Office 2003 Vs. Office 2007

 

http://live.pirillo.com/ – What’s the difference between Office 2003 and Office 2007?

The biggest difference – and the only difference most users are going to notice – is the ribbon, which is a replacement for the traditional menu system. The ribbon is supposed to make it easier for people to discover features that are already present in the office suite.

There really isn’t a huge difference for the average user: if you just type away then the difference between the two is negligible. for the power users, they’ll notice some slight tweaks and differences, along with a major speed boost in Outlook 2007.

Should you get Office 2007? Well, if you already have a version of Office that works fine, then don’t spend the money (and it is a lot of money).

If you don’t have Office and you want the suite, then try to find the bheapest price and buy it. Or, you could try Office alternatives, like OpenOffice.org, whish is a free open-source alternative to Office.

OpenOffice.org is a multiplatform and multilingual office suite and an open-source project. Compatible with all other major office suites, the product is free to download, use, and distribute.

Microsoft owns the market for office applications today: but it won’t be like that in the future.

Want to embed Office 2003 or 2007: What’s the difference? video in your blog? Use this code:

20 thoughts on “Office 2003 Vs. Office 2007”

  1. It is worth making a distinction between the change from Office 2003 to Office 2007, against the change from XP to Vista. At least the changes in Office don’t make you want to kill yourself out of frustration.

  2. As a professional writer who builds web sites for fun, I used Microsoft Office 97 from June 1999, when I bought my first PC, to December 2005, when I bought my current PC.

    My current PC, a Compaq Presario, came with a 60-day trial version of MIcrosoft Office 2003. I tried it and also downloaded and installed Open Office. I liked Open Office so much that I decided not to buy Microsoft Office 2003.

    I often use Open Office’s word-processing and spreadsheet programs, and I intend to use its database program to catalog my video tapes. I have about 200 and sometimes I can’t find what I’m looking for, so the database might help.

    Open Office’s presentation program, comparable to Microsoft’s Power Point, has worked very well for me. I sometimes receive Power Point presentations from a friend in Brazil. They work seamlessly with Open Office Presentation!

    I purchased FrontPage 2000 and later upgraded to FrontPage 2002. I also have the Dreamwaver 4 Suite, but it doesn’t work too well on my new computer. I haven’t bothered to figure out why. I do not intend to install it again when I do my next clean install. I can’t justify buying the latest Adobe/Macromedia Dreamweaver suite. I simply don’t need it.

    FrontPage 2002, however, continues to work beautifullyon my new computer.

    Microsoft announced last year that they will no longer issue Front Page or support it. I tried their beta version of an HTML program that will replace FrontPage 2002, but I didn’t like it all. For my purposes, FP 2002 continues to work beautifully.

    I hope others will share their comments on this topic.

  3. As a professional writer who builds web sites for fun, I used Microsoft Office 97 from June 1999, when I bought my first PC, to December 2005, when I bought my current PC.

    My current PC, a Compaq Presario, came with a 60-day trial version of MIcrosoft Office 2003. I tried it and also downloaded and installed Open Office. I liked Open Office so much that I decided not to buy Microsoft Office 2003.

    I often use Open Office’s word-processing and spreadsheet programs, and I intend to use its database program to catalog my video tapes. I have about 200 and sometimes I can’t find what I’m looking for, so the database might help.

    Open Office’s presentation program, comparable to Microsoft’s Power Point, has worked very well for me. I sometimes receive Power Point presentations from a friend in Brazil. They work seamlessly with Open Office Presentation!

    I purchased FrontPage 2000 and later upgraded to FrontPage 2002. I also have the Dreamwaver 4 Suite, but it doesn’t work too well on my new computer. I haven’t bothered to figure out why. I do not intend to install it again when I do my next clean install. I can’t justify buying the latest Adobe/Macromedia Dreamweaver suite. I simply don’t need it.

    FrontPage 2002, however, continues to work beautifullyon my new computer.

    Microsoft announced last year that they will no longer issue Front Page or support it. I tried their beta version of an HTML program that will replace FrontPage 2002, but I didn’t like it all. For my purposes, FP 2002 continues to work beautifully.

    I hope others will share their comments on this topic.

  4. I had to install Office 2007 on an older machine recently and IMHO it is just window dre3ssed Office 2003, with a lot more system/memory usage.
    Proggys, especially excel in 2003 would open up quickly, whereas in 2007 it seems to take forever.

    Stick with 2003 if you want a fuss free environ and programs that actually open up fairly quickly.

    BTW Running Windows XP Pro 64 bit and think its great, have no plans ever to change up to Vista!!!!!

  5. Chris,
    I recently made the leap to Outlook 2007 from the 2003 version. I agree that most users won’t notice that much difference, although I must admit that I like the ability to view attachments (MS Office, PDFs, other emails, etc.) directly within the preview pane. I also like the new “To-Do” bar that shows open tasks and upcoming calendar entries without switching views.

    Unfortunately, the biggest change is under the hood: The use of the MS Word rendering engine for HTML instead of Internet Explorer, as was the case in all prior versions of Outlook.

    The huge downside is that MS Word’s support for HTML is weak at best. You’ll find that many HTML-formatted emails and newsletters look very different in Outlook 2007, and almost always worse. Some things are obvious, like no more support for animated GIFs (you just get a static image of the last frame). But there’s lots of others, including no support for the gradient background graphics used in many emails, support for a more limited subset of CSS features, etc. Basically, MS Word has always sucked for viewing or editing HTML — but now it’s what you’ll be using to view every email.

    In effect, Microsoft has taken formatting support in Outlook 2007 back at least five years at a time when we were finally getting close to consistent and full support for HTML and CSS in most email clients. Last week, I wasted a full extra day creating a simple HTML-formatted newsletter just to ensure that it rendered similarly in MS Word (aka Outlook 2007) as it did in IE (aka Outlook 2000, XP, and 2003) and just about every other major email client. It took some pretty horrible HTML to achieve, including messy in-line HMTL that I’d never had to use in the past. But Outlook has such a commanding share of the market that we now have the dubious honor of a new “lowest common denominator” to contend with. I suspect many emailers will simply ignore the problems until Outlook 2007’s market share climbs to the point that they are forced to code to its low standards rather than hand-craft workarounds for the limitations as I did.

    Finally, while I find Outlook 2007 a bit faster than 2003 for many things, I’m seeing noticeable slowdowns in viewing some emails either by opening or using the preview pane. In general, Word seems to be slower than IE when confronted with complex HTML. And unsupported HTML within an incoming email sometimes causes my system to hang while Word apparently tries (unsuccessfully) to figure out how to handle it. A great example is the daily CareerBuilder job alert that used to open instantly, but now completely locks my system for almost 30 seconds before appearing (their use of now-unsupported background gradient graphics seems to be the cause).

    IMHO, Outlook 2007 offers a few steps forward, but a BIG one backward!

    – Rob

  6. Gday Chris

    Really miss the old tech TV. Anyway another little thing bout Office 2007, if you send e-mail directly from 2007 users of 2003 can’t open it unless you download the patch! Had a customer who does a newsletter who found out about this the hard way!

    Ozmont

  7. WOW Finally Office 07 shows the weekdays in the calendar: monday, Tuesday etc. A major breakthrough for Microsoft. But I am sticking with 03 – even without the showing of weekdays – it’s still better for me.

  8. WOW Finally Office 07 shows the weekdays in the calendar: monday, Tuesday etc. A major breakthrough for Microsoft. But I am sticking with 03 – even without the showing of weekdays – it’s still better for me.

  9. I bought a new laptop 3 months ago and got “issued” with Office 2007. Having been an Offoce 97 user before, I was stunned! I found NOTHING in the new user interface. My productivity dropped drastically and I eventually forced Microsoft to change it to Office 2003 so that I can do some work again. That change happened yesterday, and I am on cloud 9 again with Office 2003. Office 2007 has now been blacklisted in our company as a product to avoid. Look before you leap!

  10. I got MS Office 07 and it seemed like fun for the first week. When it got down to typing my work and getting the creative juices flowing, i ran into a brick wall. WOW..I was lost most of the time. Im sticking to 2003 for now and you should too

  11. I have only tried one feature in Publisher ’07 and that alone is worth the upgrade. That feature is the ability to merge records directly in to our newsletters. I love the feature and it allows us to put lables directly on our mail outs. However, I honestly was shocked such a BASIC and COMMON SENSE feature was not present as far back as Office 97. I think if it was a plan all along to force people to upgrade to 2007, in my case it worked.

  12. Too many people complaining w/o enough experience. Nobody likes change except a wet baby, they say.

    Doesn’t anyone like the right-click ability in Office 2007 to change a font color, select font attributes, etc? I think this is real helpful. Or how about being able to see and right click to fix spelling errors in Outlook? Or the To-do bar that hides on the side in Outlook? Pretty neat, I say. A lot of formatting tasks are easier in Office 2007. Even that old dog Powerpoint has some new functionality.

  13. Well, I really love Office 2007 because it makes my work easier than before. I think that Office 2003 and earlier versions are great and fine, but Office 2007 is a step forward. Specially Word, Excel and Outlook – they are my favorites programs.
    I also keep in mind that this new version requires time to get used to – but it’s necessary if you think that future versions of Office will be like this or maybe with new an better functions.
    Try to learn and dive into the new Ribbon and other functions. It really worth.

  14. The team behind this was on drugs. Seriously.

    I don’t run a company neither I’m in charge of any part of one, I a simple student, but it became obvious that this 007 thing is just a waste of money, time, and everything.

    Lets say u run a company, mmm, asume that you are in charge of … 500 machines, better, 100, or just 50, and that suddenly, as part of a corporate upgrade plan you upgrade to the latest version of office.

    What happens? Well… there is the inherent cost of the licenses, lets assume that your company can afford it, its expensive but you can.

    But… what about real usage, what happens when your workforce is confronted to a “complete new software”? I mean, they already know how to use office 2003, but now they have to deal with a complete UI redesign and that takes time a frustration to get used to.

    Lets assume that you dont care about the the initial shock your workforce will face, but, whats next? the IT th
    eam will star receiving calls, ehhh, sir, “where is the button to print”, or “sir, I cant find this menu”, or “where is this button”, or “I mailed the document but they tell me that it cant be opened”

    Now your IT deparment is flooding with request of help, help that is necessary to do the everyday work, help that cant be denied because its crucial.

    Ok, now you have wasted a considerable amount of time, you decide that this cant continue and you start a capacitation program, it takes time and money, but it worth it, right? RIGHT?

    NO! it takes just too much effort, time, money and frustration to archive NOTHING. Office 2007 just adds another layer of incompatibility, and unnecessary complexity, givin almost no new features.

    Since office 97 we have been used to a interface that proved to be reliable, heck!! since word perfect!!! (thats as far as my memory goes), now we are faced to something completely new, no other program made use of the how is it called lace? ribbon?

    Change is not good by nature, it is good when it represents a step forward.

    Sadly we have no other choice but to adapt, right, RIGHT?

    well, NO!

  15. My company is migrating from Office 2003 to 2007, and aside from re-orienting myself as to where stuff is, the migration has been fairly painless.

    The only issue so far has been that if I put 3-D borders on my inserted images in 2007 Word, a user of 2003 Word cannot open the file without 2003 Word trying to covert the encoding, which it cannot do. The 2003 Word user gets a document full of junk characters.

    Once we identified the 3-D borders as the culprit and changed them to plain vanilla borders, there was no issue.

    Time will tell, but at this point I think the migration is pain-free. Are the changes between 2003 and 2007 worth the expense of changing? If you are just a guy and the change is for your PC alone, then probably not. But if you are a company and can afford the migration cost, go for it.

  16. Office 2007 is NOT compatible by default with most office applications. Why did they not make office so it saves in the most compatible format INSTEAD they force you to save in the new, less compatible format.

    Also there is NO conversion for Access 2003 to read the new Access 2007 files YET they force access users to save in a format that is less compatible.

    Why has office gone away from standards. I find software easier to use when they follow standards.

  17. Just thought you might think this would be interesting. In the small town were I live they recently decided NOT to upgrade to Office 2007 but to switch over to OpenOffice. That is on every computer in the city administration, every department office and on all public schools. One obvious reason is the cost of buying several hundred new licenses.

    And were are not alone. There are about ten other cities in out region that has done the same. In fact, they are collaborating to be able to support each other in this mayor change of software.

    Just thought you would like to know…

  18. Try to give office 2007 a chance i ran open office for a year and hated it. i rather use ms office. don’t care what version it is.

Comments are closed.