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

    • Qualcomm takes on NVIDIA with new Dragonfly CPU and AI chips by Pradeep Viswanathan Microsoft, Google, Amazon, AMD, Meta, Apple, OpenAI, and several others have been developing their own chips for AI infrastructure. However, NVIDIA still remains the dominant player in the market. Today, Qualcomm announced a major expansion of its data center infrastructure portfolio to better compete with NVIDIA. The new lineup includes the Qualcomm Dragonfly C1000 CPU, Qualcomm High Bandwidth Compute technology, the Dragonfly AI300 inference accelerator, new connectivity products, and custom silicon solutions. Qualcomm claims that this new lineup improves performance per watt, token throughput, and total cost of ownership for AI data centers. The Dragonfly C1000 is a new data center CPU built with Qualcomm’s custom Oryon cores. This chip will feature more than 250 cores, frequencies above 5GHz, and a chiplet-based design. Qualcomm claims that this new C1000 can deliver more than 2x better performance per watt compared to existing server CPU offerings based on specifications. The Dragonfly C1000 will support PCIe Gen 7 with more than 2TB/s of connectivity, along with CXL, advanced RAS features, and both air and liquid cooling. Qualcomm expects the Dragonfly C1000 to be commercially available in 2028. Additionally, Qualcomm and Meta announced a multi-year, multi-generation agreement under which Qualcomm will supply Dragonfly C1000 data center CPUs for Meta’s next-generation server fleet. Qualcomm also announced High Bandwidth Compute, a new near-memory computing architecture designed to address AI’s memory bandwidth bottleneck. HBC Gen 1 will debut with the Dragonfly AI250, which is expected to sample in mid-2027. The AI250 will deliver 133TB/s per card, an 18x increase in effective memory bandwidth compared to the AI200 with LPDDR5X. The new Dragonfly AI300 with HBC Gen 2 is a rack-level AI inference platform from Qualcomm. Qualcomm claims that the AI300 can deliver 4x to 8x better performance per watt compared to existing GPU-based architectures based on memory bandwidth per watt per card. The Dragonfly AI300 is expected to be available in 2028.
    • IBM reveals sub-1nm chip technology, production expected in another 5 years by Pradeep Viswanathan TSMC is now leading the chip manufacturing industry with its 2nm-class process node called N2. Samsung Foundry also has a 2nm-class process node called SF2. TSMC says N2 entered volume production in Q4 2025. Samsung says SF2 started mass production in 2025. Today, IBM announced the world’s first sub-1-nanometer chip technology, marking another major semiconductor research milestone. The new technology is based on a 0.7nm, or 7-angstrom, node and uses a new transistor architecture called “nanostack.” The new design vertically stacks and staggers nanosheet-based transistors so that more components can fit into the same chip area while also improving performance and power efficiency. IBM claims that this new sub-1nm chip can pack nearly 100 billion transistors onto a chip the size of a fingernail. This offers almost twice the density, up to 50 percent higher performance, or 70 percent better energy efficiency when compared to IBM's 2nm node design announced back in 2021. Also, IBM mentioned that this new architecture can deliver 40 percent SRAM scaling. It is important to consider that this announcement from IBM is a research milestone rather than a near-term process node launch. Back in 2021, IBM unveiled the world’s first 2nm chip design, claiming 50 billion transistors on a fingernail-sized chip and major performance and efficiency gains. Five years later, IBM’s 2nm technology has still not entered mainstream commercial production. That is because IBM is no longer a major commercial chip manufacturer. It sold its chip manufacturing business to GlobalFoundries years ago and has since then focused only on semiconductor research, IP development, and partnerships. To productize its 2-nm chip technology, IBM partnered with Japan’s Rapidus, but it has not resulted in anything shipping at scale. IBM says that its new sub-1nm technology can reach production as early as within the next five years. If that happens, it will likely depend on manufacturing partners, advanced EUV tooling, and years of yield improvements.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Meta Plast earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      455
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      135
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!