Third Office for Mac 2011 Beta Reveals New Icons, Splash Screens, more


Recommended Posts

Yeap. Although it isn't anywhere as bad as Transmission.

Transmission 2.0.4 is pretty snappy in regards to exiting from my experience.

Microsoft wouldn't know what fit and finish is even if it hit 'm in the face. The company is oblivious to detail.

It still isn't as bad as Apple and their refusal to add something as important as bibliographic functionality to iWork.

Transmission 2.0.4 is pretty snappy in regards to exiting from my experience.

That depends on now many files you download and how large they are. The quitting time deteriorates pretty fast.

It still isn't as bad as Apple and their refusal to add something as important as bibliographic functionality to iWork.

The way I see it iWork is still in its early stages. It's also aimed a different market. In a sense Office and iWork are a bit like Aperture and iPhoto. With the exception of Keynote, that application is amazing. But it's also the oldest one.

Microsoft wouldn't know what fit and finish is even if it hit 'm in the face. The company is oblivious to detail.

And so has Apple in the past few years, in both their hardware and software.

If Microsoft optimized their applications for a change they wouldn't need splash screens to keep us distracted while the thing is taking ages starting up.

They have splashscreens on many of their Windows applications. Splashscreens are often a nice touch.

They have splashscreens on many of their Windows applications. Splashscreens are often a nice touch.

True, and I'd sooner have a splash screen telling me what it is doing, whether it is loading or is hung because of a corrupt file or something - end users are click happy if they don't see something to show that there is activity hence the merits of having a splash screen with maybe some sort of progress bar to provide feedback.

Mail, Pages, Numbers and Keynote don't require a splash screen yet Outlook, Word, PowerPoint and Excel do?

Because Outlook, Word, PowerPoint and Excel are magnitudes more complex than the dinky toys Apple puts out. Start comparing the two when Apple implements some basic functionality like bibliographical functionality.

Word, Excel and Powerpoint load within a half second on my machine, and would load even faster without that splash screen. Maybe they should just give an option to disable it. I thought they used to do that?

Maybe for slower machines splash screens with progress text is handy, but it's not useful for me since it disappears before I can even read anything on it anyway.

Because Outlook, Word, PowerPoint and Excel are magnitudes more complex than the dinky toys Apple puts out. Start comparing the two when Apple implements some basic functionality like bibliographical functionality.

You clearly haven't used iWork.

You clearly haven't used iWork.

I have, and iWork doesn't have bibliographical functionality - and no I am not going to pay for a crappy third party application to do something that should be in the application itself. It is clear that YOU have never used iWork.

So just because Pages doesn't have bibliographical functionality, it's a dinky toy? Hmm...

Aside from that glaring exaggeration, I think you're over-estimating the number of people who actually use the bibliography functionality of Word. Most people just create their own Works Cited and do their own embedded citations.

So just because Pages doesn't have bibliographical functionality, it's a dinky toy? Hmm...

Aside from that glaring exaggeration, I think you're over-estimating the number of people who actually use the bibliography functionality of Word. Most people just create their own Works Cited and do their own embedded citations.

word does a GARBAGE job of bibliograhy. My professors would laugh at anyone who used their tool.

word doesn't a GARBAGE job of bibliograhy.

You sound like a corrupt mp3 stuck in a loop. Just because Pages lacks a very specific feature you obviously need doesn't mean the application itself is a dinky toy. At least Pages doesn't require you to launch a second major application to edit a simple piechart...

You sound like a corrupt mp3 stuck in a loop. Just because Pages lacks a very specific feature you obviously need doesn't mean the application itself is a dinky toy. At least Pages doesn't require you to launch a second major application just to edit a simple piechart...

suppose to be does**** caught me before i caught it myself ;)

:p

iWork is relatively young and you're right it lacks certain advanced features. However the applications are much better written dan the Office ones.

Because Outlook, Word, PowerPoint and Excel are magnitudes more complex than the dinky toys Apple puts out. Start comparing the two when Apple implements some basic functionality like bibliographical functionality.

And that has anything to do with launching times because...? Hell, when Microsoft put out Office 2008 Photoshop CS4 managed to launch faster than Word 2008. You don't see that happing with Word on Windows. Face it, Office on Mac OS X is still stuck in the Mac OS 9-era and performs as such.

:p

iWork is relatively young and you're right it lacks certain advanced features. However the applications are much better written dan the Office ones.

And that has anything to do with launching times because...? Hell, when Microsoft put out Office 2008 Photoshop CS4 managed to launch faster than Word 2008. You don't see that happing with Word on Windows. Face it, Office on Mac OS X is still stuck in the Mac OS 9-era and performs as such.

+1

You guys can bitch about Office when Apple gets iTunes and Quicktime on Windows right. Till then STFU.

If you want to go down that road, let's talk about Microsoft's other (former) applications on Mac OS X: Internet Explorer 5, Windows Media Player, Windows Media plugin for QuickTime and Messenger. Doesn't matter how you spin it, iTunes doesn't perform anywhere near as poor on Windows as the mentioned Microsoft applications on Mac OS X. Even QuickTime 7 Pro is pretty much feature complete on Windows compared to the Mac OS X version, we can't say the same about Messenger and Office on Mac. Also, iTunes is a free product.

Since no one in their right mind would use iTune unless they purchased an iPod or iPhone I don't consider iTunes free. I have never had any problem with Messenger on OS X, it's not "pretty" but it's never crashed on me.

I dont see people complaining about Adobe using splash screens or mentioning that fact it's got MANY more features than pages or the fact it's a business standard for a reason. If Pages was "just as good" then I'm sure companies would buy it for their Mac users because it's so much cheaper. Our company has an active ban on Keynote because we have had so many cases of a user making a presentation in Keynote then failing to convert it before giving it to others and then no one else can edit the presentation or even re-use it. 9 out of 10 times the only reason that Keynote looks more "pretty" than Powerpoint is that they assign a designer to make the Keynote presentation and when they want a Powerpoint presentation just just assign some assistant to do it. It's like complaining that a paint brush is total **** because I can't paint as good as Leonardo DiVinci.

iWork is useless to 80% of the world until PC users can edit/create files in iWork format. Until then its ONLY useful in companies that are all Mac.

Since no one in their right mind would use iTune unless they purchased an iPod or iPhone I don't consider iTunes free.

I must be crazy then. Even if I didn't have an iPhone or iPod, I would use iTunes.

I dont see people complaining about Adobe using splash screens

I complained. :p

or mentioning that fact it's got MANY more features than pages or the fact it's a business standard for a reason. If Pages was "just as good" then I'm sure companies would buy it for their Mac users because it's so much cheaper.

As you said with your company's Keynote policy, it has more to do with interoperability (and just a lack of education about the two products) than features. For a solo user, iWork works just as well as Office in most situations.

9 out of 10 times the only reason that Keynote looks more "pretty" than Powerpoint is that they assign a designer to make the Keynote presentation and when they want a Powerpoint presentation just just assign some assistant to do it. It's like complaining that a paint brush is total **** because I can't paint as good as Leonardo DiVinci.

If you gave an assistant PowerPoint and gave the same assistant Keynote, I'm betting that the Keynote presentation would still look better.

iWork is useless to 80% of the world until PC users can edit/create files in iWork format. Until then its ONLY useful in companies that are all Mac.

It's such a shame that iWork doesn't have Office document import and export capability. Oh wait...

It's such a shame that iWork doesn't have Office document import and export capability. Oh wait...

Still fail tho, I work in education and I will from time to time have a student bring in a .pages file that we can't open at all, as we have no macs on site so they have no choice but to go home and re-export the work, it just wastes people's time. All of which could be saved by Apple creating something like Microsoft have, i.e powerpoint/word viewer.

Still fail tho, I work in education and I will from time to time have a student bring in a .pages file that we can't open at all, as we have no macs on site so they have no choice but to go home and re-export the work, it just wastes people's time. All of which could be saved by Apple creating something like Microsoft have, i.e powerpoint/word viewer.

Or that student could've just exported a DOC file. You can't blame Apple because the kid didn't think before he saved the file.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Amazon Prime Day 2026: Best Dolby soundbar deals from Sony, Samsung, JBL, Polk, and more by Sayan Sen Yesterday we covered the JBL BAR 800 which is a 5.1.2 Dolby Atmos/Vision soundbar. The unit is on sale for its lowest ever price of just $800 making it a solid offer. However, there are many more options to choose from and in this article, we have made a compilation of the best deals including from Sony, Polk, Yamaha, Denon, Samsung and more. Sony's BAR models are currently at their lowest prices which makes them solid offerings. The company's BRAVIA Theatre Bar lineup is designed to suit different home cinema needs. The Bar 5 is an entry-level 3.1-channel soundbar with a wireless subwoofer, supporting Dolby Atmos®, DTS:X, S-Force PRO Front Surround, and Vertical Surround Engine for immersive audio with clear dialogue. The Bar 6 upgrades to a 3.1.2-channel configuration by adding dedicated up-firing speakers for more convincing overhead Atmos effects while retaining the wireless subwoofer. At the premium end, the Bar 7, Bar 8, and flagship Bar 9 are single-soundbar solutions featuring Sony’s 360 Spatial Sound Mapping technology, which creates phantom speakers for a wider surround field. Bar 7 includes nine speaker units, Bar 8 increases this to eleven, and Bar 9 offers thirteen speaker driver units promising the most expansive soundstage and acoustic performance. All models should integrate seamlessly with compatible BRAVIA TVs and support the BRAVIA Connect app for setup and control. Get them at the links below: Sony BRAVIA Theater Bar 9 Soundbar (HT-A9000): $998.00 (Amazon US) (Was: $1498) Sony BRAVIA Theater Bar 8 Soundbar (HT-A9000): $798.00 (Amazon US) (Was: $998) Sony BRAVIA Theater Bar 7 Soundbar (HT-A7100): $618.00 (Amazon US) (Was: $768) Sony BRAVIA Theater System 6: $548.00 | Sony BRAVIA Theater Bar 6: $448.00 Sony BRAVIA Theater Bar 5 (HT-B500): $278.00 (Amazon US) (Was: $348) Sony HT-S400 2.1 soundbar: $198.00 (Amazon US) (Was: $248) Aside from those, we also have more discounts including from Samsung, Polk Audio, and more: Samsung Q-Series Soundbar HW-QS90H 7.1.2: $797.99 (Amazon US) (Was: $998) Polk Audio Signa S4: $336.00 (Amazon US) (Was: $449) Hisense AX3120Q: $229.00 (Amazon US) (Was: $259) Check out more soundbar deals that you may like at this link. Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Stellarium 26.2 by Razvan Serea Stellarium is a free open source planetarium for your computer. It shows a realistic sky in 3D, just like what you see with the naked eye, binoculars or a telescope. It is being used in planetarium projectors. Just set your coordinates and go. Stellarium key features: Realistic simulation of the sky, sunrise and sunset Default catalogue of over 600,000 stars Downloadable additional catalogues for up to 210 million stars Catalog data for all New General Catalogue (NGC) objects Images of almost all Messier objects and the Milky Way Artistic illustrations for all 88 modern constellations More than a dozen different cultures with their constellations Solar and lunar eclipse simulation Photorealistic landscapes (more are available on the website) Scripting support with ECMAScript (a few demo scripts are included) Extendable with plug-ins: 8 plug-ins installed by default, including: artificial satellites plug-in (updated from an on-line TLE database) ocular simulation plug-in (shows how objects look like in a given ocular) Solar System editor plug-in (imports comet and asteroid data from the MPC) telescope control plug-in (Meade LX200 and Celestron NexStar compatible) The major changes of this version: Added new sky culture Added new plugin: Planes Many improvements in plugins Many improvements in Core and GUI Many updates in sky cultures. [full release notes] Download: Stellarium 26.2 (64-bit) | 456.0 MB (Open Source) View: Stellarium Home Page | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      418
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!