J
JNA091998
Is it really worth my $$ to upgrade to Office 2003? What are the real
benefits?
Thx
benefits?
Thx
H
Herb Tyson [MVP]
What version are you using now? How much will your particular upgrade cost?
Are there specific problems that you're having?
If you aren't have problems, and if the upgrade cost is significant with
respect to your budget, then you might do well to wait for the next version
of Office. It's now 2005, closing quickly on 2006.
Are there specific problems that you're having?
If you aren't have problems, and if the upgrade cost is significant with
respect to your budget, then you might do well to wait for the next version
of Office. It's now 2005, closing quickly on 2006.
J
JoAnn Paules [MSFT MVP]
Upgrade from what?
C
Carey Frisch [MVP]
Office 2003 Editions: Compare them to Previous Versions
http://www.microsoft.com/office/editions/prodinfo/compare.mspx
--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User
Microsoft Newsgroups
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:
| Is it really worth my $$ to upgrade to Office 2003? What are the real
| benefits?
|
| Thx
http://www.microsoft.com/office/editions/prodinfo/compare.mspx
--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User
Microsoft Newsgroups
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:
| Is it really worth my $$ to upgrade to Office 2003? What are the real
| benefits?
|
| Thx
H
Harlan Grove
Herb Tyson [MVP] wrote...
There's an implicit assumption here that the upgrade would fix such
problems. Not always the case.
Also, if the OP is using Windows 2000 or prior as OS, then the most
recent Office version that wouldn't also require an OS upgrade is
Office XP. There are retail copies of Office XP still available at
significantly lower cost than Office 2003.
There's an implicit assumption here that the upgrade would fix such
problems. Not always the case.
....
Also, if the OP is using Windows 2000 or prior as OS, then the most
recent Office version that wouldn't also require an OS upgrade is
Office XP. There are retail copies of Office XP still available at
significantly lower cost than Office 2003.
H
Harlan Grove
JoAnn Paules [MSFT MVP] wrote...
The OP's question can be answered by considering 3 scenarios.
1. Running Windows 95/98/ME or NT4/2000, then upgrading to Office 2003
would also require upgrading Windows to XP, so even more $$$. Probably
not worth it unless OP already is aware of some features in Office 2003
worth the expense.
2. Running Windows XP and Office 2000 or XP, then not much reason to
upgrade. Very little has changed, and most of the new features require
servers running various other Microsoft software. For a standalone PC,
there's insufficient value in Office 2003 vs Office XP to justify
upgrade.
3. Any older Office version would be getting close to or past the
decade mark. Office 97 mostly holds its own, but VBA 5.x is getting to
be an antique. It's worth considering upgrading, but an upgrade to
Office XP (still widely available through Internet sites) would be the
more economical choice.
The OP's question can be answered by considering 3 scenarios.
1. Running Windows 95/98/ME or NT4/2000, then upgrading to Office 2003
would also require upgrading Windows to XP, so even more $$$. Probably
not worth it unless OP already is aware of some features in Office 2003
worth the expense.
2. Running Windows XP and Office 2000 or XP, then not much reason to
upgrade. Very little has changed, and most of the new features require
servers running various other Microsoft software. For a standalone PC,
there's insufficient value in Office 2003 vs Office XP to justify
upgrade.
3. Any older Office version would be getting close to or past the
decade mark. Office 97 mostly holds its own, but VBA 5.x is getting to
be an antique. It's worth considering upgrading, but an upgrade to
Office XP (still widely available through Internet sites) would be the
more economical choice.
J
JoAnn Paules [MSFT MVP]
That was why I posted what I did. 
--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]
--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]
Harlan Grove said:
G
George Nicholson
Office 97 mostly holds its own
Agreed, as long as the user applied all Service Packs. Sometimes SPs aren't
all that crucial. They were with Office 97.
--
George Nicholson
Remove 'Junk' from return address.
Agreed, as long as the user applied all Service Packs. Sometimes SPs aren't
all that crucial. They were with Office 97.
--
George Nicholson
Remove 'Junk' from return address.
Harlan Grove said:
G
Gary Smith
Harlan Grove said:
Office 2003 runs on Windows 2000. Having been upgraded from Office 2000
to Office 2003 at work, I certainly wouldn't pay to do that at home. I
found most of the changes pointless and annoying. Others may find the
changes worthwhile, depending on how they use the product.
E
Echo S
Also depending which product they use the most.
The differences between PPT 2000 and 2002/2003 were significant, and, if you
use PPT a lot, may make an upgrade worthwhile.
P
Peter Foldes
1. Running Windows 95/98/ME or NT4/2000, then upgrading to Office 2003
Office 2003 Full\Upgrade will install without any problems to W2K
--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
Office 2003 Full\Upgrade will install without any problems to W2K
--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
Harlan Grove said:
J
JoAnn Paules [MSFT MVP]
Publisher made some changes between 2000 and 2002 that are both an asset and
a disadvantage, depending on how you use the program. Newsletters - photo
compression, good thing for a smaller file size. Website - I've heard that
it's easier to maintain a Pub 2000 website than 2002 or newer. (I don't use
it for webs so I have to go by what I've read.)
It's an individual decision.
a disadvantage, depending on how you use the program. Newsletters - photo
compression, good thing for a smaller file size. Website - I've heard that
it's easier to maintain a Pub 2000 website than 2002 or newer. (I don't use
it for webs so I have to go by what I've read.)
It's an individual decision.
B
Bob I
Only you know the value of your $$, and what benefits you may realize
from "upgrading" and since you provided no "starting point" to the folks
to give an reasoned answer, I suggest you look at the info at this link
and make your own determination.
http://www.microsoft.com/office/editions/prodinfo/compare.mspx
from "upgrading" and since you provided no "starting point" to the folks
to give an reasoned answer, I suggest you look at the info at this link
and make your own determination.
http://www.microsoft.com/office/editions/prodinfo/compare.mspx
H
Harlan Grove
Echo S wrote...
....
As opposed to Excel, which hasn't changed much since Excel 2000 except
in eye wash (Colored! Worksheet! Tabs!) and some stats functions.
....
As opposed to Excel, which hasn't changed much since Excel 2000 except
in eye wash (Colored! Worksheet! Tabs!) and some stats functions.
G
George Nicholson
Memory usage has improved greatly. I can do things with Excel 2003 that
consistently crashed & burned XP/2002 & earlier.
consistently crashed & burned XP/2002 & earlier.