 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Applications / Word / May 2008Can Word/Excel 2004 and Word/Excel 2008 be on same machine?
In lieu of firing up Parallels and Office for Windows to open docs that have macros, can Word/Excel 2004 co-exist on same Mac with Word/Excel 2008? Scott Absolutely - the only app in the suite that conflicts is Entourage. If you try to revert to Entourage 2004 it will affect your database. Regards |:>) Bob Jones [MVP] Office:Mac On 4/15/08 4:13 PM, in article C42A5A6F.28EC4%scottc.melendez@gmail.com, > In lieu of firing up Parallels and Office for Windows to open docs that have > macros, can Word/Excel 2004 co-exist on same Mac with Word/Excel 2008? > > Scott Yes, it does here. You can even run the two versions concurrently. Currently, I have... The only caution we give you is "Don't allow two versions of Entourage to start simultaneously." Even that is not so bad, but things will get very confused because you get two daemons running that will generate each calendar alert twice! Some of the Word preferences are shared across versions, so you will get some glitches with the preferences. It's not serious: some settings don't stay "stuck", and it's a bug they're working on. Cheers On 15/04/08 1:13 PM, in article C42A5A6F.28EC4%scottc.melendez@gmail.com, > In lieu of firing up Parallels and Office for Windows to open docs that have > macros, can Word/Excel 2004 co-exist on same Mac with Word/Excel 2008? > > Scott  SignatureDon't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/ Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to. John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac Sydney, Australia. mailto:john@mcghie.name John, Can you be specific about which preferences are shared, and what glitches I would encounter? On 04-16-08 03:59, in article C42B2A05.11CD9%john@mcghie.name, "John McGhie" <john@mcghie.name> wrote: > Yes, it does here. You can even run the two versions concurrently. > Currently, I have... [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >> > >> > Scott If I am just installing Word and Excel, do I need to worry if Office 2004 will replace the Office 2008 Database Daemon and Sync Services? On 04-16-08 03:59, in article C42B2A05.11CD9%john@mcghie.name, "John McGhie" <john@mcghie.name> wrote: > Yes, it does here. You can even run the two versions concurrently. > Currently, I have... [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >> > >> > Scott Hi Scott: I honestly couldn't tell you which preferences are shared. It's not sufficiently irritating for me to even notice which ones. No, the Daemon will not be replaced, and Office 2004 is not interested in Synch Services. You may get two daemons running. If you do, delete the 2004 one from the Login Items and don't start Erage 2004. It should then not come back. Cheers On 21/04/08 8:23 AM, in article C4311793.292D6%scottc.melendez@gmail.com, > If I am just installing Word and Excel, do I need to worry if Office 2004 > will replace the Office 2008 Database Daemon and Sync Services? [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >>>> >>>> Scott SignatureDon't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/ Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to. John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac Nhulunbuy, NT, Australia. mailto:john@mcghie.name Thanks John. So in your opinion none of these are showstoppers? By any chance did another MVP document what they are? And does the same hold true for Excel? I¹m trying to decide whether to stick with Parallels or install Office 2004. Word is just so slow with its font issues. Maybe I should try it with Excel first and see if there are any issues. If anyone else has done/is doing this, please...I¹d like to hear from you so I can make a good decision. Scott On 04-21-08 02:02, in article C4328E28.11FF7%john@mcghie.name, "John McGhie" <john@mcghie.name> wrote: > Hi Scott: > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >>> >> >>>>> >>>> In lieu of firing up Parallels and Office for Windows to open docs that >>>> >>> have >>>>> >>>> macros, can Word/Excel 2004 co-exist on same Mac with Word/Excel >>>>> 2008? >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Scott Hi Scott: I doubt if any of the MVPs know, let alone documented, which preferences are shared. They're certainly not "show-stoppers". In fact, I defy you to even notice this. However, if you have Word 2007 installed in Parallels (as I do...) then I don't think you need to do anything. Word 2008's slow-down issues will eventually (hopefully, 'soon') be fixed. In the meantime, just don't use it :-) But it will never have more than half of the Word 2007 functionality. Word 2004 has a lot more functionality than Word 2008. But it can't handle the latest content that Word 2007 can create. It down-converts it, and does a pretty good job. But if you want to edit the latest graphics, you need an XML version of Word. So if you can afford Word 2007 as well, then that's the one to use. I have 2000, 2003, 2007 and 2004 and 2008 here. Just you try to send me something I can't handle :-) I work mainly in Word 2003 in Windows XP, because it's faster -- I was too cheap to put enough memory in this MacBook :-) Cheers On 22/04/08 3:13 AM, in article C4322054.29379%scottc.melendez@gmail.com, > Thanks John. So in your opinion none of these are showstoppers? By any > chance did another MVP document what they are? And does the same hold true [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Scott SignatureDon't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/ Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to. John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac Nhulunbuy, NT, Australia. mailto:john@mcghie.name Hi John, That¹s good information to know. I was actually referring to Word 2004¹s font handling issues; I hadn¹t really noticed a slow-down in 2008. As far as functionality, who really needs even a quarter of the functionality of Word 2007? Personally, I think Office 2007 is a mess of an application. We have no plans on deploying it at my organization unless Microsoft¹s XML format becomes pervasive (and I don¹t see any signs of that happening. I mean, let¹s face it: unless you are in a profession that requires some serious word-smithing (such as a legal profession), who needs all these arcane, obscure features? Not only that, but as a public entity, we have become more sensitive about what metadata is exposed when we publish documents for citizens, so we use Acrobat more than Word for publishing documents. Word is still used internally for document exchange, and Excel of course is used extensively for budgeting and number-crunching. I just think it¹s a pity that Microsoft has made people like you and me keep different versions of the same application. VBA-enabled Word 2008 would be all the word processing I would use. I have better tools for specific tasks, like InDesign or Acrobat. Thanks for the help, and I hope the MacBU is taking these complaints seriously. SignatureRegards Scott Melendez On 04-23-08 03:05, in article C4353FEC.1230F%john@mcghie.name, "John McGhie" <john@mcghie.name> wrote: > Hi Scott: > [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] >>> >> >>>>> >>>> If I am just installing Word and Excel, do I need to worry if Office 2004 >>>>> >>>> will replace the Office 2008 Database Daemon and Sync Services? >>>>> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >>>>>>> get very >>>>>>> >>>>>> confused because you get two daemons running that will generate each >>>>>>> >>>>>> calendar alert twice! >>>>>>> >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In lieu of firing up Parallels and Office for Windows to open docs >> > that >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> macros, can Word/Excel 2004 co-exist on same Mac with Word/Excel >>>>>>> >>>>>> 2008? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Scott Hi Scott: On 25/04/08 5:33 AM, in article C43635B8.29548%scottc.melendez@gmail.com, > As far as functionality, who really needs even a quarter of the > functionality of Word 2007? Me! You have to use Word 2007 for a while before you really begin to appreciate it. To begin with, under the skin it's really Word 2003/4 with a new file format and a new user interface. So not much change. The UI takes a while to get used to. But then it's a hell of a lot faster and more intuitive than the keystrokes and toolbars we're stuck with in Mac Word. At first, because you hit so many fewer keystrokes and mouse-clicks, it feels like you are not getting much work done. Then you realise your actual work throughput are 50 per cent higher than they were in the previous version. > Personally, I think Office 2007 is a mess of an > application. We have no plans on deploying it at my organization unless > Microsoft¹s XML format becomes pervasive (and I don¹t see any signs of that > happening. Yeah, once people discover that the new file format is a quarter the size, the roll-out will happen very fast. But because of the differences, corporations have to do a lot more work to roll out this version, so it will take them longer. > I mean, let¹s face it: unless you are in a profession that > requires some serious word-smithing (such as a legal profession), who needs > all these arcane, obscure features? The whole purpose of the new UI was to make the existing features less obscure and arcane. Most of the people who ask this question would use at least some of the power-users features if they could find them, and figure out how. That was the whole point of the new UI. > Not only that, but as a public entity, > we have become more sensitive about what metadata is exposed when we publish > documents for citizens, so we use Acrobat more than Word for publishing > documents. That's a setting in the new versions of Word. Turn it off to store "None". > I just think > it¹s a pity that Microsoft has made people like you and me keep different > versions of the same application. Well, Microsoft didn't do that. But my business is Word consultancy, so I need to have all versions available. I can produce any Word environment back to Word 4 for DOS if I need it for a customer application. > VBA-enabled Word 2008 would be all the > word processing I would use. Yeah, well I could probably survive quite well with Apple Calculator in place of Excel. Just because I can't understand the question, let alone the answer, does not mean Excel should not contain the tools for linear regression. Many corporate cube-dwellers will tell you "Oh, I never use all those fancy features, just give me the basics." All that told us was that they had never taken the time to learn how to use those features. Their corporate IS department had written VBA to do it for them. You should have heard them scream when VBA disappeared from Excel and Word, and all of a sudden they had to do all their complex work-flows by hand :-) Out here in private industry, I see corporations are becoming increasingly impatient with the kind of user who loudly claims to know nothing about computers. We have a few like that, being encouraged to consider early retirement, at the company I am with now. Given that the computer is the tool of trade for most of us, they are becoming increasingly likely to test for computer competence at the job interview, these days :-) > Thanks for the help, and I hope the MacBU is taking these complaints > seriously. That depends: If you put these complaints in here, they're not. They will never see them. If you use Help>Send Feedback, then trust me, they take THAT very, very seriously! Cheers SignatureDon't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/ Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to. John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac Nhulunbuy, NT, Australia. mailto:john@mcghie.name Oh we¹ve been using Office 2007 since early beta stages. But you and I are in different businesses. My clients don¹t use a new version because its a new version; it has to be able to get their job done better and faster. Office 2007 has yet to prove to us decision-makers that it does something Word 2003 can¹t do, that we would use in an everyday environment. While the change may not be significant to you, in our testing it proved to be frustrating to users (across all applications, not just Word). We exchange Office documents with hundreds of thousands of people on a daily basis. I don¹t see people swarming to use Microsoft¹s XML format. And until the OpenDoc ³standards² settle, I don¹t see it happening. As far as metadata goes, you are talking about a catch 22: you have to use Word 2007 to strip metadata, but we¹re not going to deploy Office 2007. Acrobat¹s tools for stripping metadata and redaction are superior, easier to use, and, most importantly to us, the PDF format is a fully-governmental compliant format to use for dissemination of information to citizens. The fact is, having been in corporate IT for so long, 80% of users, will never use 90% of features in Word or Excel. Finance people are examples of that smaller percentage of users to will use Excel in a more advanced manner. Similarly, those who write our budget, environmental impact reports, manuals, etc. use Word¹s more advanced features. But I¹ve yet hear someone say ³Gee, I wish Word/Excel had this feature...² that is fulfilled by 2007. And slowly, but inexorably, Word is being used just as the drafting part of publishing documents. Complex documents are assembled by a team in InDesign for distribution via PDF, for version-control and security. Office 2008 for Mac seems to be a better ³jack-of-all-trades² for Mac users. I like it¹s Notebook layout (though I wish it integrated better with Entourage, like OneNote does with Outlook). VBA just needs to make a comeback. The recent issue of Macworld had an editorial on why it is so difficult for Microsoft to make substantial changes to its core products, and when it does, there is a hue and cry about it. This certainly applies to Vista and Office 2007. SignatureRegards, Scott Melendez Manager, Enterprise Messaging City & County of San Francisco On 04-24-08 21:17, in article C437916A.1240A%john@mcghie.name, "John McGhie" <john@mcghie.name> wrote: > Hi Scott: > [quoted text clipped - 79 lines] > > Cheers Hi Scott: On 30/04/08 2:07 AM, in article C43C9CD4.29723%scottc.melendez@gmail.com, > Oh we¹ve been using Office 2007 since early beta stages. But you and I are > in different businesses. My clients don¹t use a new version because its a > new version; it has to be able to get their job done better and faster. > Office 2007 has yet to prove to us decision-makers that it does something > Word 2003 can¹t do, that we would use in an everyday environment. It's faster and it doesn't crash as often. It doesn't corrupt documents. The files are a quarter the size. Compliance to corporate standards can be enforced. Those things are worth having to my clients :-) > While the > change may not be significant to you, in our testing it proved to be > frustrating to users (across all applications, not just Word). I suspect you used experienced users and you didn't let the test run long enough. As a very experienced user, it took me more than two months to get used to the new UI. Newbies get it in about half a day :-) > We exchange Office documents with hundreds of thousands of people on a daily > basis. I don¹t see people swarming to use Microsoft¹s XML format. And until > the OpenDoc ³standards² settle, I don¹t see it happening. You wouldn't expect it yet, surely?? Large corporations have a software roll-out cycle of about four years per platform. And it takes them two years to plan and deploy. So if they went to 2003, the earliest they would have done that is 2005. That means they won't go to 2007 until 2009. My clients are stuck about half-in-half. Some are actively working on their 2007 roll-out. The others are waiting for Office 2009. The ones on drip-feed volume licensing tend to go early. The ones that buy boxed copies tend to buy every alternate version :-) > As far as metadata goes, you are talking about a catch 22: you have to use > Word 2007 to strip metadata, but we¹re not going to deploy Office 2007. Rubbish! You can strip metadata in any version of Word since 97 :-) > Acrobat¹s tools for stripping metadata and redaction are superior, easier to > use, and, most importantly to us, the PDF format is a fully-governmental > compliant format to use for dissemination of information to citizens. Yeah, but in corporate service it's a PITA. If you get a PDF version, you immediately have to email the sender and ask for a "useable" version. Then they'll send you another PDF. Then you have to go back to them and explain that you don't want to read it, you want to "use" it, and you will finally get a Word version, usually appallingly-badly formatted :-) > The fact is, having been in corporate IT for so long, 80% of users, will > never use 90% of features in Word or Excel. Yes: But "which" 10 per cent WILL they use? This is such an oft-quoted statistic (originally from Microsoft...) that it has become industry lore. However, the original research was not published. If you get hold of the original study you will see that the statement was carelessly phrased. What they should have said is "For 80 per cent of users, EACH user users a subset comprising no more than 10 per cent of the application's functions. However, for each user, the functions in use are slightly different. I could have sworn that NOBODY in the whole world EVER uses "Blue Background, White Text". Go on: Betcha can't find it :-) However, as soon as I said they were going to take the feature out, the three users in the entire world still using the function descended on my head like a pack of rabid dogs :-) > I¹ve yet hear someone > say ³Gee, I wish Word/Excel had this feature...² that is fulfilled by 2007. Well, that's a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy if you won't roll it out :-) But I can tell you that "Themes" have been offered in Word since 2002. Nobody has ever bothered with them. But since Word 2008, all of a sudden we're doing a brisk trade in theme-related questions in here. So they've found that one! List styles is another. They have also been around since Word 2000. All of a sudden, we're getting questions on them, because the new user interface stuffed them in the user's faces where they can find them. > And slowly, but inexorably, Word is being used just as the drafting part of > publishing documents. Complex documents are assembled by a team in InDesign > for distribution via PDF, for version-control and security. No: There you are definitely dreaming of the "good old days" :-) That's the way things USED to be, when I started in the industry. Documents were hand-written by subject-matter-experts. They were typed up by the typing pool. Then sent off to DTP for formatting and output. Doesn't happen any longer, except in a few astonishingly rare companies. Not even the government can afford that level of embellishment these days :-) I put 5,000-page books to press straight out of Word. InDesign has been confined to the Marketing Department, where they use it to indulge in endless arguments with hapless printers who are unable to colour-match the result :-) > Office 2008 for Mac seems to be a better ³jack-of-all-trades² for Mac users. You haven't tried to use it for corporate work yet :-) Come back when you have, and let's see if your opinion remains the same :-) > I like it¹s Notebook layout (though I wish it integrated better with > Entourage, like OneNote does with Outlook). VBA just needs to make a > comeback. Yeah, well that "was" mentioned once or twice on our wish-list when we were in Redmond last month. Along with one or two other little items that you may not have missed yet, but they're gone or not working right :-) > The recent issue of Macworld had an editorial on why it is so difficult for > Microsoft to make substantial changes to its core products, and when it > does, there is a hue and cry about it. This certainly applies to Vista and > Office 2007. MacWorld is not the first journal I would turn to if I were looking for authoritative comment on the goings-on at Microsoft. Come to think of it, I would not turn to ANYTHING that depends for its livelihood on sales of software or advertising to be especially accurate on that score. Vista was a classic stuff-up. Even Steve Ballmer agrees :-) I worked on the beta, and I could tell you exactly what went wrong. But basically, the design team considered input from a large number of stakeholders, NONE of whom were end-users. Word 2007 is a totally different kettle of fish. The only real mistake there was by the Marketing Department. I suspect there was an extremely potent batch of cocaine came in from Columbia that month... They ended up describing it as something it isn't, tried to sell it to customers who didn't need it, and aimed it at users who couldn't understand it! Under the surface, it's quite a good product (better than 2003, not quite at the level of 2000...). But it has some seriously good and important benefits for the heavyweight users and the corporate users. This will become increasingly apparent over time. Perhaps one of the things they should have done was add an ODF transform to it right out of the box. I understand there is one now, or soon will be. As soon as there is, people will instantly discover that ODF is not powerful enough to describe the modern corporate document, and the noise about it will die down. :-) Cheers SignatureDon't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/ Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to. John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac Nhulunbuy, NT, Australia. mailto:john@mcghie.name I would like to have both Office 2004 and Office 2008 installed on my macs, and because of EndNote-support I'd like Word 2004 to be default program for .doc-files. However when I try to "change all" in the information window (Cmd + i), it immediately switches back to Word 2008. Does anyone have a hint as to how to solve this? Thanks in advance! Hi Aaamund: Sorry, you can't change that. That's the way they built it. Office 2008 will always take over the file associations as soon as one of its applications launches. Cheers On 21/04/08 6:13 AM, in article ee98909.2@webcrossing.caR9absDaxw, "Aasmund" <aasmund_fretland@hotmail.com> wrote: > I would like to have both Office 2004 and Office 2008 installed on my macs, > and because of EndNote-support I'd like Word 2004 to be default program for > .doc-files. However when I try to "change all" in the information window (Cmd > + i), it immediately switches back to Word 2008. > > Does anyone have a hint as to how to solve this? Thanks in advance! SignatureDon't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/ Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to. John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac Nhulunbuy, NT, Australia. mailto:john@mcghie.name That may be the way its built but its a Bug. Or there was bugs in the ears of the folks That designed it to Take over. Up until and including Office2004 and all other Applications in existence for Mac You can: High Light a group of Files on OSX.3.9 or right click wait for menu to pop up and choose get Info Group (or equivalent) scan down and look for default application. if it shows say Office 2008 and you want Office 2004 to open click on that button locate 2004 choose the button below says"Change all..." choose and click okay then get out of get info. This is provided that you are only changing doc, ppt, and xls files. they would switch over to Office2004 applications. Now if all files you selected ended in x then it would not. But Office2008 takes over *all* office files those with x or or not. Like I say its a Bug, or there was bugs in the ears of the fellow responsible for writing that bit of code. My suggestion would go to help menu and choose feed back explain the situation. Maybe they will fix it by Office2025. > Hi Aaamund: > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> >> Does anyone have a hint as to how to solve this? Thanks in advance! Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112 |pjones@kimbanet.com, ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! mailto:pjones@kimbanet.com <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm> <http://www.vpea.org> John and Philip: Thanks for your answers! I guess I'll just remove Office 2008 from my old iMac G5. And hope that we some day will get the freedom of choice back! Cheers, Aasmund 2004 and 2008 can co-exist nicely on same Drive. There are two way to open 2004 Files. Open application choose open file from menu > then locate desired file and open. next go from Finder menu bar and click on open with. Wait for list to build. now choose what ever 2004 application is shown (word, excel, powerpoint). click on the 2004 application. The bug only relates to double-clicking. And despite Microsoft folks saying that's the way its supposed to work its actually a bug they don't want to admit to or fix. > John and Philip: Thanks for your answers! I guess I'll just remove Office 2008 from my old iMac G5. And hope that we some day will get the freedom of choice back! > > Cheers, > Aasmund Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112 |pjones@kimbanet.com, ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! mailto:pjones@kimbanet.com <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm> <http://www.vpea.org> You don't have to remove anything -- I haven't :-) Just start the version of Word that you want to use. Then use File>Open from within the application. You can (and I do...) have both versions running at the same time. Ummm... Not a good idea to open the same DOCUMENT in both at once -- the results can be a little "undefined" :-) But other than that, just don't fret it. Install both, use both, and enjoy! Cheers On 22/04/08 8:02 AM, in article ee98909.9@webcrossing.caR9absDaxw, "Aasmund Fretland" <aasmund_fretland@hotmail.com> wrote: > John and Philip: Thanks for your answers! I guess I'll just remove Office 2008 > from my old iMac G5. And hope that we some day will get the freedom of choice > back! > > Cheers, > Aasmund SignatureDon't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/ Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to. John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac Nhulunbuy, NT, Australia. mailto:john@mcghie.name |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.