Microsoft Office 2010 released to manufacturing

6. Interesting points ACM. MS need to release a new version every few years, otherwise it will quickly appear old. The trouble is though, that frankly MS Word 2002 is just as capable of creating a decent word document than I imagine MS Word 2010 will be.

I don't see Cloud Computing properly taking off until Wireless is free and everywhere. There are plenty of times I cannot get Internet access (and 3G/HSDPA is non-existent), with cloud computing this would mean I couldn't get access to my documents.

Whereas a combination of both I'd be able too.

People who say Open Office is a true competitor to MS Office, cannot be using Outlook. Open Office doesn't even have a PIM client. For Word Processing, spreadsheets etc.. it's fine though.

5. I have to agree with "Saildog". Open Office does the trick for me too.

Google docs is a great service too.

4. acm, try www.dropbox.com - not as much space but just as convenient!

3. Bradavon, I disagree. The future is cloud computing. As computers become more powerful and internet speeds increase, there will be more demand for heavier cloud applications. Photoshop in a cloud is obviously going way beyond realism at the moment. I think simple tasks like word processing are going to be increasingly carried out in a web browser. This could well be Microsoft's last attempt at a desktop version of Microsoft Word and perhaps a couple of other products from their suite. As far as I'm concerned, there is little difference between many of the 2010 products and the 2007 ones. How do Microsoft take a step forward? They concentrate on creating efficient cloud-based applications.

Microsoft rip off their customers time and time again by releasing new products when there's really no need. Why can't they provide an update with the new features for its customers? Many of whom have spent hundreds of pounds on a brand new Office Suite, which offers very little else than what they're already used to.

Going back to cloud applications though, I think you're right that a mixture of storing data on a desktop and a cloud will be the norm for now. Efficiency will always win over aesthetics, and if a program runs better on the desktop than on the cloud, people will use it. The day there is no difference will be the day people will change to cloud-only computing.

Storing files on the cloud makes much more sense to me than storing on a hard drive. Even now, I have all my work stored primarily on a 16GB memory flash drive, and only use my hard drive for backing up stuff. Why? Because when I move around to a different computer, I want to be able to access my work easily. I think many other people share that view. It is inevitable that eventually everything will be stored on servers, including the operating system. Our desktops will be web addresses. Everything we do and open will have a URL pointing to it. It will be great when that happens.

2. Hardly. Try looking for an equivalent application to Outlook. It doesn't exist.

The MS Office 2007 ribbon is miles easier to navigate around then menus with a million options. Those who say otherwise, probably haven't bothered to get used to it.

As to Cloud Computing. Great idea on paper, not in practise. Even Google are expecting their Chrome OS to be a secondary computer to a main one. Good luck trying to use Adobe Photoshop on a cloud based computer. I see the future being where both Cloud and Desktop storage is equally used.

1. Why bother? Open Office is free and compatible. Anyway we are all moving into the cloud and this model of updating MS latest beta of Office every few years for several hundred dollars is dead.