# Does anyone else think Word 2007 Sucks? Badly!! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 23, 2009, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372 "2009-12-23T21:32:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Cubsfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Cubsfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cubsfan)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2010, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/101 "2010-01-03T06:13:36Z")
wmfellows is an EXECUTIVE. If you’re in this thread and you’re not an EXECUTIVE then don’t bother talking to him because only he can understand the awesome perspective of an EXECUTIVE. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2010, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/102 "2010-01-03T06:20:51Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > That’s it. Command line text-editing. And here’s what it looked like: > > [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wordstar.gif](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wordstar.gif) > > It doesn’t have mouse support. > It doesn’t have a graphical user interface. > It doesn’ supply visual feedback > No images > No graphs > No styles for formating (WRONG!) > No commenting > No proofing & tracking changes > No version control > No connection with a spreadsheet or presentation program > No internet publishing > No email support > No flowcharts > No automatic bibliography/footnotes/end notes (WRONG!) > No tables > No macros (WRONG!) > No find & replace (WRONG!) > No hyperlinks > No spellcheck or thesaurus (WRONG!) > No special print abilities, like multiple copies or collation (WRONG!) > > And that’s just off the top of my head. I’m sure there’s more. > > Don’t get me wrong - it was hot stuff in 1983. It was a legitimately important piece of small business software. I didn’t use it myself, but I used it’s successor, Word Perfect for DOS, until I switched to Word 6 and it’s sexay GUI. Later addon programs had things like a spellcheck. > > But bottom line: it’s Notepad, without a mouse, and less functionality. Nonsense. Notepad has NOT had, for TWO FUCKING DECADES, most of those features. Many of the rest (and you will note that they aren’t supported by Notepad, either) are internet-based, and the internet as we know it was, in 1983, not imagined by most anyone. And so what if there were no hyperlinks? In a well-designed program things like that can be added easily. Okay, as Wordstar was, to the best of my knowledge and given the size of the executable, NOT written to make additions easy, my claim that word processing, as a substitute for a typewriter in which additions and subtractions can be made easily, is a mature technology, only added to by other functions, still stands. Read [HOW A WORD PROCESSING PROGRAM WORKS](http://www.atariarchives.org/deli/how_word_program_works.php) by Paul Lutus to see how the basics, which differentiate a word processor from a typewriter, operates and, if you are any sort of programmer, how basically they remain the same. The rest are bells and whistles, like how a 1975 Dodge differed from a 1946 Dodge in (sadly) insignificant ways. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2010, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/103 "2010-01-03T06:26:35Z")
> [@dropzone](#): > > … if you are any sort of programmer … I’m old. Is that still a call-out for software types or are they all memory hogs who don’t give a shit how long it takes for software to boot? Because Word 2003 boots faster than 2007 or its Open Office equivalent ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2010, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/104 "2010-01-03T06:37:51Z")
> [@Cubsfan](#): > > wmfellows is an EXECUTIVE. If you’re in this thread and you’re not an EXECUTIVE then don’t bother talking to him because only he can understand the awesome perspective of an EXECUTIVE. Executives are the folks who sign our purchase requisitions. Sell the idea to them and you’re home free. However, if you sold them a previous idea that didn’t pan out, be prepared to do either some dancing or a pile of reasons why this time is different. You Office justifiers have it easy only needing to do it every few years. Autodesk is very interested in yearly or, at worst, bi-yearly paid upgrades. I still save my files in ACAD 2004 format because they are very compatible with other software, though I use a later version. Yeah, 2006 FINALLY added a feature I’ve desired for 20 years, but it doesn’t kill the deal. ETA: I have a toolbar icon for that. You don’t get that option with Word. ---
**Author:** ![wmfellows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c2a13f/32.png) [@wmfellows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wmfellows)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2010, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/105 "2010-01-03T11:42:59Z")
> [@Ogre](#): > > It’s not like they rewrote the program in Klingon. It’s really not all that different. Spend 15 minutes looking at it, and you’ve got it. No, not really. I am in fact using Word 2007 personally, and while some aspects are “neat” 15 minutes has not solved the fact some features are gone - such as customisations to fit my particular style of interacting with the commands, or no longer accessible (such as the multilingual auto salutations etc). For non-individual users, and I rejoin Saintly, there are serious transitions costs, for… not particularly impressive changes - from the perspective of Word and Office as simple baseline tools. > [@Ludovic](#): > > But there are only a finite amount of minutes in a human life, which can be spent more productively doing almost anything than re-learning a basic word processing program. > > In this case, the secretaries get more productivity done in the short term and do not have to relearn their muscle memory and the office saves upgrade money, win win. > > And I suppose this represents some major marketing coup for microsoft. Quite right. > [@Lord\_Ashtar](#): > > It took me all of 10 minutes to find all the features in Word 2007 that I needed to write my papers and do all the things I need it to do for work. Same for Excel, Access, and Powerpoint. Now I prefer it, since the different ribbons are like different modes: one for writing the paper, another for formatting it, another for the citations, etc. > > Anyone complaining that all their people need to be retrained to use it is either lazy themselves, has lazy employees, or both. It just ain’t that hard, people. No, not lazy you dumb backend of a horse’s arse, rather we have other areas to spend finite amounts of effort on. The old office interface has a large legacy population (and for you smarmy Americans, I can assure you that much of Developing World which is part of my geographic footprint, e.g. Africa, is still in 9x Generations of Office. And will be for quite a while). Unlike you cunts, I am not on particularly worried about my own individual ability to adapt to Office 2007, I have not stripped it off my laptop, although the more I use it the more irritated I get by pointless “Ooh look at the Shiny Bells & Whisltes to Seduce the Fucking Gits Functions and New Graphic Presentations” rot, and the Some aspects I find fine. There was no particular need, however to package the new formats and functionalities with a total throwout of the old interfacing - except as a marketing ploy to try to create a market barrier between the New Special MS interface and the general menu interfacing. > [@Cubsfan](#): > > wmfellows is an EXECUTIVE. If you’re in this thread and you’re not an EXECUTIVE then don’t bother talking to him because only he can understand the awesome perspective of an EXECUTIVE. Yes, you don’t. I sign off the the Buy of systems for a continent sized geography of multiple offices. I work in an industry that the marketing data from IT consultants indicates is a major IT buyer, and usually buying fancy stuff. Office Suite software ain’t fancy stuff, by the way, it’s a mature product whose only real evolution these past years is marketing oriented bells and whistles. A bunch of _ **individuals** _ who think that fucking “looking” at it for 15 minutes is training or blither on like smarmy, dreary marketing fucking drones about Ribbons being the “wave of the future” (because the MS fuckers say so? Said that about fucking Vista too, gullible fucks) tells you fuck all (except perhaps about individual taste). I piped up since those complaining about Office 2007 were getting idiotic “oh you’re against change” - “oh you’re just whinging on,” etc. I provided a corporate buyer perspective (or rather that of the guy who can authorise the buyer, or not). Saintly provided a lower level view, but it is substantially a similar analysis. And merely being accused of being “lazy” - an empty and pointless accusation - is simply childishness. The reality is a corporate needs to look at Cost-Benefit and playing around with funny new ways to present or execute non-core features… doesn’t outweigh my training and productivity losses (which contra the smarmy American view, will be ongoing as the Legacy Base in schools etc. that will exist for at least 5-10 years in my experience will be an ongoing drag; of course perhaps in American MS has enough arm twisting to magically get rid of that problem). > [@dropzone](#): > > Executives are the folks who sign our purchase requisitions. Sell the idea to them and you’re home free. However, if you sold them a previous idea that didn’t pan out, be prepared to do either some dancing or a pile of reasons why this time is different. > > You Office justifiers have it easy only needing to do it every few years. Autodesk is very interested in yearly or, at worst, bi-yearly paid upgrades. I still save my files in ACAD 2004 format because they are very compatible with other software, though I use a later version. Yeah, 2006 FINALLY added a feature I’ve desired for 20 years, but it doesn’t kill the deal. > > ETA: I have a toolbar icon for that. You don’t get that option with Word. ah yes… ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2010, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/106 "2010-01-03T16:21:28Z")
Hiya. I’m here to provide the IT perspective. You’re right. Ninety percent of all clerical workers do not have computer skills. At all. And if you try to retrain them, they freak the hell out. That losing one out of five people? Yeah, that’s accurate. Generally, they’ll be the older ones, who can scream all the way up to upper management, too. Especially since the ones most resistant to change are generally the big boss’ secretaries. I’d like you to visualize every single VP and CXO level secretary pissed off at you. These are the most important people in the entire company, if you’re not already management, but have to deal with management. ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2010, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/107 "2010-01-03T18:19:09Z")
Some of the issues at hand apply to software changes in new versions regardless of whether it’s Word (or Microsoft Office) or not. Others may be specific to Word. Not being a user of Word (except under duress), I’m going to comment on some of the former. a) **Conformity to established interface standards is a good thing** (unless you really want to argue that the standards actually suck). Whether it is a new version of software I already use (Photoshop CS 19) or a brand new software title I’ve never seen before (IshmaKabibble Pro 1.0) I expect it to have a File menu, an Edit menu, probably a View menu, probably a Tools or Options menu, probably a Window or Windows menu, perhaps a Format menu, and a Help menu. If I’m on a Windows PC I’d expect to find Preferences or Options or Settings at the bottom of the Edit menu, or in the Tools or Options menu. (On a Mac it would be in the Application-Name menu that’s to the left of the File menu). The File menu is where one opens new document files, saves existing ones (or does a Save As), Closes current window, does Print Setup and Print, and exits out of the application. I expect Cut Copy Paste and Undo to hang out in the Edit menu. If the program lets me edit content (not just view and interact with content like a web browser) I expect a Format menu, especially if any of the editable content has text characteristics (font, font size, margin, justification) but also if it has graphical-object characteristics (color, fill pattern, border, border color, border pattern). And I expect conventional keystrokes to invoke conventional behaviors: ⌘-O, ⌘-S, ⌘-C, ⌘-X, ⌘-V, ⌘-Z, ⌘-P, ⌘-Q, ⌘-F, ⌘-N, ⌘-W may not all be present but unless the thing that the application itself does is very esoteric and unusual, a decent chunk of them should be; at a minimum, if the functions exist and they have keystroke equivs, they should have THESE keystroke equivs, and reciprocally these keystroke commands should NOT invoke some other oddball command. Consistency is what makes it easy to learn new applications. There have been some pretty decent yet convention-breaking apps ([del]KPT[/del] [del]Corel[/del] Daz Bryce, for one; and while it gets off the hook due to its Unix roots, having evolved in a world without the same conventions, The GIMP deserves mention here as well) but for the most part they prove the maxim more than they disprove it: they didn’t really HAVE to depart from convention so thoroughly and it DOES make it harder to learn their product, and their different way of doing things is NOT markedly superior to the conventions. b) **New versions should not change things just for the sake of changing them.** If version 5 or 2003 or X3 used the icon of a spyglass to invoke a function, there’s no good reason to replace that with a crystall ball. If the power-use keystroke combo ⌘-Shift-R used to rotate the selected object 90° it’s a bad idea to remap that to “redo” and make -⌘-Option-\> the new 90° rotate command. I will single out FileMaker Inc as poster child for this particular sin. Some blithering idiot in marketing probably decided it was important to emphasize how _NEW_ the new version 7 was a few years ago, I don’t really know for sure… but they changed the name of dozens of existing functions (BAD!) as well as introducing dozens of new ones (GOOD!), they changed the tab order in the ScriptMaker so that focus moves to the NAME of the script being edited, thus screwing up power-users’ tactile memory of how to script (EXTREMELY BAD! and STUPID! how often in the course of editing your script are you gonna want to change the name of the script?), got rid of the list view of relationships (BAD!) while giving us a graphical relationship diagram (GOOD!) thus forcing us to do all viewing creating editing and investigating of relationships in an environment requiring an entirely new workflow, with no good reason to do so. (I’ve compared it to taking away a sortable telephone directory of your office’s employees and giving you instead a floor plan with each person’s telephone number conveniently printed below the icon of the person’s office chair). From the description of this “ribbon”, the lack of traditional menu structure, and the extent to which legacy workflow has been interrupted, it sounds to me like Microsoft has done a FileMaker and have also ended up with a Bryce. Now, me, I have always detested Word. Bloated feature-crammed all-purpose jack of all trades master of none program that isn’t a very good word processor due in part to trying to be a graphics program, a browser, a spreadsheet, and probably a goddam coffee maker; a program that broke conventions used by other programs right from the start, seldom with good and sufficient reason; an annoying uncooperative mule of an application that would change 30 things you did not ask it to change when you edited one small element, and which from early on decided it knew better than you did what you were trying to do and by god was therefore going to do what it thought best without your confirmation or consent. > [@](#): > > Word has been a hammer since Winword 2.0 That is a very good description. That’s exactly how I feel when I try to use Word: “Yeesh, I wish I had Nisus or AppleWorks or WordPerfect or WordPro, or any word processor on this machine. This is like trying to write a letter with a freaking hammer!” But I think my dislike for Word is largely irrelevant to the discussion, except insofar as some of it was originally prompted by Word’s convention-breaking characteristics (they’ve been doing that for a long long time. “This is WORD, whatever is done in WORD is the new convention, we don’t have to follow anyone else’s lead”) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Real\_Regency\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d9b06d/32.png) [@The\_Real\_Regency\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Real_Regency_Elf)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2010, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/108 "2010-01-03T19:47:31Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Do I understand correctly that you’re saying companies typically lose 20% of staff when that staff has to learn new software?! Not all companies, not all software. If you re-read my post, I said “similar situations at other companies of the same size,” meaning a full cut-over to a brand new enterprise-wide turnkey software system that had no other training options available. A nearby healthcare business with nearly the same number of employees tried the same thing but without the formal training program that we used. They lost on average 1 in 5 registration staff in each clinic but we were told that in some clinics the turnover rate was close to 90% for three months after go-live, because the switchover was handled so poorly. Granted, training for Microsoft Office is normally a much more straightforward effort and the average user has many options for learning. Concerned about the reaction of the executive assistants if you give them OTJ training, as **E-Sabbath** mentioned, and rightfully so? That’s why you should get executive buy-in first. The admin assistants can’t really argue with management when the directive comes from management in the first place. This should always be a top-down decision. Even then it’s hard, but not impossible if you have the right approach. ---
**Author:** ![Pindusa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a6a055/32.png) [@Pindusa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pindusa)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2010, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/109 "2010-01-03T21:49:56Z")
I used to be able to format a document in just a couple of minutes. Now I have to be searching through all these useless “format” options on this Too Thick, Too Overloaded, Too Useless, Too Illogical toolbar to find what I need. To date I have been unable to find the auto text Page # of ## which I liked to use on the footnote of documents to indicate how many pages were in a document and what number each particular page was. I don’t know who the moron was who designed this new version but obviously he was BORED and just wanted to entertain himself and enlarge his ego with this overly-elaborate, illogical monster of a menu toolbar he has invented. Not to say that Word ever worked better than WordPerfect which apparently has been driven off the market. But this new version of Word takes the cake. I hope the moron or morons who designed it (who obviously never had to do wordprocessing work in their sad lives) go straight to hell when they die. As to Support from MicroSoft–HA! Those bastards don’t give a dam about the user. It may be that they are understandably upset with Bill the Bastard Gates laying off a whole bunch of American employees while at the same time going to Congress to lobby for more H1B visas so he can import cheaper IT workers to replace his american workers. I hope Bill Gates ends up in the lowest circle of Hell. ---
**Author:** ![Hunter\_Hawk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/50afbb/32.png) [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/110 "2010-01-04T02:49:01Z")
> [@Pindusa](#): > > I used to be able to format a document in just a couple of minutes. Now I have to be searching through all these useless “format” options on this Too Thick, Too Overloaded, Too Useless, Too Illogical toolbar to find what I need. To date I have been unable to find the auto text Page # of ## which I liked to use on the footnote of documents to indicate how many pages were in a document and what number each particular page was. [Have you tried this?](http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HP012265131033.aspx#3) (Though personally I just insert the fields myself.) ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/111 "2010-01-04T03:03:03Z")
I tried to insert a row in a table on Word XP, and it took me several minutes to locate the option in the menu. In Word 2007, I right clicked on the menu, and there it was. Therefore Word 2007 is better. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/112 "2010-01-04T04:17:32Z")
> [@wmfellows](#): > > There was no particular need, however to package the new formats and functionalities with a total throwout of the old interfacing - except as a marketing ploy to try to create a market barrier between the New Special MS interface and the general menu interfacing. Sure there was. There are differences in the files because the new ones do things the old ones can’t. For example, did you happen to notice that Excel 2007 allows for the files to be much, much bigger? Maybe that doesn’t matter to someone like you, but to people who use Excel to create CSV files to move massive amounts of data between systems, it matters. > [@wmfellows](#): > > A bunch of _ **individuals** _ who think that fucking “looking” at it for 15 minutes is training or blither on like smarmy, dreary marketing fucking drones about Ribbons being the “wave of the future” (because the MS fuckers say so? Said that about fucking Vista too, gullible fucks) tells you fuck all (except perhaps about individual taste). I never said that it was the “wave of the future” or anything that could even be remotely construed that way. I have also have had virtually no problems using Vista, either at home, on my work laptop, or in any of the dozens of client environments I’ve worked in over the last year. > [@wmfellows](#): > > And merely being accused of being “lazy” - an empty and pointless accusation - is simply childishness. The reality is a corporate needs to look at Cost-Benefit and playing around with funny new ways to present or execute non-core features… doesn’t outweigh my training and productivity losses (which contra the smarmy American view, will be ongoing as the Legacy Base in schools etc. that will exist for at least 5-10 years in my experience will be an ongoing drag; of course perhaps in American MS has enough arm twisting to magically get rid of that problem). Here, go read this: > **[Office 2007 For Dummies: Wang, Wallace: 9780470009239: Amazon.com: Books](https://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Office-2007-Dummies-Wallace/dp/0470009233)** > > Office 2007 For Dummies \[Wang, Wallace\] on Amazon.com. \*FREE\* shipping on qualifying offers. Office 2007 For Dummies It’s designed with people like you and your employees in mind. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/113 "2010-01-04T06:48:41Z")
Trust me: NOTHING that requires a link, especially one that only mentions it after three pages of bitching, is “designed with people like you and your employees in mind.” Good God, haven’t ANY of you had real-life jobs? You are talking out your asses like you didn’t. The point of a JOB is to GET THE JOB DONE. A Normal quickly realizes that ANYTHING that slows or prevents that is a hindrance that reflects poorly on them. The latest versions of Word introduce MANY hindrances. Dig? For MANY users you are CUNTS trying to get them fired. As I said before, a word processor is a fucking HAMMER that was, if not perfected, was good enough decades ago. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/114 "2010-01-04T11:12:34Z")
To be honest, the new format is not a bad thing. Except, uhm. Where it is a bad implementation of a okay idea. F’r example, the 65536 error. [http://www.businessweek.com/the\_thread/techbeat/archives/2007/10/65536\_lashes\_fo.html?campaign\_id=rss\_blog\_techbeat](http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/techbeat/archives/2007/10/65536_lashes_fo.html?campaign_id=rss_blog_techbeat) Basically, they were in such a rush to put out this new format that there’s a bunch of little bombs in it… and they can’t even spec it out properly to the ISO standards committee, even after the committee-packing trick they did. I mean, yeah, some improvement was necessary, but the way they did it… not helping. This, of course, has nothing to do with the changes in UI. Which also, not helping. I mean, yes, we could spend a lot of money and send people to training. And we’d only lose, say, one in ten people that way. Which is a further cost to our business. And I could name the one in ten we’d lose. And many of them would be the older employees, the institutional memory of our organization. Which is a further cost. Yes, they’re not horribly efficient, but they can do their work. And further, when things go wrong, they do miracles. The purpose of our job isn’t to type numbers in. That’s just how we get paid. Our job is to save people. And these people are very, very good at that. We don’t want to lose our best healers. … we also don’t want to piss off the doctors. oh, god, retraining doctors. I daaaare you to do that. ---
**Author:** ![wmfellows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c2a13f/32.png) [@wmfellows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wmfellows)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/115 "2010-01-04T12:42:52Z")
> [@Lord\_Ashtar](#): > > Sure there was. Oh wonders, I am about to have the fucking obvious pointed out to me. > [@](#): > > There are differences in the files because the new ones do things the old ones can’t. For example, did you happen to notice that Excel 2007 allows for the files to be much, much bigger? Maybe that doesn’t matter to someone like you, but to people who use Excel to create CSV files to move massive amounts of data between systems, it matters. Woo. bigger files, why I am bloody fucking impressed. We use proper analytical software for that, thanks very much, rather than sub-optimal all purpose Swiss Army Knife tools. However, I already noted, issues like the format and other optionality changes in no way require the hard break with historical interface tools, which immediately impose significant toothaches for a vast legacy base of users that are working quite effectively off of the old. It appears fundamentally difficult for stupid fucking gits like yourself to understand, but the fact that I have to look at and worry about a baseline office suite and see it imposing added training costs and down time, never mind the inevitable loss of efficiency over a year or so, is utter rot. As an executive managing a regional organisation, I should not have to even think about this. Word, Excel, etc are low level tools. We do not want or need them to do fancy things. That there are users out there (largely it would be small business and even more so, personal users) that want extra functionalities, fine. None of this _ **requires** _ a massive interface break, that directly imposes on my firm - were I to be a gullible cunt and upgrade pointlessly - efficiency losses, downtime, and other direct costs. For frankly **trivial widget gains**. It is perfectly within the realm of the reasonable and the possible to upgrade features (_to the extent needed, although frankly I agree with the comment supra about Word being bloatware, trying to function as HTML editor (badly), picture editor (badly), etc etc)_) and including interface optionality so as not to impose on large scale users unnecessary training and migration costs. Cost Benefit fucking analysis you stupid fucking smarmy peon git. > [@](#): > > I never said that it was the “wave of the future” or anything that could even be remotely construed that way. I have also have had virtually no problems using Vista, either at home, on my work laptop, or in any of the dozens of client environments I’ve worked in over the last year. I wasn’t fucking talking to you, you dumb git. It was that Academic Writer. So fuck off, fucking smarmy twit. As for Vista, oooh, you had not a wee problem. So the fuck what. The market has spoken, Vista failed. (and in our limited install we had many issues with integration, failed drivers, etc, enough so that we bounced the fucker back, and rolled back. Microsoft’s job is to serve my firm as a client, when they fail, they lose my business. I don’t need smarmy fucking lectures about computer skills, we use plenty of nice stuff like geo-analytics, etc that are in fact cutting edge. Office is a damned basic fucking tool, we should never have to even fucking discuss the goddamned thing.) > [@](#): > > Here, go read this: > > [Office 2007 For Dummies: Wang, Wallace: 9780470009239: Amazon.com: Books](http://www.amazon.com/Office-2007-Dummies-Computer-Tech/dp/0470009233/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1262578594&sr=8-1) > > It’s designed with people like you and your employees in mind. No, it’s designed for twittish gits like yourself, who know fuck all about business decisioning, and like to make really idiotic, smarmy little useless fucking references to a fucking book they personally used. In case you had missed it, I actually am using Office 2007 personally, and while continuously annoyed at the unneeded changes and the losses of real functionality where useful, it is not “hardness” of learning, you dumb fucking subliterate moron, it is the motherfucking time wasted for the pointless and useless changes. Changes apparently made so that stupid fucking gits like yourself that are impressed by graphics, bells and whistles and other marketing drivel will pointlessly refer me to a fucking idiotic basic fucking manual, as they evidently understand not a bloody fucking thing about the whole Cost Benefit discussion to date. Jaysus, you really are a dumb fuck. ---
**Author:** ![wmfellows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c2a13f/32.png) [@wmfellows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wmfellows)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/116 "2010-01-04T12:49:50Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > To be honest, the new format is not a bad thing. Except, uhm. Where it is a bad implementation of a okay idea. F’r example, the 65536 error. > [http://www.businessweek.com/the\_thread/techbeat/archives/2007/10/65536\_lashes\_fo.html?campaign\_id=rss\_blog\_techbeat](http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/techbeat/archives/2007/10/65536_lashes_fo.html?campaign_id=rss_blog_techbeat) > Basically, they were in such a rush to put out this new format that there’s a bunch of little bombs in it… and they can’t even spec it out properly to the ISO standards committee, even after the committee-packing trick they did. > > I mean, yeah, some improvement was necessary, but the way they did it… not helping. > > This, of course, has nothing to do with the changes in UI. Which also, not helping. I mean, yes, we could spend a lot of money and send people to training. … Ah wonders. On the Excel calculation error (first of doubtless more in my experience with MS), the whole bloody issue is MS Office is a mature product. A basic product. It is not a mission critical product, it is useful, like the old IBM Selectronics - which everyone in industries I have worked in stuck with over fancy items - because they did the basics, serviced well, and had reliability. Our expectations (mine and others in my industry and client industries that I talk to) are that MS Office should be like IBM Selectronics. You buy it, and Sr. Mgmt never hears about it. When I have to hear about, it pisses me off. It is a product that firms like mine should not have to worry about. An upgrade should be seamless, minimise transitioning and generally never be a bother to Sr. Mgmt. MS insists on making itself a bother. Thus, no one I know is upgrading to 2007. Not my footprint, not my colleagues / competitors. Fuck it, too much fucking trouble in direct and indirect expensing for really trivial gains. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/117 "2010-01-04T12:55:57Z")
Why does Microsoft feel that every 4 years, it must rearrange all the commands and options in a product that many have just begun to master? My best guess is that the product only needs some bugfixing/refactoring/enhancement, but nobody’s going to shell out $350 for a product that doesn’t visibly _look_ new. It’s not just Word… it’s Windows, it’s every piece of shit that comes out of their advanced fecal labs in Redmond. This is a racket between Microsoft and IT departments, IMO. You have a bunch of people who get paid to upgrade software (IT workers). Microsoft gets paid to sell software. What will they possibly lobby for except to install the same software over and over again, repackaging it so that it looks new? Fuckers. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/118 "2010-01-04T14:30:17Z")
I should, I feel, point out that the number ‘65336’ (0r 65335, if starting at 0), is the value of a 16 bit unsigned word. The implications should be obvious to anyone who programs. There’s some pretty basic problems with Excel 2007’s math engine. Isn’t that sweet? Generally, it’s not an issue. Except for when it is. ---
**Author:** ![HookerChemical](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/278dde/32.png) [@HookerChemical](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HookerChemical)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/119 "2010-01-04T18:43:55Z")
It’s important to realize that there are several different groups of changes to be discussed here. They are not necessarily related. First, there are changes to functionality. For example, the ability of Excel to handle larger spreadsheets, new functions, or the improvements to the way Word handles footnotes. These are Good Things. In no way does Excel 2007’s ability to open huge spreadsheets adversely impact the ability to learn it. The only possible drawback is that a file saved in Excel 2007 won’t be usable in Excel 2003 because there are too many lines, but Excel 2003 couldn’t have created the spreadsheet anyway. Then there are the interface changes. These are a different beast. I think the Ribbon is an improvement for people coming to Office 2007 without being heavily invested in learning Office 2003. I found it easy and intuitive. I doubt I would feel that way if I had spend 10 years in Office 9X and 2003, but I didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2010, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372/120 "2010-01-04T19:47:18Z")
> [@wmfellows](#): > > Jaysus, you really are a dumb fuck. And you’re a pretentious blowhard. Yeah, I took some business classes too, so I do know what a cost/benefit analysis is. You don’t think it’s worth it? Fine. I don’t give a flying fuck whether you upgrade or not. But if the primary cost is retraining because your people are soooo confused by the new layout, then perhaps you’ve got other issue that require your oh so important and valuable time, like the fact that you’ve hired incompetent employees who can’t handle their cheese being moved (that’s executive-speak for being unable to adapt to change, right?). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-anyone-else-think-word-2007-sucks-badly/522372.md?page=7)