Microsoft's Office XP: Is it a compelling upgrade?<\/p>\n
By Zatni Arbi<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): You must have heard a lot about it already:
\nMicrosoft has just launched the latest version of its Office
\nproductivity suite.<\/p>\n
Instead of giving it the name of Office 2002, the software
\nmaker everybody loves and hates at the same time has chosen the
\ntwo letters XP to distinguish it from the earlier versions,
\nOffice 97 and Office 2000. The name XP, according to Microsoft,
\nstands for experience -- a smarter work experience.<\/p>\n
There are two important things that need to be underscored
\nhere. First and foremost, Office XP is meant as a vehicle that will
\ntake users closer to Microsoft.NET, which is the gospel of networking
\nand computing according to Microsoft. As you may have also heard, this
\ncompany includes providing its software as utility that users have to
\npay for based on usage as part of its future plans.<\/p>\n
Secondly, Office XP is the road opener to the introduction
\nof Microsoft's next generation Windows XP, slated for an October
\nlaunch.<\/p>\n
Courtesy of PT Microsoft Indonesia, I was able to test run a
\n"Release Candidate 2" copy of Office XP. The installation ran
\nwell, although I had to click on the Ignore button quite a few
\ntimes as the files -- most of which were images and templates --
\nwere still unavailable on the Installation CD.<\/p>\n
The first thing that struck me was the leaner and cleaner
\ninterface. Office XP does not have the gray 3-D effects that we have
\ncome to expect from any Windows program. Personally, I like the new
\nface. The menu structure, however, remained more or less the same.<\/p>\n
One of the most significant new features of Office XP, as you
\nmust have heard, is the Smart Tags. This feature actually adds
\nmore functionality in Office's applications by allowing us to do
\na lot of things to an individual object, including a word, a
\ntitle, a date, an address, someone's name and other proper names.<\/p>\n
Let us say we type in someone's name on the document we
\nare working on. If it recognizes it, Word will automatically add the
\nSmart Tag, which will be indicated by the purple dotted underline.
\nPlace the mouse cursor over the object with the Smart Tag, and a
\nsquare with the "i" inside will appear. Click on the button, and we
\nwill get the optional menu.<\/p>\n
Using the menu, we can check the person's data such as phone
\nnumber, e-mail address and perhaps home address. Or, we can call
\nup our e-mail client software, which will then open a blank e-
\nmail form with his e-mail address already inserted. Or, we can
\nclick on another menu item that will launch Internet Explorer, which
\nwill then go straight to the Web site that provides all the
\ninformation about the person. In a way, Smart Tags consolidate many of
\nOffice's more intrusive commands and menus into a more accessible
\nmenu, allowing us to link a word in our Word document to information
\nresources both on the same computer, on the intranet and on the
\nInternet.<\/p>\n
Another example of the smart use of Smart Tag is when we
\ntype in "INTC" in Excel. Based on the option that we have chosen, the
\nSmart Tag will connect to Microsoft MoneyCentral Web site and then
\npull out the latest stock price of Intel Corporation. If you happen to
\nbe curious about it, INTC is the chipmaker's stock symbol.<\/p>\n
Certainly, there have been pros and cons about this
\npowerful feature of the new Office, which will later become even more
\npowerful when Windows XP has been rolled out. I guess we will not be
\nsurprised to see the arguments will erupt into allegations that
\nMicrosoft is, once again, trying to control the Web, as Smart Tags are
\nalso seen as the extension of its previous effort when it bundled the
\nInternet Explorer browser into the operating system.<\/p>\n
Proponents of the Smart Tags argue that we can disable
\nSmart Tags at any time if we choose and we can write our own.<\/p>\n
Other important new features include the speech and writing
\nrecognition capabilities. I have not yet tested them out, as I
\nwas not testing a complete version. Reports that I have read so far,
\nhowever, generally have lukewarm reception of Office XP's speech
\ncapability. Still, it is a step in the right direction.<\/p>\n
The new Task Panes also makes it easier for us to see what
\nactions we can take when
\nusing an Office application. Document recovery has also been improved,
\nso chances of losing our work should the power suddenly go out have
\nbeen further minimized.<\/p>\n
Office XP also features some welcome capabilities in the
\ncollaborative environment. Users can place their documents in Web
\nsites that support Microsoft's new SharePoint Team Services technology
\nfor document and activities sharing. This will enhance teamwork as
\nteam members work on their projects.<\/p>\n
If you think Office XP is for you, you will have to check your
\nmachine first. Unfortunately, Office XP will run only on Windows
\n98 or later.<\/p>\n
I ran the Office XP on an IBM Netvista X40i, which came
\npreinstalled with Windows Me and had 64 MB of RAM. A much longer
\ntime will be required before we can draw the final conclusion
\nabout Office XP. We certainly wish that there were competition in
\nthe Office and Suite arena.<\/p>\n
In other words, we would like very much to see WordPerfect and
\nWordPro improved and enriched in such a way as to provide us with
\nfeasible alternatives. However, for now, it still seems that XP
\nis, indeed, a must-have, particularly if you already use
\nMicrosoft Office. (zatni@cbn.net.id)<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/microsofts-office-xp-is-it-a-compelling-upgrade-1447899208",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}