Office 2003: Should you upgrade?
Published: 10 Mar 2003 15:49 GMT
The beta kit's aforementioned 15 discs include a single disc holding Word, Excel, Outlook, PowerPoint, and Access, and individual CDs for FrontPage, Publisher, and two new apps, OneNote and InfoPath.
OneNote is a new note-taking application that seems mostly designed for use with Tablet PCs. It's not yet clear whether the program will be included with Office, sold separately, or given away. InfoPath is essentially a tool for building XML-based forms.
Installing all the client software onto my desktop took less than an hour; if the installation hadn't broken my copy of Microsoft MapPoint 2002, which I had to subsequently uninstall, the whole operation would have been almost glitch-free.
At first glance, the 2003 applications are not all that different feature-wise from their Office XP predecessors. Outlook seems the most changed, gaining a slightly different user interface in the process.
But there's more: the CDs also include Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition, Windows SharePoint Services, Windows SharePoint Portal Server 2.0, and Exchange Server 2003. There's also a separate disc for Outlook 2003 with Business Contact Manager, which is different from the stock version most everyone uses.
What these server discs enable, and what makes Office 2003 special, are the collaboration features. Based on Microsoft's SharePoint technology, the suite allows users to collaborate on documents and hold meetings in ways not easily possible before.
People familiar with the current crop of groupware -- things like Lotus Notes and the Groove Networks products -- might think that Office 2003 represents only baby steps in the direction of real group productivity, because it relies on Web-based work spaces for sharing documents and email to create a group experience.
Yet Office 2003 does a few things that neither Lotus nor Groove can: it works with the apps you already use, it doesn't require special client software, and, because it's closely integrated with your email, it won't force you to open a separate app to find out what your group is up to.
SharePoint has been available for some time now, tracing its roots back to (as I recall) Office 2000 Services. The technology creates small ad hoc Web sites for your shared projects, documents, and meetings. This online work space allows you to share documents, calendars, announcements, conduct polls, and do other things a group might want to do.
Because group members will vary in their commitment to the Office 2003 way of working, SharePoint uses email to notify members of new postings and changes, combining the best of Internet mailing lists and newsgroups with the flexibility and features offered by a Web site.
This short description really doesn't do SharePoint justice; you might want to visit Microsoft's SharePoint Web site yourself to learn more. But I've been following collaboration software for a long time, and this is the first time I've seen anything that might actually be widely implemented, because it manages to bridge the gap between committed and casual users. Thanks to the email notifications, I can be part of a SharePoint group without having to spend time actually thinking about it.
Of course, there's a price attached to this: you need to have a SharePoint server of some sort. (Alternatively, you can use SharePoint as an ISP-hosted service.) Right now, I don't think there's much reason for average users to upgrade to Office 2003 -- unless their IS departments are willing to set up SharePoint servers. Of course, I suspect many "outlaw" SharePoint servers will appear on corporate networks, so an uncooperative IS department may not be the end of the line for those wanting the collaboration features.
I'm in the process of setting up just such a server (albeit outside our corporate firewall); I'll report back on my experience. I'm also awaiting a new version of Microsoft Small Business Server, which could rapidly bring SharePoint services to smaller businesses.
So, at first blush, I really like Office 2003, even if it means buying into a "system." I'm a big believer in collaboration software and feel Microsoft has done a pretty good job of pitching groupware at a level many users might be willing to try. But because a new server is involved, and because I think it will take a fair amount of convincing to get corporations to buy in, I'm not sure how many of those users will get the chance to do so, at least anytime soon.
Let the editors know what you think in the Mailroom.
Previous
Did you find this article useful?
20 out of 38 people found this useful
Digg
Slashdot
Del.ici.ous
Stumble
Reddit
