What office suite is compatible with Windows ME ?

[laura]

I'm going to be starting college soon and need either office 2000 or office
2003 in order to participate in online classes. I have ME on my computer. Is
there a office version that is compatible with ME ? I can't afford to buy a
new computer to get 2000 or XP already installed. Upgrading from ME to 2000
is that possible for a non-computer-techie like me to do ? It would be so
simple if there was a office 2000 or 2003 version that was compatible...why
can't life ever be simple?

Thanks for any replies in advance

Laura

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

Office 97, 2000 and XP are compatible.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, laura asked:

| I'm going to be starting college soon and need either office 2000 or
| office 2003 in order to participate in online classes. I have ME on
| my computer. Is there a office version that is compatible with ME ? I
| can't afford to buy a new computer to get 2000 or XP already
| installed. Upgrading from ME to 2000 is that possible for a
| non-computer-techie like me to do ? It would be so simple if there
| was a office 2000 or 2003 version that was compatible...why can't
| life ever be simple?
|
| Thanks for any replies in advance
|
| Laura

 

[JoAnn Paules [MSFT MVP]]

What you need to do FIRST is to find out which version the college
recommends. Visit their website - most have a section on computer
recommendations.

 

[Harlan Grove]

I'm going to be starting college soon and need either office 2000
or office 2003 in order to participate in online classes. I have ME
on my computer. Is there a office version that is compatible with ME?

....

If you have Windows ME, then you must have an older computer. Windows ME
can't run Office 2003, so that's out of the question unless you also upgrade
Windows. Whether upgrading Windows makes sense depends in part on the cost
of that upgrade too as well as how much RAM your machine has. While it's
possible to run Windows XP with 128MB RAM, it's not pleasant. If you have
128MB or less RAM, you don't want to upgrade to Windows XP. If you stick
with Windows ME, then Office 2000 would be what you want to use.

 

[Harlan Grove]

What you need to do FIRST is to find out which version the college
recommends. Visit their website - most have a section on computer
recommendations.

....

Colleges and universities have an unfortunate habit of recommending things
most students can't afford. However, most make the sensible recommendation
that students buy Macs, so they can't be all wrong.

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

And by recommending that students buy a Mac, the colleges are also
recommending that the students lay out a LOT more cash to replace their
Windows programs with ones that will run on a Mac.

A much worse scenario than upgrading memory ($100) and the OS (another
$100).

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, Harlan Grove asked:

|| What you need to do FIRST is to find out which version the college
|| recommends. Visit their website - most have a section on computer
|| recommendations.
| ...
|
| Colleges and universities have an unfortunate habit of recommending
| things most students can't afford. However, most make the sensible
| recommendation that students buy Macs, so they can't be all wrong.

 

[JoAnn Paules [MSFT MVP]]

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on that. I used to sell computers and
sold MANY to college students. I used to keep a huge binder full of the
specs for different colleges. As a new request appeared, it was added to my
book. Rarely did I see a school that recommended Macs and most schools list
the *minimum* requirements as well as a highly recommended system. And
almost all also stated what software the school uses.

--

JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

 

[Harlan Grove]

And by recommending that students buy a Mac, the colleges are also
recommending that the students lay out a LOT more cash to replace
their Windows programs with ones that will run on a Mac.

A much worse scenario than upgrading memory ($100) and the OS
(another $100). ....
After furious head scratching, Harlan Grove asked: ....
|Colleges and universities have an unfortunate habit of recommending
|things most students can't afford. However, most make the sensible
|recommendation that students buy Macs, so they can't be all wrong.

It was deliberate provocation.

Actually, the most sensible colleges and universities only require some
means of connecting to the college or university network on which online
access is provided to all software needed for coursework. Note that I'm not
claiming that this is most colleges. The only offline software most students
need is a decent word processor, and there are many cheaper options than
Word.

Note also that I didn't claim everyone should buy a new computer. As for
what to look for when buying a new computer, software is one consideration.
The advantage of newer Macs is that OS X is essentially a Unix variant,
which means that most GNU and other open source software can compile without
any more modifications than provided by autoconf. The same is not true for
Windows.

 

[JoAnn Paules [MSFT MVP]]

Well, I was only just *a little* provoked.

I just happen to have personal experience with the topic so I answered the
way I did based on that.

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

Unfortunately, many open source programs (excluding star office and oo.o)
are poor quality with no documentation.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, Harlan Grove asked:

| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]" wrote...
|| And by recommending that students buy a Mac, the colleges are also
|| recommending that the students lay out a LOT more cash to replace
|| their Windows programs with ones that will run on a Mac.
||
|| A much worse scenario than upgrading memory ($100) and the OS
|| (another $100).
| ...
|| After furious head scratching, Harlan Grove asked:
| ...
||| Colleges and universities have an unfortunate habit of recommending
||| things most students can't afford. However, most make the sensible
||| recommendation that students buy Macs, so they can't be all wrong.
|
| It was deliberate provocation.
|
| Actually, the most sensible colleges and universities only require
| some means of connecting to the college or university network on
| which online access is provided to all software needed for
| coursework. Note that I'm not claiming that this is most colleges.
| The only offline software most students need is a decent word
| processor, and there are many cheaper options than Word.
|
| Note also that I didn't claim everyone should buy a new computer. As
| for what to look for when buying a new computer, software is one
| consideration. The advantage of newer Macs is that OS X is
| essentially a Unix variant, which means that most GNU and other open
| source software can compile without any more modifications than
| provided by autoconf. The same is not true for Windows.

 

[Harlan Grove]

Unfortunately, many open source programs (excluding star office and
oo.o) are poor quality with no documentation.

....

In re documentation, based on a LOT of the original questions asked in the
Excel newsgroups, the same could be said for Excel.

With regard to quality, there are many thousands of open source software
packages commonly packaged with desktop Linux distros. A few hundred of them
may be of marginal quality. Most of the others are no worse than most
Microsoft products, and some are better.

There's actually a large amount of commercial software available for
Linux/BSD/Mac OS X. Most of it originated under Unix. These include
Mathematica, MatLAb, Maple, S-Plus, just to name the math/stats software
with which I'm most familiar.

As for the free stuff, there's more documentation available for the Linux
and BSD kernels than for Windows. Ditto both XFree86 and X.Org compared to
Windows GDI. Same for the major desktop environments, KDE, Gnome,
Windowmaker and Xfce. And should we compare the skimpy online help for
CMD.EXE compared to the hundreds of pages of documetation for *each* of the
shells that commonly come with these other OSs?

With regard to the software I use most, R, nedit, Mozilla and TeX, there are
thousands of pages for each except nedit, which is a simple enough text
editor it doesn't need more than a hundred pages or so. Further, very few
packages are included in most distros unless they come with at least a
man[ual] page.

Got any specific examples, or do you get paid to spout Microsoft propaganda?
[Freebie: if you mean abs sucks, I agree completely, but it does come with
docs.]

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

I was following your information until you got to the part where you
inserted a personal epithet, thus negating any positive information you had
provided that I might have been willing to review.

A common failing of the open source advocates, insult the user of
proprietary software reader and then urge the use of open source. Sad.


--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, Harlan Grove asked:

| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]" wrote...
|| Unfortunately, many open source programs (excluding star office and
|| oo.o) are poor quality with no documentation.
| ...
|
| In re documentation, based on a LOT of the original questions asked
| in the Excel newsgroups, the same could be said for Excel.
|
| With regard to quality, there are many thousands of open source
| software packages commonly packaged with desktop Linux distros. A few
| hundred of them may be of marginal quality. Most of the others are no
| worse than most Microsoft products, and some are better.
|
| There's actually a large amount of commercial software available for
| Linux/BSD/Mac OS X. Most of it originated under Unix. These include
| Mathematica, MatLAb, Maple, S-Plus, just to name the math/stats
| software with which I'm most familiar.
|
| As for the free stuff, there's more documentation available for the
| Linux and BSD kernels than for Windows. Ditto both XFree86 and X.Org
| compared to Windows GDI. Same for the major desktop environments,
| KDE, Gnome, Windowmaker and Xfce. And should we compare the skimpy
| online help for CMD.EXE compared to the hundreds of pages of
| documetation for *each* of the shells that commonly come with these
| other OSs?
|
| With regard to the software I use most, R, nedit, Mozilla and TeX,
| there are thousands of pages for each except nedit, which is a simple
| enough text editor it doesn't need more than a hundred pages or so.
| Further, very few packages are included in most distros unless they
| come with at least a man[ual] page.
|
| Got any specific examples, or do you get paid to spout Microsoft
| propaganda? [Freebie: if you mean abs sucks, I agree completely, but
| it does come with docs.]

 

[Harlan Grove]

I was following your information until you got to the part where you
inserted a personal epithet, thus negating any positive information
you had provided that I might have been willing to review.

Logically specious: any subjective criticism and speculation (even if an
argument could be made that it's warranted by the vagueness of your earlier
assertions) negated any objective information content. The first refuge of
the scoundrel, er, MVP.

Hurt my feelings, and I'll hide my head in the sand at you!

A common failing of the open source advocates, insult the user of
proprietary software reader and then urge the use of open source.
Sad.

Obviously we have a different opinion on the relative merits and value of
objective information and software on the one hand and hurt feelings on the
other. In case it wasn't clear from my last post, I really didn't expect you
to be able to name any dodgy free software. Guess you didn't/don't realize
that without examples, what you're doing to free software is no different
than what you claim I've done to you, so your basis for any moral authority
rests on the fact that YOU were the target in the latter case.

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

Ah, now we have stooped to insulting me personally.

I think we all can draw what conclusions we will about this whole thread and
people's credibility. And I am now done with this thread and any current or
future responses to this individual.


--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, Harlan Grove asked:

| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]" wrote...
|| I was following your information until you got to the part where you
|| inserted a personal epithet, thus negating any positive information
|| you had provided that I might have been willing to review.
|
| Logically specious: any subjective criticism and speculation (even if
| an argument could be made that it's warranted by the vagueness of
| your earlier assertions) negated any objective information content.
| The first refuge of the scoundrel, er, MVP.
|
| Hurt my feelings, and I'll hide my head in the sand at you!
|
|| A common failing of the open source advocates, insult the user of
|| proprietary software reader and then urge the use of open source.
|| Sad.
|
| Obviously we have a different opinion on the relative merits and
| value of objective information and software on the one hand and hurt
| feelings on the other. In case it wasn't clear from my last post, I
| really didn't expect you to be able to name any dodgy free software.
| Guess you didn't/don't realize that without examples, what you're
| doing to free software is no different than what you claim I've done
| to you, so your basis for any moral authority rests on the fact that
| YOU were the target in the latter case.

 

[Harlan Grove]

Ah, now we have stooped to insulting me personally.

All a question of whether you deserved it, ain't it?

You can denegrate free/open source software freely, but other people can't
REACT to that and question your motives?

You can dish it out, but you can't take it?!

As for the conclusions we can draw, you've generated a lot of heat, some
smoke, little light. I'll stipulate that I've hurt your feelings. I'll point
out there's still the fact you've made unsubstantiated broad criticism of
free/open source software, and you seem to be hiding behind your hurt
feelings rather than providing any sort of factual basis for your criticism.

Yes, we can all draw our own conclusions.