Microsoft Office 2016 desktop suite scheduled for H2 2015

[HEXUS]

Will offer "compelling new experiences," beyond those offered by Office for Windows 10.

Read more.

[MrRockliffe]

Amazing, multi billion dollar companies and they can't even count...

[Tpyo]

Will Sway and other projects be bundled or are they staying independent?

For me I'm more concerned about pricing/pricing models. I don't mind paying more up front to own the software, but will generally avoid subscription services on principle.
More specifically here, I'm not that comfortable with 365's 'don't worry, we'll look after that for you in our cloud' approach. It may work for backups (if you aren't worried about the privcacy/security implications) but I most definitely prefer to work from a local copy so that work doesn't stop every time the interweb flutters.

[crossy]

For me I'm more concerned about pricing/pricing models. I don't mind paying more up front to own the software, but will generally avoid subscription services on principle.

I'm more amenable to subscription services for apps, (subscriptions for OS's though are a non-starter), it'd have to depend on the pricing etc. For example, if it was £60-80/year for a four user license that included desktops, tablets (inc non-Windows ones) and mobiles (also including non-Windows ones) then I could be persuaded.

More specifically here, I'm not that comfortable with 365's 'don't worry, we'll look after that for you in our cloud' approach. It may work for backups (if you aren't worried about the privcacy/security implications) but I most definitely prefer to work from a local copy so that work doesn't stop every time the interweb flutters.

I thought Office365 was tied into OneDrive, in which case you can always use "Make available offline" to make sure it's sync'ing to the cloud rather than storing only in the cloud. Although why that isn't the default setting and they offer a "Make available online" option instead is another question. Don't use OneDrive a lot, prefer Dropbox because it's easier to get my head around.

[TheAnimus]

There isn't any need to save a document in 365 to 'the cloud', unless you want collaborative editing features in a live manner. Even then you can always host your own sharepoint.

[ChinesePate]

I wonder if they introduce any significant changes this time, as last 10 years they seem to have spent working on the ribbon.

[Saracen]

Amazing, multi billion dollar companies and they can't even count...

Maybe they used Excel?

[Saracen]

I'm more amenable to subscription services for apps, (subscriptions for OS's though are a non-starter), it'd have to depend on the pricing etc. For example, if it was £60-80/year for a four user license that included desktops, tablets (inc non-Windows ones) and mobiles (also including non-Windows ones) then I could be persuaded.

....

Unless pricing was absolutely trivial, I couldn't be persuaded. And, of course, I meant relative pricing, comparing monthly sub to outright purchase.

Why? Because, in most cases, a given version is useful to me far, far FAR after MS have updated it. I still have two machines running Office 2000 and one on Office 97. And, for what I use them for, they do everything I need. So why pay for new versions? And IMHO, that is a large part of why MS and others, like Adobe, want a sub model.

And, of course, it's about predictability of cash flow, too. Unless the product release model, they have to do the development, incur the costs and only then try to persuade people to part with money for upgrades. With the sub model, they know that inertia will mean most subscribers will subscribe long-term, and people just being content with the old version is no longer a problem.

For me, it's simple. With a product release, I can base a decision to buy, or not, based on what the new version offers, either extra or improvements, and on a known, one-off cost. And very often, I decide that bells and whistles might be nice, might be better but not enough to justify paying for them. The old version was doing what I needed it to do yesterday, and therefore pretty much by definition, still will be tomorrow, next week or next year.

So for the purchase cost of, say, Office 2000, here I am 15 years later still getting value from it for zero extra cost. When I compare that to £x per month, or per year, it starts to look VERY expensive, unless the cost/month is extremely low compared to buying a perpetual licence outright.

At your £60-80, call it £70 for simplicity, £70 for 15 years is £1050, and will be £1120 shortly, increasing year on year. My one-off purchase was, firstly, fixed, secondly, far less over MY life usage, and thirdly, utterly predictable as a one-off rather than a constant vampiric effect on my income, for a sub.

I can see why a modest sub appeals to some users, especially businesses, but for me, I see it as an extremely expensive way of buying 'upgrades' cthat I may not need, may not want and indeed, may emphatically prefer to not have. I reverted to Win7 for daily use despite buying Win8, and several friends reverted to versions of Office prior to whatever they called their context-sensitive toolbar thingy (which I use on one system on, IIRC, Office 2007, and don't mind).

And yes, before anyone tells me (again) I know you can get utilities to revert Win8 to a Win7 style UI, and to revert to Classic office menu's too.

All told, I don't care if MS offer a subscription option, either for Windows or Office, provided they don't do an Adobe and offer it as the only, and mandatory, route.

Despite being a long-term Photoshop user, that alone guarantees I will never upgrade Photoshop again. I'll use my existing version as long as I can, then switch to something else.

As for cloud storage, I only have two points. First, I see no benefit to me, and for some of my data, considerable risk. So, no way in hell.

The second point is that with increasing integration, the ONLY thing I want is absolute certainty that it CANNOT happen unless I explicitly authorise it. Behind-the-scenes "default' cloud storage, as core OS service or not, is an OS-changing uncrossable red line issue. In other words, a real red line, not an Obama-style red line.

Again, I get why it appeals to many people, but for me, it's an absolute non-starter that will stop me using either an OS or an office suite if I cannot be sure it cannot happen without my explicit agreement, which will not be forthcoming. I want my data under my control, period. Full-stop. End-of.

[spacein_vader]

Unless pricing was absolutely trivial, I couldn't be persuaded. And, of course, I meant relative pricing, comparing monthly sub to outright purchase.

Why? Because, in most cases, a given version is useful to me far, far FAR after MS have updated it. I still have two machines running Office 2000 and one on Office 97. And, for what I use them for, they do everything I need. So why pay for new versions? And IMHO, that is a large part of why MS and others, like Adobe, want a sub model.

And, of course, it's about predictability of cash flow, too. Unless the product release model, they have to do the development, incur the costs and only then try to persuade people to part with money for upgrades. With the sub model, they know that inertia will mean most subscribers will subscribe long-term, and people just being content with the old version is no longer a problem.

For me, it's simple. With a product release, I can base a decision to buy, or not, based on what the new version offers, either extra or improvements, and on a known, one-off cost. And very often, I decide that bells and whistles might be nice, might be better but not enough to justify paying for them. The old version was doing what I needed it to do yesterday, and therefore pretty much by definition, still will be tomorrow, next week or next year.

So for the purchase cost of, say, Office 2000, here I am 15 years later still getting value from it for zero extra cost. When I compare that to £x per month, or per year, it starts to look VERY expensive, unless the cost/month is extremely low compared to buying a perpetual licence outright.

At your £60-80, call it £70 for simplicity, £70 for 15 years is £1050, and will be £1120 shortly, increasing year on year. My one-off purchase was, firstly, fixed, secondly, far less over MY life usage, and thirdly, utterly predictable as a one-off rather than a constant vampiric effect on my income, for a sub.

I can see why a modest sub appeals to some users, especially businesses, but for me, I see it as an extremely expensive way of buying 'upgrades' cthat I may not need, may not want and indeed, may emphatically prefer to not have. I reverted to Win7 for daily use despite buying Win8, and several friends reverted to versions of Office prior to whatever they called their context-sensitive toolbar thingy (which I use on one system on, IIRC, Office 2007, and don't mind).

And yes, before anyone tells me (again) I know you can get utilities to revert Win8 to a Win7 style UI, and to revert to Classic office menu's too.

All told, I don't care if MS offer a subscription option, either for Windows or Office, provided they don't do an Adobe and offer it as the only, and mandatory, route.

Despite being a long-term Photoshop user, that alone guarantees I will never upgrade Photoshop again. I'll use my existing version as long as I can, then switch to something else.

As for cloud storage, I only have two points. First, I see no benefit to me, and for some of my data, considerable risk. So, no way in hell.

The second point is that with increasing integration, the ONLY thing I want is absolute certainty that it CANNOT happen unless I explicitly authorise it. Behind-the-scenes "default' cloud storage, as core OS service or not, is an OS-changing uncrossable red line issue. In other words, a real red line, not an Obama-style red line.

Again, I get why it appeals to many people, but for me, it's an absolute non-starter that will stop me using either an OS or an office suite if I cannot be sure it cannot happen without my explicit agreement, which will not be forthcoming. I want my data under my control, period. Full-stop. End-of.

I can't see MS ever getting away with having cloud enabled by default without getting anti-trusted into the ground like they did with IE.

Also, do you have a script that posts your view on cloud services and subscription models into every news item that mentions either?

[fuddam]

Also, do you have a script that posts your view on cloud services and subscription models into every news item that mentions either?

ROFL!!! Was wondering about the same



I went for Office 365 last year, to get the 5 licences, the 5TB of cloud storage, the monthly Skype mins, and for £57 at the time from Zavvi. Had to get Office 2013 regardless for the work I do (self employed), and it made more sense than £170 for SBE and 2 licences, since my kids needed copies too.

[peterb]

Having just bought my first copy of Office for 15 years (and that under duress and the 2011 version) it was disappointing to find it as clunky and quirky as it always was. So I can't think of ant "compelling new features" that would even make me consider using it over Open Office or better still, Corels latest version of WordPerfect. If only they hadn't dropped Linux support...

Oh maybe on feature - the one that stops the formatting of a whole paragraph or document change because you delete a charachter. Now that would be good.

[Saracen]

...

Also, do you have a script that posts your view on cloud services and subscription models into every news item that mentions either?

Do you think I'm going to find that amusing?

Listen, and listen carefully, because I am REALLY not in the mood for this.

I don't tell you what to post, and I don't expect snide comments about what I post.

Please provide one single example of the same post appearing ANYWHERE.

If you can't, knock it the hell off because I am sick and flaming tired of people telling me what I can and can't post, and am current flaming angry.

Sense of humour failure? Hell yes. Others thinking of joining in with this similarly think carefully, because my tolerance level for this is zero.

[TheAnimus]

Sense of humour failure? Hell yes. Others thinking of joining in with this similarly think carefully, because my tolerance level for this is zero.

Hey I don't think he meant anything bad by his comments, but it's well known that you are not in favour of subscription models.

I think we've spoken a lot before about why I am, and I do also agree with your points a lot on the whole, it's just I consider software to be an on-going thing that needs maintenance. This is probably a side effect of being a developer. But it's no different to someone owning a house. You need money available for repairing the roof when it first starts to leak. Software in a connected world is different as it often has people, very smart people trying to attack it.

Moving to the latest version is often very preferable for developers too, as it makes our lives easier to be only supporting one version for active development, rather than deploying patches amongst many different branches, keeping all those code files in sync is error prone at best.

[peterb]

Moving to the latest version is often very preferable for developers too, as it makes our lives easier to be only supporting one version for active development, rather than deploying patches amongst many different branches, keeping all those code files in sync is error prone at best.

Any developer who wishes to dig into his wallet and pay for me to upgrade my systems because it makes life easier for them is welcome to send cash. I will accept PayPal (subject to a 25% transaction fee) but sorry, not Bitcoin

[OilSheikh]

Why are they still sticking to the God awful look of Office 2013? Why don't they learn their lessons?!

Office 2010 FTW

[spacein_vader]

Do you think I'm going to find that amusing?

Listen, and listen carefully, because I am REALLY not in the mood for this.

I don't tell you what to post, and I don't expect snide comments about what I post.

Please provide one single example of the same post appearing ANYWHERE.

If you can't, knock it the hell off because I am sick and flaming tired of people telling me what I can and can't post, and am current flaming angry.

Sense of humour failure? Hell yes. Others thinking of joining in with this similarly think carefully, because my tolerance level for this is zero.

My apologies, it was meant as a light hearted observation and I certainly have no intention of trying to tell you or anyone else what they can and can't post on this or any other subject.
Your opinion on cloud & subs is detailed and well reasoned and I agree with a lot of it, particularly when it comes to subs for an OS. All I meant was that as I imagine most people on here (as has been alluded to in the posts above,) are aware of your position on these matters you might not need to state it so fully on such a regular basis. Some users may find your confident and detailed position intimidating enough to refrain from adding to the debate, particularly if they have a differing view.

Also, to clarify: Obviously you've not made an absolutely identical posting elsewhere on the forum, just similarly themed ones.