles (which may or may not be of any interest), or you pay over twice as much, for less software for one seat of business version. Er...?
I run a SOHO setup also with 2 children's PCs & would not feel inclined to stump up $219 (usually translates to 219, not 138 -ouch) annually for both of us plus more for the kids, which is why I'm trying Libre Office to see if it will work for us. MS Office H&B is 240 here - that's got to be good for 3-5 years vs 600-1000 subscription over that time..

The $99 is a yearly charge the others are one time...

We dont have access to the internet every wear we travel. We will buy the standalone. In fact, we will need three or four copies. I hope MS will offer a upgrade or multiple copy discount.

The charge is US$100 but in Australia M$ want to charge AU$120 even though the AU$ buys about 105 US cents at the moment. That makes the price in Australia about 25% more. More Microsoft digital rip off.

not feasible when supporting 80 users. Besides, we need Access, Outlook and Publisher.

at least as per the chart

What??s the gain irt 2010? Or 2007? Or even XP?
It will take a while to pick-up, I??m afraid.

What happens to those of us who now run Office 365 on a subscription basis? WIll we be able to download and install thsi newer form?

I've been waiting for this for a long time as a Project Coordinator of IT/IS Departments. This is exactly what anyone who does contract work needs.

This subscription offer does not make much sense to me. With Adobe, for example, if you subscribe, you get their whole CS package. True, it is more expensive but that is cheaper than buying it all up front every two years if you use the whole package. With Microsoft, you get a basic package. It does not include the complete Office package [Access is not included, for example]. They have only one option which, IMHO, is short-sighted. That is one of the reasons I will opt for the standalone package ($400).

365 comes with Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, Access, Publisher and OneNote...

Where did you see that you don't get Access?

I misread the package and see that it does offer everything. For this price, I will opt to go with the subscription model.

FYI everyone Google Apps Sync does not work with 2013. If you are like my organization we use that on every PC and they are currently running 2010 perfectly. So be advised this my not be a good option out of the gate until google catches up. Last time when 2010 came out, google took 3 months to address the issues of compatibility.

If they are, then they will stay with this. If not, they will tweak it until they get the revenue stream they desire.

and the offer was that when 2013 comes out I can upgrade for free, the offer is for either the one year sub to 365 with all the bells and whistles or the download of the new version with its limited functions. Does anyone know if the free upgrade is good for all three licenses or just one of the PCs? And if I do take it, would I be able to transfer it to a new computer if I was to replace the one(s) its installed on now?

I don't believe Microsoft will make big profits off this subscription "Office".
I already fave "Office" why would I buy it for a few upgrades?
Plus the learning curve it just does not make scence.

Mark, you forgot to mention, which operating systems will Office 2013 work with. Windows XP? Windows 7? Windows 8? Apple Mac OS?

Thanks,
Jim L.

Speaking for myself and almost everyone I know, there is no need to upgrade. Office 2013 does not offer any advantages over 2010 or even Office 2007, which is my (and many, many others) choice. I use Outlook, Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Sorry Microsoft but you are totally underwhelming me with this latest cash grab.

Is Office 365 limited in any way if you don't have Internet access?

For home use the subscription is a steal. I do not currently have any version of Office on any home computer. With my wife and kids all having their own computers, and the kids needing to use Office more and more for school, the subscription service makes the most sense. I do agree with donyurchuk that if you own an Office license or manage a Microsoft Office environment at work upgrading doesn't make sense. Office 2010, or even 2007, are great products and still very much usable.

Microsoft is proposing to turn Office into an information utility. It exercises an effective monopoly in its class. (I've tried passing documents and presentations back and forth between Word and Power Point and the Open Office apps - it doesn't work.)

We've always subjected monopoly utilities to price regulations. Is it time?

Microsoft hasn't added anything that I need to Office since Office 97, and that's probably true for 90% of Office users. When you add in the ribbon (WHICH I'm still not used to despite 6 years of use at work), there's not only no reason to upgrade, there's a strong disincentive.

If you're still not used to the ribbon after using it for 6 years, you are either lying or incompetent. Yes it was quite an adjustment back when it was brand new, but those who took the time to learn it found it made much more sense, especially if you're using multiple office programs. It was organized far better and much easier to access the same features across the different applications.

Not all are using it all day every day of their working lives some of us only drop into Office 2007 or newer on very rare occasions for our work so why should you know it after 6 years under those circumstances?

Sure a Secretary who uses it all day every day would have to know it after 6 years but not all of us are that person.

I found it funny how the staff here complained bitterly about having Word Perfect on their systems when they started but now they are the ones who complain when they have to use office anything and they all hate having to drop back into any of the Office Products with the possible exception of Outlook which is still used as the default Mail Browser.

But simply if we need a Word Processor we use WP X5 not Microsoft Office anything.

Col

Having used Office 2013 (word and excel in particular, and some powerpoint) for several months, I definitely WON'T go back to 2010/07. I find the new versions have added to my productivity in many ways.

But, the court is still out as to whether I'll subscribe or buy. I'm still reviewing the licensing options.

Two problems with this. For one, the "subscription" one is only for home use. It'll save you a little money if you have a big family of Windows users, no one's using it professionally (eg, that PC isn't used to edit documents from work), and you always upgrade year to year. For single user, it's a bad deal, unless you really need the online component for some reason (eg, the free versions aren't enough).

For office work, it's not an option. For many kinds of engineering offices, never has been -- we have needed an option available on Linux, Windows, and MacOS at my last two jobs, with online collaboration, and ideally these days, Android and iOS support. We're using Google Docs for the collaboration these days -- they have their own issues. And sometimes reformatting in "one's wordprocessor of choice" for a final document, to be delivered in Acrobat PDF.

I have 2007, my wife has 2010, and were both happy. Anyway before I would shell out the money again, I would use Open Office or Libre Office.

First get me some more reasonable prices for all of the options, then i will think about it

Don't need to do either as my work has an EA agreement which gives all staff the Home Use Program for MS Office latest version. Full install for $10 thanks!

I will not be getting either version. I do so few documents that Libre Office handles what ever I need.

I use Word, Excel, and Access on WinXP and Win7. the 2003 and 2007 versions do everything I need, and I can move them to new hardware if necessary. Why bother spending the money.

http://member.thinkfree.com/member/goLandingPage.action

Every new version of Office a feature that I found really useful is removed and new unhelpful features installed. I will stick with my current Office 2010 until I am forced to do otherwise!

I am using Ms Office 2007 and 2010. both and in few past year i have used MS office 2003 also but never think about to subscribe