Text 5952, 500 rader
Skriven 2005-07-13 00:00:38 av Rich (1:379/45)
Kommentar till en text av Geo (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Continuing Microsoft Office improvements
====================================================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C5873D.E6A5D670
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Because it doesn't affect their satisfaction with the old version. =
It would affect a value decision on whether to make a purchase but that = is
independent.
Rich
"Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message news:42d470d8@w3.nls.net...
Why not price? If upgrades were free a lot more might not be satisfied =
with the old version.
Geo.
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:42d3eb2b@w3.nls.net...
Looking at the new version, yes. Price, no.
Rich
"Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message =
news:42d3a774@w3.nls.net...
I think for this discussion satisfied should mean after looking at =
the new version and the price they decide not to upgrade. Because if I = try to
look at it like below, then I'm not satisfied because I want = activation
removed so I can upgrade for no reason but to run the current = version.
Geo.
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:42d34417@w3.nls.net...
You have to be careful how you judge whether someone is =
satisfied. gary didn't do so and I didn't question him on it because = his
claim is clearly made up.
Anyway, whether someone is satisfied can depend on whether =
the he is aware that something better is available. I'll use my father =
again. He has it in his mind that he needs a faster computer. His = current
computer is faster than his previous one which is faster than = the one before
that. He knows that faster computers are available and I = believe it is
because of that that his satisfaction with his current one = has decreased.
I'll give another example. A good friend of mine has = been watching TV for
around 40 years. Was he satisfied by his TV, yep. = Then he got a tivo. He
is no longer satisfied by a TV without a PVR. = In both cases, the user has
something good enough and in both cases the = user is no longer satisfied by
what he had before once he knows what he = is missing.
Rich
"Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message =
news:42d335f8$1@w3.nls.net...
I don't know if I'd be satisfied with that version since I =
didn't start using office until Office 97. However I'm completely = satisfied
using Qpro version 5 from 1993 so I don't see why I should = consider his
statement false simply because I don't have a version that = old.
For me it's not a question of which version was good enough, I =
like to keep current so the question is at which version does or did it =
become unacceptable. Typically becoming unacceptable is why I stop = upgrading
a product.
Geo.
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:42d32432@w3.nls.net...
Irrelevant question and you fail to fall ib gary's bogus =
95% unless you would be satisfied with Office 5.0 for Windows 3.1.
Rich
"Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message =
news:42d30077$1@w3.nls.net...
Ok time for a survey.
I run Office 2000, what versions do the rest of you run?
Geo.
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:42d29689@w3.nls.net...
If you truly expect 95% than I believe you are full =
of it and just making up junk to sound as if you know something. Use = "some"
if you mean some.
Rich
"Gary Britt" <zotu@nospamforme.com> wrote in message =
news:42d292af$1@w3.nls.net...
I never said it wasn't. What is it about the =
definition of the words "I
Suspect" that seem to so trouble your reading =
comprehension. Quit being
such a touchy ass about this. Its not my fault nobody =
wants to upgrade
their MS Office software.
Your employer needs to build a business model that =
doesn't rely upon full
cost monopoly priced upgrades of products every 9 =
months. That isn't my
fault either. Eventually, people say "wait a minute", =
again not my fault.
I guess Microsoft could get lots of office upgrades if =
they just make
Longhorn incompatible with every version of MS Office =
except <FILL IN NAME
OF VERSION HERE>.
Gary
"Rich" <@> wrote in message =
news:42d28167@w3.nls.net...
And I still think you have no clue. The 95% you =
keep claiming is a
number you pulled out of thin air.
Rich
"Gary Britt" <zotu@nospamforme.com> wrote in message
news:42d265b2$1@w3.nls.net...
You are right that my perspective does not extend =
outside the USA.
I never said there weren't *improvements* from =
Office 5.0 to the later
versions. I am saying those *improvements* are =
meaningless to 95% of the
market, and in MANY or MOST situations those =
*improvements* are offset by
dis-incentives and negative changes that are more =
negative than the
improvements are positive.
I like office 2000, have no plans to go above office =
2000. Truth is, I
could easily stayed with Office 5. I suspect that =
truth holds for 95% of
the market within my perspective.
Gary
"Rich" <@> wrote in message =
news:42d1b1ad$1@w3.nls.net...
95% what market? You surely do not mean people =
that speak many
non-Western languages because Unicode support did =
not appear until Office
97
and support for more languages and better support =
for existing ones
continued to improve with successive releases. With =
your broad brush you
are discounting a great deal of the people on this =
planet. Far more than
5%. Western European language speaker are the =
minority. Even you would
have to be blind to not see the clear improvements =
between Office 5.0 or
even Office 95 and Office 2000.
I suspect you have no clue what the improvements =
are in the two
releases
since the one you use. If I'm wrong feel free to =
tell us all which Office
2003 applications you use and what differences you =
perceived.
Rich
"Gary Britt" <zotu@nospamforme.com> wrote in =
message
news:42d194f6$1@w3.nls.net...
The truth be told, Office for Win95 and Office 5.0 =
for Win3.1 was good
enough for 95% of the market.
I've stayed at the Office 2K level with no =
intention on the horizon of
going
higher.
Gary
------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C5873D.E6A5D670
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Because it doesn't affect =
their=20
satisfaction with the old version. It would affect a value = decision
on=20
whether to make a purchase but that is independent.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Geo" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> wrote=20
in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d470d8@w3.nls.net">news:42d470d8@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Why not price? If upgrades were free =
a lot more=20
might not be satisfied with the old version.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Geo.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d3eb2b@w3.nls.net">news:42d3eb2b@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Looking at the =
new version,=20
yes. Price, no.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Geo" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d3a774@w3.nls.net">news:42d3a774@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I think for this discussion =
satisfied should=20
mean after looking at the new version and the price they decide =
not to=20
upgrade. Because if I try to look at it like below, then I'm not =
satisfied=20
because I want activation removed so I can upgrade for no reason =
but to=20
run the current version.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Geo.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d34417@w3.nls.net">news:42d34417@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> You have to be =
careful how you=20
judge whether someone is satisfied. gary didn't do so and =
I didn't=20
question him on it because his claim is clearly made =
up.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Anyway, whether =
someone is=20
satisfied can depend on whether the he is aware that something =
better is=20
available. I'll use my father again. He has it in =
his mind=20
that he needs a faster computer. His current computer is =
faster=20
than his previous one which is faster than the one before =
that. He=20
knows that faster computers are available and I believe it is =
because of=20
that that his satisfaction with his current one has =
decreased. =20
I'll give another example. A good friend of mine has been =
watching=20
TV for around 40 years. Was he satisfied by his TV, =
yep. =20
Then he got a tivo. He is no longer satisfied by a TV =
without a=20
PVR. In both cases, the user has something good enough and =
in both=20
cases the user is no longer satisfied by what he had before once =
he knows what he is missing.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Geo" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> wrote =
in message=20
<A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d335f8$1@w3.nls.net">news:42d335f8$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I don't know if I'd be =
satisfied with=20
that version since I didn't start using office until Office =
97.=20
However I'm completely satisfied using Qpro version 5 from =
1993 so I=20
don't see why I should consider his statement false simply =
because I=20
don't have a version that old.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>For me it's not a question of =
which=20
version was good enough, I like to keep current so the =
question is at=20
which version does or did it become unacceptable. Typically =
becoming=20
unacceptable is why I stop upgrading a product.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Geo.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d32432@w3.nls.net">news:42d32432@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Irrelevant =
question and=20
you fail to fall ib gary's bogus 95% unless you would be =
satisfied=20
with Office 5.0 for Windows 3.1.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Geo" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> =
wrote in=20
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d30077$1@w3.nls.net">news:42d30077$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ok time for a =
survey.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I run Office 2000, what =
versions do=20
the rest of you run?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Geo.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d29689@w3.nls.net">news:42d29689@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> If you =
truly expect=20
95% than I believe you are full of it and just making up =
junk to=20
sound as if you know something. Use "some" if you =
mean=20
some.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Gary Britt" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:zotu@nospamforme.com">zotu@nospamforme.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d292af$1@w3.nls.net">news:42d292af$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>I=20
never said it wasn't. What is it about the =
definition of=20
the words "I<BR>Suspect" that seem to so trouble your =
reading=20
comprehension. Quit being<BR>such a touchy ass =
about=20
this. Its not my fault nobody wants to =
upgrade<BR>their=20
MS Office software.<BR><BR>Your employer needs to =
build a=20
business model that doesn't rely upon full<BR>cost =
monopoly=20
priced upgrades of products every 9 months. That =
isn't=20
my<BR>fault either. Eventually, people say "wait =
a=20
minute", again not my fault.<BR><BR>I guess Microsoft =
could=20
get lots of office upgrades if they just =
make<BR>Longhorn=20
incompatible with every version of MS Office except =
<FILL=20
IN NAME<BR>OF VERSION =
HERE>.<BR><BR>Gary<BR><BR>"Rich"=20
<@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d28167@w3.nls.net">news:42d28167@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>&nbs=
p; =20
And I still think you have no clue. The 95% you =
keep=20
claiming is a<BR>number you pulled out of thin=20
air.<BR><BR>Rich<BR><BR> "Gary Britt" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:zotu@nospamforme.com">zotu@nospamforme.com</A>>=20
wrote in message<BR><A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d265b2$1@w3.nls.net">news:42d265b2$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
=20
You are right that my perspective does not extend =
outside the=20
USA.<BR><BR> I never said there weren't =
*improvements*=20
from Office 5.0 to the later<BR> versions. =
I am=20
saying those *improvements* are meaningless to 95% of=20
the<BR> market, and in MANY or MOST situations =
those=20
*improvements* are offset by<BR> dis-incentives =
and=20
negative changes that are more negative than =
the<BR> =20
improvements are positive.<BR><BR> I like office =
2000,=20
have no plans to go above office 2000. Truth is, =
I<BR> could easily stayed with Office 5. I =
suspect=20
that truth holds for 95% of<BR> the market =
within my=20
perspective.<BR><BR> Gary<BR><BR> "Rich" =
<@>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d1b1ad$1@w3.nls.net">news:42d1b1ad$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
=20
95% what market? You surely do not mean people =
that=20
speak many<BR> non-Western languages because =
Unicode=20
support did not appear until Office<BR>97<BR> =
and=20
support for more languages and better support for =
existing=20
ones<BR> continued to improve with successive=20
releases. With your broad brush you<BR> =
are=20
discounting a great deal of the people on this =
planet. =20
Far more than<BR> 5%. Western European =
language=20
speaker are the minority. Even you =
would<BR> have=20
to be blind to not see the clear improvements between =
Office=20
5.0 or<BR> even Office 95 and Office=20
2000.<BR><BR> I suspect you =
have no=20
clue what the improvements are in the=20
two<BR>releases<BR> since the one you use. =
If I'm=20
wrong feel free to tell us all which Office<BR> =
2003=20
applications you use and what differences you=20
perceived.<BR><BR> =
Rich<BR><BR> "Gary=20
Britt" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:zotu@nospamforme.com">zotu@nospamforme.com</A>>=20
wrote in message<BR> <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42d194f6$1@w3.nls.net">news:42d194f6$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
=20
The truth be told, Office for Win95 and Office 5.0 for =
Win3.1=20
was good<BR> enough for 95% of the=20
market.<BR><BR> I've stayed at the =
Office 2K=20
level with no intention on the horizon of<BR> =20
going<BR> =
higher.<BR><BR> =20
=
Gary<BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLO=
CKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML=
>
------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C5873D.E6A5D670--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|