Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    71
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    Getting a new PC... should I install Office 2000 with updates or Office 2003 with updates (OS will be Windows 2000 Pro with SP2)? What are the advantages, if any, of Word/Excel/PPT in 2003 over 2000? Drawbacks? How downward compatible is Office 2003 with Office 2000 [work and husband's machines are still in Office 2000]?

    TIA,
    gg

  2. #2
    Super Moderator jscher2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, USA
    Posts
    23,112
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 93 Times in 89 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    PowerPoint had a lot of improvements in PPT 2002, not sure about 2003. The changes in Word were less profound in 2002; in 2003, the most interesting feature sounds like the improved way that form protection works. Either will get rid of some of the nasty metadata in the .DOC file, 'though you have to be careful not to add other metadata by using the change-tracking integration with Outlook. I don't use Excel enough to comment.

    You might stick with what you have and like (and can use most productively) until you either need a new feature (e.g., PowerPoint) or have another reason to upgrade (e.g., need to use same software as a colleague or client) or Microsoft stops issuing security fixes for Office 2000.

    Added: If you have a choice of OS, Windows XP Pro is nice, particularly if you switch the menus and animations back to the more spare Windows 2000 look.

  3. #3
    Uranium Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles Area, California, USA
    Posts
    7,453
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    Just to drive home one point. I haven't used Word 2002 or 2003, so I can't really compare. But I have noticed that every single new version has buried some of the more commonly used items. For someone who likes speed & doesn't need the new bells & whistles, you may find a new version slowing you down.
    My <img src=/S/2cents.gif border=0 alt=2cents width=15 height=15>

  4. #4
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Quedgeley, Gloucester, England
    Posts
    5,333
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    Ah for the days of the efficient WordStar
    <font face="Script MT Bold"><font color=blue><big><big>John</big></big></font color=blue></font face=script>

    Ita, esto, quidcumque...

  5. #5
    Uranium Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles Area, California, USA
    Posts
    7,453
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    Or erasable bond? <img src=/S/duck.gif border=0 alt=duck width=23 height=23>

  6. #6
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Renton, Washington, USA
    Posts
    12,560
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    Operating system Microsoft Windows

    Now running HP Pavilion a6528p, with Win7 64 Bit OS.

  7. #7
    Super Moderator jscher2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, USA
    Posts
    23,112
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 93 Times in 89 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    I think many people would say that WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS, although much more of a memory hog than WordPerfect 4.2, was the pinnacle of evolution in terms of word processing productivity. So you needed a four-color keyboard template to find all the different function key commands. Was that really any harder than Word's menu system? <img src=/S/laugh.gif border=0 alt=laugh width=15 height=15>

  8. #8
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    629
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    We've found some nice new features in Office 2003. Mostly in Outlook, which is a great upgrade from 2K, especially if you're connected to an Exchange server. Other features are nice, like the "tags" feature, and the easier, more logical way to stop Word from Auto-coorect stuff that it misunderstands.

    File formats are the same (except, I believe, for Access databases), so you shouldn't have any compatibility issues. If you have to buy one anyway, I would just go with 2003.

  9. #9
    Gold Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Sint Niklaas, Belgium
    Posts
    2,778
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    The file format for the pst file for Outlook is different from previous versions.
    But you can eventually export the new format to an older format.
    Francois

  10. #10
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Sacramento, California, USA
    Posts
    16,775
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    It was if you lost that keyboard template!! <img src=/S/yikes.gif border=0 alt=yikes width=15 height=15> Wordstar had a handy shortcut list at the bottom of the screen. And since it could produce an ASCII text file without any extra work, it was the text editor of choice for programmers for years. <img src=/S/grin.gif border=0 alt=grin width=15 height=15>
    Charlotte

  11. #11
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    629
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    That 's a good point. I do believe that one of the major changes in the pst format was the removal of the 2 Gig file size limit. Which was one of those things people didn't find out about until they were nearing the limit, and their files started to not open.

  12. #12
    Lounger
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Sierra Madre, California, USA
    Posts
    46
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    Oh my gosh - the changes from Word 2000 to Word 2002 were huge! There was an entire legal advisory board that prompted the changes in Word 2002. Any business that does intense documents (i.e. law firms) should be using 2002 or 2003. I've told all of my clients to upgrade, and have stopped supporting 2000, because the improvements are that big. For example, using "styles" in Word is so important for these people, and it is SO much easier to use in 2002 and 2003.

  13. #13
    Super Moderator jscher2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, USA
    Posts
    23,112
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 93 Times in 89 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    <img src=/S/smile.gif border=0 alt=smile width=15 height=15> One of the first things I did in 2002 was re-rig the menus and shortcuts to get the old Styles dialog back. <img src=/S/smile.gif border=0 alt=smile width=15 height=15>

  14. #14
    Uranium Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles Area, California, USA
    Posts
    7,453
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Office 2000 vs. 2003 (Office 2000)

    Hi Kris:
    One of the reasons I shied away from upgrading was all the problems I heard about styles in Word 2002 on (see e.g. the thread about <!post=...Evil Word char char Syles,338015>...Evil Word char char Syles<!/post>. But I'd like to hear the other side. Could you explain what settings or style methods you use that are easier in Word 2002?
    Thanks,

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •