Dell 15" Laptop Deals
- Average user rating: 2.0 stars out of 48 reviews Back to product review
- My rating: 0 stars Write review
Full user review
-
10 out of 16 people found this review helpful
3.0 stars
"MS WORD 2003 vs WORD 2007"
Pros: More Comands
Cons: Totally revamped. Start over leaning MS Word
Summary: Over the years most people use MSWord because it came with MS Office. Now may be a time to look for something different. MS has totally changed the toolbar in MSWord 2007 & to be honest, most likely you will get frustrasted, upset, even mad trying to find some of the command you are so use to using.
So before you spend $200 to $400 on the new MS OFFICE 2007 PROGRAMS. I HIGHLY suggest you look at other word processors. Unless you have time everyday, trying to learn the new MSWord, which to me has been a pain.
That's why I quit using the Word 2007 & went back to MS WORD 2003.
Good Luck.
Buyer Beware ---- Maybe MS will doing something if they lose a lot of sales.
- 8 replies to this review
-
My I suggest OpenOffice, a community supported and developed office suite with the whopping price tag of $0. I have given up on buying word processors because OpenOffice is a better application than most of than and I can open nearly any text document, Word, Word Perfect, StarOffice and others. Although I can not save to all formats I can still save to Word files from version 6 all the way through Word 2003
Try it you will like it.
Open Source The Better Development Model -
I find the new MS Word 2007 to be very disappointing. They have failed to achieve simplicity... in fact it is decidely more complex than MS Word 2003.
-
I never even liked Windows 2003. Windows 2000 does everything I need and I do not have plans to change.
-
I find the new word interface to be a major improvement over previous versions of word. It is simply easier to find and use commands that were buried in the older versions. You can save a doc as a pdf. It has a fast learning curve.
-
Offhand, I cannot think of one product that MS has created on its own rather than imitated. MS cannot even imitate well because it takes them g-d knows how many versions to get their copy to run well. Let's face it, WordPerfect was a much better product than equivalent versions of Word. Did people and businesses buy Word because it was a better product? I submit that the answer is "no." MS put WP out of business, as with a number of other software makers, not because MS made better software but because Gates was a superior businessman. Thus, in response to the MS defender, many people use MS products not because they are the ones that people preferred or believed were better but because MS, whether lawfully, or quasi-lawfully, or in an unlawful manner (as many allege and which I believe was proven by the government's lawsuit), manipulated the market which, for practical purposes, left consumers with no real viable alternative.
As well, and with software by any manufacturer, unless there is a warning on the box that it will take hours for a reasonably intelligent but not necessarily computer-savvy consumer to figure out how to work the software, the simple fact is that "learning" a new version of an older program should be, at the least, intuitive and quick. The consumer has paid for the software but no one is paying the consumer for his or her time to learn it. In short, using a word processing program in 2007 is not, and should not be, "rocket science." The truth is that, as with audio and video equipment, the "bells and whistles" are what makes the product profitable (because they differentiate the product in the marketplace but are usually very inexpensive to manufacture or add to the software) but are the very things which most purchasers will never use. And, unless you are putting together newsletters or other print or slide media using graphics and charts and photos, that is exactly the case with MS Word.
Although I use Office XP and MS Word myself, I write this simply because I don't think that the MS "defender" was either accurate, thoughtful or courteous in his comments about the reviewer who felt that the new Word should be easier to learn and use out of the box. -
Offhand, I cannot think of one product that MS has created on its own rather than imitated. MS cannot even imitate well because it takes them g-d knows how many versions to get their copy to run well. Let's face it, WordPerfect was a much better product than equivalent versions of Word. Did people and businesses buy Word because it was a better product? I submit that the answer is "no." MS put WP out of business, as with a number of other software makers, not because MS made better software but because Gates was a superior businessman. Thus, in response to the MS defender, many people use MS products not because they are the ones that people preferred or believed were better but because MS, whether lawfully, or quasi-lawfully, or in an unlawful manner (as many allege and which I believe was proven by the government's lawsuit), manipulated the market which, for practical purposes, left consumers with no real viable alternative.
As well, and with software by any manufacturer, unless there is a warning on the box that it will take hours for a reasonably intelligent but not necessarily computer-savvy consumer to figure out how to work the software, the simple fact is that "learning" a new version of an older program should be, at the least, intuitive and quick. The consumer has paid for the software but no one is paying the consumer for his or her time to learn it. In short, using a word processing program in 2007 is not, and should not be, "rocket science." The truth is that, as with audio and video equipment, the "bells and whistles" are what makes the product profitable (because they differentiate the product in the marketplace but are usually very inexpensive to manufacture or add to the software) but are the very things which most purchasers will never use. And, unless you are putting together newsletters or other print or slide media using graphics and charts and photos, that is exactly the case with MS Word.
Although I use Office XP and MS Word myself, I write this simply because I don't think that the MS "defender" was either accurate, thoughtful or courteous in his comments about the reviewer who felt that the new Word should be easier to learn and use out of the box. -
Offhand, I cannot think of one product that MS has created on its own rather than imitated. MS cannot even imitate well because it takes them g-d knows how many versions to get their copy to run well. Let's face it, WordPerfect was a much better product than equivalent versions of Word. Did people and businesses buy Word because it was a better product? I submit that the answer is "no." MS put WP out of business, as with a number of other software makers, not because MS made better software but because Gates was a superior businessman. Thus, in response to the MS defender, many people use MS products not because they are the ones that people preferred or believed were better but because MS, whether lawfully, or quasi-lawfully, or in an unlawful manner (as many allege and which I believe was proven by the government's lawsuit), manipulated the market which, for practical purposes, left consumers with no real viable alternative.
As well, and with software by any manufacturer, unless there is a warning on the box that it will take hours for a reasonably intelligent but not necessarily computer-savvy consumer to figure out how to work the software, the simple fact is that "learning" a new version of an older program should be, at the least, intuitive and quick. The consumer has paid for the software but no one is paying the consumer for his or her time to learn it. In short, using a word processing program in 2007 is not, and should not be, "rocket science." The truth is that, as with audio and video equipment, the "bells and whistles" are what makes the product profitable (because they differentiate the product in the marketplace but are usually very inexpensive to manufacture or add to the software) but are the very things which most purchasers will never use. And, unless you are putting together newsletters or other print or slide media using graphics and charts and photos, that is exactly the case with MS Word.
Although I use Office XP and MS Word myself, I write this simply because I don't think that the MS "defender" was either accurate, thoughtful or courteous in his comments about the reviewer who felt that the new Word should be easier to learn and use out of the box. -
Over the years, most people use Microsoft Word the same reason they use Windows, Internet Epxlorer and Windows Media Player: because it's better than comepting products, period. There was never a worse time to look for something different, now that is much easier and intuitive to work with Office. Microsoft did change the looks of the new Office applications and, IMHO, only a seriously computer-challenged and reluctant person would get frustated, upset and even mad trying to find some of the commands people are used to using, everything is more accessible than before, it's just a matter of getting used to the new layout, that's all.
So think twice before coming here to advertise lower-quality competing products instead of reviewing the product with an unbiased position, because that's what this section is for. I also highly recommend people to look at other Word processors, at least that way they will realize why Microsoft Word is the most used Word processor. Unless you are seriously computer-challenged and you don't even know how to work with Windows, in which case you should switch to paper and pen.
If I may, if you quit using the Word 2007 and went back to Word 2003 is because you're not computer-savy enough or you simply give up to quicly, but don't assume everyone will have as much difficulty in finding a button as you did and be as reluctant as you were.
Good luck with working with Windows (are you still using Windows 95?).
People beware - Microsoft-haters will do anything to try to convince people not to buy/use Microsoft products, even if they are better.
Where to buy
Microsoft Word 2007:
$142.00 - $229.99
| store | price | in stock? | rating |
|---|---|---|---|
|
$211.95 | Yes |
|
|
$199.95 | Yes |
|
|
$141.94 | Yes |
|
|
$183.99 | Yes |
|
|
$162.46 | Yes |
|
