Text 5876, 312 rader
Skriven 2005-07-10 23:43:04 av Rich Gauszka (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 5875 av Rich (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Continuing Microsoft Office improvements
====================================================
From: "Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@hotmail.com>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C585A9.1D782EF0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I don't understand the worldwide argument you made. I did see an article = from
2004 that claimed MS estimated that the number of Office users to = be around
400 million world wide ( I make no claims to the accuracy of = that number ).
Since those users are already using Office the 'Western = European language'
argument wouldn't seem (to me) to have much validity = in a decision to
upgrade or not
Link to the 400 million quote
http://www.fontstuff.com/comment/comment03.htm
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:42d1e617@w3.nls.net...
I don't mind Gary saying that Windows 2000 is good enough for him. =
What I pointed out was how bogus is claim that 95% of users, particular = the
majority of the world that does not speak a Western European = language, would
agree.
FYI, Office 2003 is often called Office 11 within Microsoft. You =
should not read anything into the name Office 12 beyond the version = being 12.
Rich
"Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:42d1de9b$1@w3.nls.net...
Just stating that opinion by many ( Gary included ) that their =
current Office software is good enough is valid and that they shouldn't = have
to jump through hoops validating that opinion. =20
I read Ballmer's quote and I still don't know if he is saying that =
Office 2003 is deployed on 10 to 15 percent of installed PCs or if he = means
all versions of Office?
=
http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml?articleId=3D1=
65701130
"We shipped Office 2003 two years ago and roughly Office is deployed =
on just 10 to 15 percent of all installed PCs in the world."=20
And let's confuse people even more by naming the next version Office =
12
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:42d1d725$1@w3.nls.net...
Who are you blaming for what?
Rich
"Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:42d1ba93@w3.nls.net...
Blame the consumer? Is that the new Microsoft tactic that is to =
be used when a user feels no need to upgrade? Gary's sentiments =
regarding Office are viewed by many. Will the MS attack machine go after = the
bloggers next ? ( sample below )
http://www.micropersuasion.com/2005/03/microsoft_offic.html
It's no secret that Microsoft is having difficulty getting =
Office 97 and 2000 users to upgrade to the latest version. Most people = use a
small percentage of the Office suite's full feature set and feel = fine with
what they have.=20
Or maybe ads with workers in dinosaur masks are just asinine? =
Perhaps MS marketing needs to 'evolve'
http://www.netimperative.com/2005/04/13/Microsoft_viral
The "New Era" campaign features actors in an office environment =
wearing dinosaur masks, made by the creators of the Jurassic Park = dinosaurs.
The ads show the old way of working with Office products, = suggesting that
it's time to evolve with the latest version of Microsoft = Office.=20
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:42d1b1ad$1@w3.nls.net...
95% what market? You surely do not mean people that speak =
many non-Western languages because Unicode support did not appear until =
Office 97 and support for more languages and better support for existing = ones
continued to improve with successive releases. With your broad = brush you are
discounting a great deal of the people on this planet. = Far more than 5%.
Western European language speaker are the minority. = Even you would have to
be blind to not see the clear improvements = between Office 5.0 or even Office
95 and Office 2000.
I suspect you have no clue what the improvements are in the =
two releases since the one you use. If I'm wrong feel free to tell us = all
which Office 2003 applications you use and what differences you = perceived.
Rich
"Gary Britt" <zotu@nospamforme.com> wrote in message =
news:42d194f6$1@w3.nls.net...
The truth be told, Office for Win95 and Office 5.0 for =
Win3.1 was good
enough for 95% of the market.
I've stayed at the Office 2K level with no intention on the =
horizon of going
higher.
Gary
------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C585A9.1D782EF0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I don't understand the worldwide argument you made. =
I did see=20
an article from 2004 that claimed MS estimated that the number of Office =
users=20
to be around 400 million world wide ( I make no claims to the = accuracy
of=20
that number ). Since those users are already using Office the =
'Western=20
European language' argument wouldn't seem (to me) to have much = validity
in=20
a decision to upgrade or not</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Link to the 400 million quote</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.fontstuff.com/comment/comment03.htm">http://www.fontst=
uff.com/comment/comment03.htm</A></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d1e617@w3.nls.net">news:42d1e617@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I don't mind Gary saying =
that=20
Windows 2000 is good enough for him. What I pointed out was how =
bogus is=20
claim that 95% of users, particular the majority of the world that =
does not=20
speak a Western European language, would agree.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> FYI, Office 2003 is =
often called=20
Office 11 within Microsoft. You should not read anything into =
the name=20
Office 12 beyond the version being 12.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich Gauszka" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@hotmail.com">gauszka@hotmail.com</A>> =
wrote in=20
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d1de9b$1@w3.nls.net">news:42d1de9b$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Just stating that opinion by many ( Gary =
included ) that=20
their current Office software is good enough is valid and that =
they=20
shouldn't have to jump through hoops validating that opinion. =20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT><FONT size=3D2>I read Ballmer's quote and =
I still=20
don't know if he is saying that Office 2003 is deployed on 10 to 15 =
percent=20
of installed PCs or if he means all versions of Office?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2> </FONT><FONT size=3D2><A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml?artic=
leId=3D165701130">http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.j=
html?articleId=3D165701130</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>"We shipped Office 2003 two years ago and roughly Office is =
deployed on=20
just 10 to 15 percent of all installed PCs in the world." </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>And let's confuse people even more by naming the =
next=20
version Office 12</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d1d725$1@w3.nls.net">news:42d1d725$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Who are you blaming =
for=20
what?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich Gauszka" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@hotmail.com">gauszka@hotmail.com</A>> =
wrote in=20
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d1ba93@w3.nls.net">news:42d1ba93@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Blame the consumer? Is that the new =
Microsoft tactic=20
that is to be used when a user feels no need to =
upgrade? =20
Gary's sentiments regarding Office are viewed by many. Will the =
MS=20
attack machine go after the bloggers next ? ( sample below=20
)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.micropersuasion.com/2005/03/microsoft_offic.html">http=
://www.micropersuasion.com/2005/03/microsoft_offic.html</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>It's no secret that Microsoft is having difficulty getting =
Office=20
97 and 2000 users to upgrade to the latest version. Most people =
use a=20
small percentage of the Office suite's full feature set and feel =
fine=20
with what they have. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Or maybe ads with workers in dinosaur masks =
are just=20
asinine? Perhaps MS marketing needs to 'evolve'</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.netimperative.com/2005/04/13/Microsoft_viral">http://w=
ww.netimperative.com/2005/04/13/Microsoft_viral</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>The =93New Era=94 campaign features actors in an office =
environment=20
wearing dinosaur masks, made by the creators of the <I>Jurassic =
Park</I>=20
dinosaurs. The ads show the old way of working with Office =
products, suggesting that it=92s time to evolve with the latest =
version of=20
Microsoft Office. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d1b1ad$1@w3.nls.net">news:42d1b1ad$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> 95% what =
market? You=20
surely do not mean people that speak many non-Western =
languages=20
because Unicode support did not appear until Office 97 and =
support for=20
more languages and better support for existing =
ones continued to=20
improve with successive releases. With your broad brush =
you are=20
discounting a great deal of the people on this planet. =
Far more=20
than 5%. Western European language speaker are the=20
minority. Even you would have to be blind to not see the =
clear=20
improvements between Office 5.0 or even Office 95 and Office=20
2000.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I suspect you =
have no clue=20
what the improvements are in the two releases since the one =
you=20
use. If I'm wrong feel free to tell us all which Office =
2003=20
applications you use and what differences you =
perceived.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Gary Britt" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:zotu@nospamforme.com">zotu@nospamforme.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d194f6$1@w3.nls.net">news:42d194f6$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>The=20
truth be told, Office for Win95 and Office 5.0 for Win3.1 =
was=20
good<BR>enough for 95% of the market.<BR><BR>I've stayed at =
the=20
Office 2K level with no intention on the horizon of=20
=
going<BR>higher.<BR><BR>Gary<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></=
BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C585A9.1D782EF0--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|