View Full Version : Office Applications
rollercoaster375
2009-09-13, 11:38
Okay, I'm a college student (At the University of Illinois, for those that care), in Computer Science, and with the purchase of my new MacBook Pro, I no longer have an office suite.
As such, I'm trying to decide which to buy... My options are really just MS Office '08, iWork, and sticking with NeoOffice for the time being... So which should it be?
Office '08 is $55 for me, by the way, as I can get it through my school for rather cheaply.
I would say Office '08. You're unlikely to get iWork for any cheaper and you want to make sure the formatting stays perfect for your professors. (Since they're in a Computer Science program, they really should know better and accept PDFs, but I bet they won't...)
Try Open Office 3.1, its Native for OSX now, and much faster than NeoOffice. For $55, I would just suck it up and get MS office, you are least likely to run into comparability problems that way.
For all the criticism of it - some of it I share - I actually use the MS Office Suite for Mac ('08) all of the time. While I have never been a big fan of MS Office in general, it is still the 'standard', and the Mac version works just fine (within the parameters of what is still the bloatware of all Office versions, Windows or Mac). I have also found the Mac version to be seamlessly compatible with the Windows Office version.
I use iWork. Sensible UI, runs great (unlike Office) and it's reasonably cheap.
I actually have both Windows Office 2003 & 2007 and Mac Office 2004 and whenever I can, I try to use Office 2004 because it's much cleaner and easier compared to 2003 & 2007 and like Chinney has played very well with both 2003 and 2007. Haven't bothered to buy iWork, but have been impressed with them for the brief time I played with it.
Just a consideration, though.
If your classes is going to be basically a typed essay, then it actually won't matter that much. You should only be worried if you know that they will want you to do lot of formatting with tables, bulleting/numberings, footnotes & endnotes. Otherwise, you can do all of that in TextEdit and save it as .rtf which Word can still open and read. Of course, there may be the problem of convenience when your teachers demands .doc files and won't accept .rtf and you may not want to run over to the computer lab fervently hoping it's not all taken so you can open Word and save it as .doc two minutes before start of your class.
In fact, I would think the better question would be whether you would be required to use Excel, which is going to be more tougher to port around compared to text documents.
HTH.
Office isn't all that bad (and 2008 generally feels a lot more Mac-like), but iWork has a UI that does a far better job at focusing on what's important.
At college, compatibility will be very important since you will be exchanging files both with teachers and other students. For true compatibility, your only option is Microsoft Office. iWork and OpenOffice/NeoOffice would be fine if you were working in a bubble, but I'm pretty sure that won't be the case.
And, yes, Microsoft Office isn't bad. It's no worse than any other big third-party, cross-platform software like, say, Adobe's Creative Suite for Mac OS X. It's occasionally slow and has a confusing/inconsistent user interface in some areas, but it gets the job done just fine.
I like Office 2008 (Mac) more than Office 2007 (Windows). Is that weird?
From what I've seen of iWork, I like it the most, but on college campuses collaboration is common, so compatibility is crucial.
I like Office 2008 (Mac) more than Office 2007 (Windows). Is that weird?
No.
From what I've seen of iWork, I like it the most, but on college campuses collaboration is common, so compatibility is crucial.
I wish Pages could directly work with .doc, instead of importing and exporting…
OK, I just have to post this because it's really really bothering me.
http://www.apple.com/iwork/compatibility/
Can you spot the incredibly obvious orphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widows_and_orphans) near the bottom of the page? And it's totally unnecessary and easily fixed, too!
:wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:
(It might just be Chrome, though. :err: Ironically I can't get the site to render at all correctly in IE to compare. :\)
OK, I just have to post this because it's really really bothering me.
http://www.apple.com/iwork/compatibility/
Can you spot the incredibly obvious orphan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widows_and_orphans) near the bottom of the page? And it's totally unnecessary and easily fixed, too!
Wha? An orphan on a screen? I don't get how you can have orphans without pagination.
Wha? An orphan on a screen? I don't get how you can have orphans without pagination.
Second definition of orphan, an orphaned word ending a paragraph. For example:
The iWork Public Beta is not blah blah blah Terms of Service
apply.
It's even worse on that Apple page, because they go
[indent]The iWork Public Beta is not blah blah blah Terms of service[gap]
apply.
...despite the fact that the "Shop the Apple Store..." line right below it has no indent. The indent is inconsistent, and removing it would allow all the legalese to fit all on one line (so there'd be no orphaned words).
It seems to all fit on one line in IE, anyway (though the rest of the page is a glitchy mess, so I can't be too sure). Maybe it's a Chrome thing, but there's a pointlessly inconsistent indent either way. :mad:
Second definition of orphan, an orphaned word ending a paragraph. For example:
The iWork Public Beta is not blah blah blah Terms of Service
apply.
Right. It's because fonts are dynamic in size on screens. Apple can't control this 100% without just replacing the whole thing with a bitmap. Browser layout rendering engines, system font rendering engines, font availability, user font size setting, user window size setting... all will change the number of words that fit on a line.
edit: By the way, that's not what the line looks like on my Mac running Safari. :)
Second definition of orphan, an orphaned word ending a paragraph. For example:
The iWork Public Beta is not blah blah blah Terms of Service
apply.
It's even worse on that Apple page, because they go
[indent]The iWork Public Beta is not blah blah blah Terms of service[gap]
apply.
Hm, I see what you're saying. The gap is before "service" for me, though.
The indent is inconsistent
Not really. The "Shop the Apple Online Store" piece has nothing to do with the particular page. It's part of the footer.
Right. It's because fonts are dynamic in size on screens. Apple can't control this 100% without just replacing the whole thing with a bitmap. Browser layout rendering engines, system font rendering engines, font availability, user font size setting, user window size setting... all will change the number of words that fit on a line.
Yes, although the width of that element is fixed, and the font is presumably (since I'm on OS X with mostly just default fonts) the very font they were testing it with.
Gotta love how the class is "sosumi"…
Right. It's because fonts are dynamic in size on screens. Apple can't control this 100% without just replacing the whole thing with a bitmap. Browser layout rendering engines, system font rendering engines, font availability, user size settings... all will change the number of words that fit on a line.
I know, but I have the same fonts on the same system with nothing to override the page's chosen fonts or size settings. It's (in a perfect world) one line of text, so shouldn't it be rendering the same in both browsers? :confused: Why is Chrome or IE messing it up? I know browser rendering engines differ, but should they really differ that much?
I get that obviously the text will adjust to fit window sizes, since it's not an image, but that's not what happening here.
Not really. The "Shop the Apple Online Store" piece has nothing to do with the particular page. It's part of the footer.
True, but the "iWork.com Public Beta..." legalese is the only line on that page that is outside of one of the boxes but is indented. It's a legal footer, so to be more consistent it should be aligned with the left edge of the box, like every other "outside" element on that page. IMO. :)
I know, but I have the same fonts on the same system with nothing to override the page's chosen fonts or size settings. It's one line of text, so shouldn't it be rendering the same in both browsers? :confused: Why is Chrome or IE messing it up?
Engines will interpret layout directives ever-so-slightly differently. Web layout is not print layout. It's not meant to be pixel-perfect. Even something as simple as changing the anti-aliasing settings could cause the character width to differ by a pixel or two, and that adds up…
Web layout is not print layout. It's not meant to be pixel-perfect.
But it should be, dammit! :lol:
I'm obviously showing my print leanings here. :o
rollercoaster375
2009-09-13, 15:49
I suppose it's worth noting that any/all CS-related homework is done in LaTeX, or on paper, and hence doesn't involve documents such as these at all. I have... 5-6 classes left where I'll (probably... I assume, at least) be expected to write papers. As of yet, I've only had one paper at all... (And I'm on my 3rd semester)
edit: By the way, that's not what the line looks like on my Mac running Safari. :)
I'm sure it looks just *perfect* in Safari, but I only had Safari on my iPhone (which split the line) to check.
I can't stand orphaned words, by the way. If there's an orphaned word in one of my paragraphs I will actually edit my post to address it. It's like a disease. And I know that it only effects people browsing AppleNova Pro with my exact screen resolution and web browser and settings but I still have to fix it. But what bothers me most about Apple.com is the Store. So many columns and boxes coming so close to lining up but not :wtf:
Y'know, Brad, I've learned something today...I'm starting to think that this whole "internet" thing isn't for me. :o
EDIT: I had to edit every one of those paragraphs for orphaned words. It's a sign :(
Quick! Someone call the Orphanarium!
http://i32.tinypic.com/27zdm6c.png
GAAAAH! :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:
That's actually exactly how it looked on my screen, too, before my edit. So apparently browsers can render things consistently, but only to piss me off. :( :( :(
From now on I will
only post all my thoughts in
the form of haiku.
(Orphan that, bitches.)
Y'know, Brad, I've learned something today...I'm starting to think that this whole "internet" thing isn't for me. :o
WHAT? Get out and don't come back, you heretic rebel scum! :mad:
Quick! Someone call the Orphanarium!
http://i32.tinypic.com/27zdm6c.png
:lol:
GAAAAH! :wtf: :wtf: :( :( :(
From now on I will
only post all my thoughts in
the form of haiku.
(Orphan that, bitches.)
I see your stealth edit, but on the original, three out of five ain't bad?
http://i32.tinypic.com/106wnfd.png
;)
:lol: I knew you would do that, Brad.
Also, I fucked up that haiku (since edited!). Note the missing "in."
That's actually exactly how it looked on my screen, too, before my edit. So apparently browsers can render things consistently, but only to piss me off.
No, it's just because I have a different window size than yours, resulting in different line widths and breaks. :)
No, it's just because I have a different window size than yours, resulting in different line widths and breaks. :)
I was kidding. :lol: I'll shut up now :(
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.