It’s godawful, to the point of being barely functional
My company runs on office and I write everything in Google drive, then export it to a word document and import it into office because working on office web is just a joke.
Seriously.
Sometimes it just randomly and quietly deletes some text I just typed
Sometimes it just changes layouts on other pages where I’m not even working
Sometimes it says it saved the work and it saved didly squat
I see Microsoft office as something that only “enterprise” level customers would be stupid enough to use and to pay actual money for.
I’ve been writing a long work, using Office for web editing. Every so often in proofreading, I find spots where it looks like words were just missing. Now I feel like I may have some explanation…
Nah, they’re right. The first time I tried Linux I remember how irritated and nitpicking I was with LibreOffice, and how that has always been sort of the dealbreaker for me in terms of becoming a dedicated Linux user.
The entire world runs on .docx like it or not. If it’s not either close to an exact replica or far superior, it’s a no-go. I remember giving up on Google Docs because of something to do keystrokes and margin formats. Nothing has ever been able to quite replace it up to this point.
Shame they’ve decided to dump their entire undisputed monopoly for AI lol
yeah office used to just work (mostly, and ignoring the quirks), but this past year it’s been doing weird shit and generally been unreliable because of cloud sync behaviour for me
I remember how this little operating system with a kernel invented by a Finnish dude and with no real corporate back almost completelly ate their market share in the server space back in the day (not that they’ve had a significant server market for long in between the end of the era of corporate Unixes like SunOS and the beginning of the era of Linux).
I actual did server-side development and just about every company I worked for in 2 decades and 3 countries had masses of Linux servers and if that much a handful of Windows servers, and that included all sized of company, from small ones to massive corporate behemoths - Linux was simple the best way to get the most use and performance out of your server hardware.
Whilst I haven’t been doing server side stuff for a few years, I’m actually surprised they still have any server market at all, since the only upside their server solutions have over Linux is perfect integration with their Desktop OS whilst all the rest are downsides.
I guess that they have some market share because basically their servers serve as glue between instances of to their Desktop OS in a network because of using closed protocols (i.e. a forced dependency on the desktop market rather than superior quality) whilst for any kind of generic computing they’re an inferior solution to even a free OS.
I didn’t mean to start a what’s-best-for-companies (as i really don’t care, i stopped working 30yrs ago and am doing server-stuff just for fun at home mostly), but just said that their server-OSs are tremendously better than their office-shit and their desktop-OSs.
Since NT they surely matured a lot, also i’d argue that with 2019+ i fail to see the appeal anymore. Having said that, of my 15+ machines here, there are only 2 windows left and that is just for that decades-old-domain plus some essentials.
I totally agreed with that: their Server OS is superior to their Desktop OS.
I just think it’s mainly because their Desktop OS has fast enshittified after Windows 7 rather than because Windows server is actually all that great as a server OS.
In fact, thinking about it, one might even say that Windows Server is better than the Desktop version because it’s to a very great extent a Desktop OS (in terms of having things like having an a complex UI layer and set of support applications integrated) the very thing which is actually a large part of the reason why its an inferior server OS for typical server-side scenarios because there what you most value is maximum computing resources made available to the server applications (which tend to be heavy users of computing, memory, networking or a combination of those) and an integrated UI layer actually uses more of those just for the OS (both directly for its own work and indirectly from the added complexity of a bulkier OS resulting in less streamlined execution paths) making fewer resources available for the same hardware.
If you look at the Linux distros and distro variants for server deployment they are actually vastly inferior to the Windows OS Desktop - for starters because they’re command-line only, though nowadays there’s often web-based management interfaces which are still a much lighter option than a directly integrated UI layer - exactly because absent an intergrated UI layer, not adding the UI support on top via something like XWindows or Wyland on a server Linux distro actually makes them better for server tasks.
But you know the UI is optional in the recent server versions?
Can all be done in console, for an added layer of security and less overhead. Way too late they included that, but still…
lol yes, but close. Since server 2008/2008R2 there is the “core”-option. Since 2016 even a nano-core, with just basic container-options and one cannot even login locally.
Plus a ton of corpo-stuff that is already there, and “easily” to setup (the gui seems so simple, but it’s still just a do-it-quick-stuff in the front, most of the actual work is scripted/console anyway). I must admit I do have all MS-titles and -certificates and it often is as trivial as it seems. But still more trivial than doing the exact same thing in linux.
Despite not ever have cared for MS-licenses (except for back then, when i still ran the buisiness), i still choose linux most of the time as it’s still much less overhead for simple tasks than even the lightest of core-installations.
Office is the last good branding Microsoft have and they’re just getting rid of it, I can’t believe it
Good?
It’s godawful, to the point of being barely functional
My company runs on office and I write everything in Google drive, then export it to a word document and import it into office because working on office web is just a joke.
Seriously.
Sometimes it just randomly and quietly deletes some text I just typed
Sometimes it just changes layouts on other pages where I’m not even working
Sometimes it says it saved the work and it saved didly squat
I see Microsoft office as something that only “enterprise” level customers would be stupid enough to use and to pay actual money for.
They didn’t say it was a good product
I’ve been writing a long work, using Office for web editing. Every so often in proofreading, I find spots where it looks like words were just missing. Now I feel like I may have some explanation…
Apparently word online will just st random drop pieces of text during saving.
Why?
Microsoft. That’s why
Nah, they’re right. The first time I tried Linux I remember how irritated and nitpicking I was with LibreOffice, and how that has always been sort of the dealbreaker for me in terms of becoming a dedicated Linux user.
The entire world runs on .docx like it or not. If it’s not either close to an exact replica or far superior, it’s a no-go. I remember giving up on Google Docs because of something to do keystrokes and margin formats. Nothing has ever been able to quite replace it up to this point.
Shame they’ve decided to dump their entire undisputed monopoly for AI lol
yeah office used to just work (mostly, and ignoring the quirks), but this past year it’s been doing weird shit and generally been unreliable because of cloud sync behaviour for me
Suicidally bad naming is the one thing we can always rely on Microsoft for
Introducing Microsoft Sepukku.
Maybe they hired the brand team from HBO.
you mean HBO Max? wait it’s Max now? No, it’s HBO. No, Max. No, HBO Max. The real seahorse emoji is…
Not to defend MS’s bullcrap, but their server OS are much better than their fucking aweful office.
Starting with WinNT back in the days.
Ah, yes, Windows NT.
I remember how this little operating system with a kernel invented by a Finnish dude and with no real corporate back almost completelly ate their market share in the server space back in the day (not that they’ve had a significant server market for long in between the end of the era of corporate Unixes like SunOS and the beginning of the era of Linux).
I actual did server-side development and just about every company I worked for in 2 decades and 3 countries had masses of Linux servers and if that much a handful of Windows servers, and that included all sized of company, from small ones to massive corporate behemoths - Linux was simple the best way to get the most use and performance out of your server hardware.
Whilst I haven’t been doing server side stuff for a few years, I’m actually surprised they still have any server market at all, since the only upside their server solutions have over Linux is perfect integration with their Desktop OS whilst all the rest are downsides.
I guess that they have some market share because basically their servers serve as glue between instances of to their Desktop OS in a network because of using closed protocols (i.e. a forced dependency on the desktop market rather than superior quality) whilst for any kind of generic computing they’re an inferior solution to even a free OS.
I didn’t mean to start a what’s-best-for-companies (as i really don’t care, i stopped working 30yrs ago and am doing server-stuff just for fun at home mostly), but just said that their server-OSs are tremendously better than their office-shit and their desktop-OSs. Since NT they surely matured a lot, also i’d argue that with 2019+ i fail to see the appeal anymore. Having said that, of my 15+ machines here, there are only 2 windows left and that is just for that decades-old-domain plus some essentials.
I totally agreed with that: their Server OS is superior to their Desktop OS.
I just think it’s mainly because their Desktop OS has fast enshittified after Windows 7 rather than because Windows server is actually all that great as a server OS.
In fact, thinking about it, one might even say that Windows Server is better than the Desktop version because it’s to a very great extent a Desktop OS (in terms of having things like having an a complex UI layer and set of support applications integrated) the very thing which is actually a large part of the reason why its an inferior server OS for typical server-side scenarios because there what you most value is maximum computing resources made available to the server applications (which tend to be heavy users of computing, memory, networking or a combination of those) and an integrated UI layer actually uses more of those just for the OS (both directly for its own work and indirectly from the added complexity of a bulkier OS resulting in less streamlined execution paths) making fewer resources available for the same hardware.
If you look at the Linux distros and distro variants for server deployment they are actually vastly inferior to the Windows OS Desktop - for starters because they’re command-line only, though nowadays there’s often web-based management interfaces which are still a much lighter option than a directly integrated UI layer - exactly because absent an intergrated UI layer, not adding the UI support on top via something like XWindows or Wyland on a server Linux distro actually makes them better for server tasks.
But you know the UI is optional in the recent server versions? Can all be done in console, for an added layer of security and less overhead. Way too late they included that, but still…
I did not know that.
Took them two decades but better late than never!
lol yes, but close. Since server 2008/2008R2 there is the “core”-option. Since 2016 even a nano-core, with just basic container-options and one cannot even login locally. Plus a ton of corpo-stuff that is already there, and “easily” to setup (the gui seems so simple, but it’s still just a do-it-quick-stuff in the front, most of the actual work is scripted/console anyway). I must admit I do have all MS-titles and -certificates and it often is as trivial as it seems. But still more trivial than doing the exact same thing in linux.
Despite not ever have cared for MS-licenses (except for back then, when i still ran the buisiness), i still choose linux most of the time as it’s still much less overhead for simple tasks than even the lightest of core-installations.