The ambitious, ground-up rebuild of Microsoft Office Standard 2007 presents drastically different interfaces and new file formats. The new Office looks so unlike its predecessors, it's likely to spark intense love-hate responses from users. This upgrade isn't for everyone: if you're patient, eager to try the latest tools and willing to relearn most of what you already know about Office, then you may relish the challenge of Office 2007. Word, Excel and PowerPoint 2007 can produce more polished documents and presentations, and Outlook's new scheduling abilities make it a handier communications hub. Professionals who want to impress clients and co-workers with attractive reports, charts and slide shows will find this a worthy upgrade. First-time Office users may have an easier time than veteran users getting their bearings.
However, if you only use a small fraction of what Office offers or you felt that getting the hang of Office 2003 was painful enough, then you might want to avoid Office 2007 or try it free for a couple of months first. We imagine that power users who have mastered the nooks and crannies of the older versions will curse the steep learning curve. But take heed: the new era of Office affects even those who don't upgrade, and a conversion tool is needed to let older Office versions open Office 2007's default Open XML files.
Office 2007 does offer complex features that you can't yet find elsewhere. However, it also falls short in key areas. Integration among the applications isn't as thorough as we'd hoped, and there's no one-click way to collaborate with others on an edit without buying Microsoft's Groove online collaboration tool or working within a server setting. The advent of Office 2007 comes as a growing number of competing tools are simpler, cost less (if they aren't free), and handle the same core features. Oddly, despite its bevy of Windows Live and Office Live services, Microsoft chose not to build a bridge to the Web for all Office users.
Office editions
We reviewed Microsoft Office Standard 2007, which costs a substantial $399 (£203), or $239 (£121) to upgrade. This suite includes Word, PowerPoint, Excel and Outlook in addition to Office Tools that manage language settings and pictures and include a diagnostics tool for use in the event of a crash. If you don't need desktop email, you should opt for Office Home & Student at $149 (£76; no upgrade option), a new suite roughly equivalent to Office Student and Teacher 2003 but with OneNote instead of Outlook. The Basic package, with Word, Excel and Outlook, only comes pre-installed on computers sold by manufacturers that have Microsoft software licensing agreements. At $449 (£228), or $279 (£142) to upgrade, Microsoft Office Small Business 2007 costs $50 (£26) less than the $499 (£254) Professional edition ($329/£167 to upgrade) that includes the Access database program. Only the Enterprise and the $679 (£345) Ultimate ($539/£274 to upgrade) editions include the new Groove tool. And oddly, both the Enterprise and Professional Plus editions lack the Business Contact Manager component of Outlook, which corporate users might want for their marketing efforts. For more detail on the different Office 2007 editions, see our comparison table.
Video
To view this content, JavaScript must be enabled and you need the latest version of the Adobe Flash Player
Images
Member reviews
The UK Pricing is almost double that of the same product in the US (Don't get me started on Language differences)
Full Version Upgrade Version
Office Standard 181% 176%
Office Home and Student 146%
Office Small Business 177% 186%
Office Professional 180% 182%
Office Ultimate 187% 183%
This is based on pricing from Global retailer Amazon, who should represent Global Purchasing Power combined with low costs of sale. yet they want to charge an 80% premium to UK customers.
Microsoft's view on this is that country pricing is with the retailers. But when UK consumers are being ripped off once again, and so universlly from all the retailers, you have to assume Microsoft has a piece of this under the table. And forget about ordering from Amazon.com or any other US e-tailer. They wont ship internationally.
- 9.00 out of 10
9.00 out of 10We generate aroudn 1Gb of Powerpoint alone every year. We have evaluated a copy of Office 2007. We shall not be using it. Here is why.
First, the prodiuct is exceptionally slow. It takes PP nearly a minute to load a 50 Mbyte file. Word takes as long to load. Once loaded, many macros and plug ins do not work properly, or at all.
Second, its 'look and feel' is a disaster for experienced users. There are two elements to this:
1: Even when customised with third party software, the ribbon takes three clicks where one sufficed before. There seems to be no reason to ditch ten years of experience for what is on offer.
2: The interface itself is wasteful of space. The graphics are seeminlgy random in design and colour. "Template" in PP produces something 3x4 cm on an orange background, drawing object that is tiny and grey on a grey-blue base. Many icons replicate each other: new drawing object and change drawing object. The working area jerks around spastically when sub menus are introduced. PP has a graduated background, which makes graphics look different from how they project. And so on...
Third, the innate opacity of Office seems to be taken to a higher level, It knows what you ought to want, and it will change only after negotiations. Users of e.g. Dreamweaver who are accustomed to telling the package what they want find this frustrating. Trying to import an Excel chart into PP is seamless if you want what it thinks you ought to want, but a half hour battle if you know your own mind.
One wonders what MS strategy people can have been thinking. We cannot be alone in rejecting this product. If it sits on the MS development line, then we are rejecting MS products forthe longer term. This has to be a general issue. Few companies can afford the 10-15 working days it will take to recover th eskilsl this package kills.
- 1.30 out of 10
1.30 out of 10The UI is not dramatically different to Office 2003; it is just dramatically poor. It is totally unintuitive; things that should be grouped together (e.g. inserting any different type of object) are not.
Big buttons & a lack of compatibility with old quick-keys & feedback on menu short-cuts makes this version of Office great if you've never used a word-processor before. But if you've been using Word for similar products for 20 years, it's really a backward step. Also; the need to constantly be at the mouse (which makes touch typing almost impossible).
I assessed whether to move my company to Star Office back in 2004. Star Office is the closest thing I've seen to this UI. In 2004 I chose to stick with Office 2003 ... I would recommend the same today. Office 2007 is junk.
- 1.70 out of 10
1.70 out of 10