Why do some continue using Microsoft Office on Mac?

[MacBH928]

It's typically automatically exported/imported. People aren't manually editing cells with millions of rows.

The wrong entry is only wrong if it came out of the source data, and generally it isn't a case of "ruining the whole thing" any more than it is already incorrect inside the line of business app.

extracted from a database and then formulas/pivots are done on tables (though people often don't use the actual table feature so in practice a "table" is just a hardcode rectangular range of cells). However, it is still a very error-prone design.

So the ERP system can't do formulas and pivot tables like excel? I never used one.

Assuming someone imports the data correctly, it is still very easy to corrupt. Many years ago I was given a junior analyst to "fix" and one of their assignments was to analyze some data (de facto we used Excel). I couldn't figure out what they did to it. Best guess is they tried to sort the table but only included some of the columns in the sort so at that point the data looked like it went through a blender. Plus somehow the column totals were still off from the original in ways I couldn't figure out either...

Putting that aside, formulas typically have to be repeated for every row using a filldown logic. So instead of something like NewVar := OldVar1 + OldVar2 in real data analysis systems, one writes "=A1 + B1" in cell C1 (row 1, column 3) and then "fills down" (the 3rd column) letting Excel update the formulas as it goes along to "=A2 + B2", "=A3 + B3",.... Don't forget to get your cell anchor references right in more complex situations. And yes your formula for C25313 could accidently get corrupted to "=A25131+B25313" and Excel will happily chug away (it will flag such cell with a little mark though if you happen to notice while scrolling through it).

There are best practices to avoid the most common mistakes like the above and various new features designed to make it work better with "big data" but I go back to my thesis: the spreadsheet model is very error-prone design.

is there a way to make the source data/cells "immutable" so you can only analyse them but not alter them by mistake?

 

[throAU]

So the ERP system can't do formulas and pivot tables like excel? I never used one.

Different ERP solutions can do different things but no that’s not typically what they do.

And often the amounts department will run into a problem that needs a mass adjustment made based on some new law or business logic that can either be drive by hand in the ERP, or export a bunch of data to excel, run some code or a formula over it and then import the resulting transactions to fix the problem.

It’s a case (for example) of someone with a clue spending 1-2 hours in excel or waiting and paying for the ERP vendor trip respond to a ticket to fix, test, charge the company for an update and room through change management. And the pay run needs to happen in 8 hours.

People not involved in big business accounts really don’t understand just how janky some of this stuff is, and the level of in house accounting staff hacks using excel are happening every day so people get paid.

 

[throAU]

Typos above but can’t edit post due to forum errors

 

[AZhappyjack]

Still trying to understand why it matters to anyone else what software I run on my Macs. I use what works for me.

 

[drrich2]

Still trying to understand why it matters to anyone else what software I run on my Macs. I use what works for me.

It may be to determine the answer to the question 'What am I missing?'

It's a cliche' that you don't know what you don't know.

Some people who get a Mac that includes no-added-charge productivity app.s like Pages then see many Mac users seem to default to Microsoft Word for word processing, and it's natural to seek a better understanding of why that is.

It's pretty ubiquitous - you'll see it at work, on other's computers, etc...

You likely had to learn to use it anyway.

It's multi-platform so if at some future point you leave the Apple ecosystem, you won't have to learn a completely new word processor.

It's been around longer and many people were familiar with it before there WAS a Pages.

You can get a 'gray market' copy of Microsoft Office pretty cheaply after you dig into where to look, so you don't have to pay for a subscription or pay a large amount of money.

It integrates with other Microsoft app.s and shares some common interface elements with same.

It's 'industrial strength' if your need for advanced features extends beyond the typical home user's.

It's the de-facto document format for word processing files and what many people tend to assume you use, so sharing is easier.

Once people get enough posts to see what the reasons are, they can ponder whether those reasons matter to them.

 

[H2SO4]

Thats because you probably know your way around Office. When I first started using both, I found Apple Pages+Numbers much easier and I had to look up on how to do things much less.

I did actually mention that in my comment(s), however, consider this;
I was using Microsoft Windows LOOOONNNNNNNG before I used OSX, that is to say, I knew my way around it. Somehow I ended up on the Mac...................
Do you see where I'm going with this?

 

[Pecka]

I don't use MS Office but Numbers and Pages. The former I often find unintuitive and I have yet to figure some things out regarding formulas.

 

[jlc1978]

For software that all it does is calculate numbers, this sounds ironic that it can't do calculations right. Can't imagine how all businesses rely on it.

It's not just Excel but many spreadsheet programs de to the way the math is done behind the scenes.

So the ERP system can't do formulas and pivot tables like excel? I never used one.

That's not the issue, rather how the data is used. The ERP system provides the which then can be analyzed the way the user wants. For example, I did a porject where the client needed to know when a backlog of items would be elimintaed. It was pretty easy to run a SQL query to get the data on what was where in the process and then calculate a completion date. We also could make adjustments to staffing levels as we reviewed the data to ensure we hit our target date. Could we have written a SQL query to do the calculation? Maybe, but it would not have given us the same flexibility to assess the impact of add/removing staff from the project, charting various pieces of data, etc.

Also, as ThroAU points out, sometimes you need different calculations right now and can't wait for your (expensive) ERP vendor to make and test the changes.

is there a way to make the source data/cells "immutable" so you can only analyse them but not alter them by mistake?

Sure, you can lock cells.

Which can be useful. I once did the annual budget for my firm and used spreadsheets as the input from each department. Trusting soul I was, I sent them out with explicit instructions not to change anything; and of course one person decided he didn't like the layout and changed it. His boss was quite surprised when he discovered his department had asked for zero money for the next year. Yes, I had caught the obvious error but if you're to stupid to follow simple directions...

Still trying to understand why it matters to anyone else what software I run on my Macs. I use what works for me.

That's the key. If it works for you then it is the right software for you.

The only caveat I would add is it doesn't hurt to learn what other options are available because sometimes something that is hard in one package is easy in another.

 

[drrich2]

I don't use MS Office but Numbers and Pages. The former I often find unintuitive and I have yet to figure some things out regarding formulas.

Your mention of 'unintuitive' jogged a thought. Many people learned basic Microsoft Word use in a class or on a work computer (or a trial version installed on their new computer) early on, likely without thinking a lot about alternatives. If they stay at a fairly basic level of word processing the big majority of the time (as many of us do), it's 'intuitive' in the sense they're familiar with and know how to use it. Call it 'acquired intuitiveness.'

Now let's say for argument that Pages is more 'naturally intuitive,' in that if a large group of average home computer users somehow naive to either Word or Pages were split into 2 groups, each randomly assigned to Word or Pages, the average user would find Pages more intuitive to figure out and use than Word, with less learning curve. Does that matter?

Maybe not much. Because in the real world, that's not how most people come to the party, so to speak. How many people meeting Pages for the first time have never developed basic Word fluency? Yes, it's an unfair competition on these terms, but Life is not fair. It's not enough for Pages to be more naturally intuitive if pre-existing acquired intuitiveness with Word is fine. Many who'd like Pages better if they took time and effort to learn it won't (after all, people who value intuitiveness may not want to invest unnecessary time and effort).

 

[bzgnyc2]

A new paradigm for how spreadsheets do calculations would be nice, and to be fair you could do that in VBA; but we're stuck with a model that is basically the old paper and pencil way converted to a program. Much of our tools are similar as well because of their roots.

Agree the modern spreadsheet is just an ultra-souped up version of paper and pencil paradigm and a new paradigm is needed. The BI model -- basically everything is a pivot or something of a block of data -- seemed to be the successor although I think it doesn't quite meet all needs.

VBA in Excel is of course still a full programming language though it's also a weird hybrid. The sheet/grid is still the center of the model. Also very few people know it and often it is blocked for security reasons.

Of course, which is why error checking is a critical, but often overlooked part of a good design. Something as simple as when adding across columns like you are to get a sum , and then adding the results for a total, you can also add all the underlying columns, add those results and compare to the total to see if they match. Not fool proof but at least it's a layer of defense.

Yes and there are things like protecting ranges though I rarely see that used. Most people don't know about it and it takes a little trial and error to get the options just right. There are many other best practices that reduce the likelihood of errors but the variation in practice is quite large.

Excel is very errector set. It's extremely flexible but it takes a lot of effort to build something right.

 

[bzgnyc2]

So the ERP system can't do formulas and pivot tables like excel? I never used one.

They vary and I can't speak to the modern versions. In the past ERP basically sat a fancy interface on top of a database. They had some rudimentry reporting capabilities and then deferred to BI tools (e.g. CrystalReports, Cognos in the past, Tableau and PowerBI starting about 10-15 years ago). Things like PowerBI and Tableau allow all sorts of calculated fields and pivot tables though you really have to understand the data models and how to use the tool to get the right answers.

Nonetheless, a lot of what finance (etc) people need to do is ad-hoc calculations possibly including data from multiple sources using parameters determined externally. These things can be done with a properly setup data warehouse with Tableau/etc on top but it takes a bit more more expertise all the way around.

It's also hard to beat Excel (or things like it) for quick and dirty calculations. Where I still use Excel these days is when I get a small-to-medium sized dataset and just want to calculate some quick ratios or something. Basically it's like having a red pen and a calculator but faster. I can do that in seconds in many cases -- faster than it takes to load up a big app like Tableau not to mention going through all its import routines.

The larger picture is that Excel is rooted in self-service analytics for non-IT people (e.g. Finance) while a lot of these other tools are rooted in IT. So when people want new data loaded into the database, for a lot of organizations that's an intake process and analysts creating ETL specifications and such over months while Excel people just go File-> Open and get to work.

Tableau while not perfect is the best middle ground I've seen so far though still mostly better for report like things rather than ad-hoc analyses. On the flip side, I think recent versions of Excel have the ability to run data through Python. Then there are new frontier things like just uploading your data to OpenAI (or whatever) and making natural language queries against it (which it then translates into Python and calculates). Not quite sure the last approach is something I would do blindly for a calculation going into a financial report...

is there a way to make the source data/cells "immutable" so you can only analyse them but not alter them by mistake?

Yes you can protect cells though I rarely see that used. Most people don't know about it and it can take a little trial and error to get everything just right.

 

[MacBH928]

People not involved in big business accounts really don’t understand just how janky some of this stuff is, and the level of in house accounting staff hacks using excel are happening every day so people get paid.

I always imagined they are "professional" and super stable. After all the price of that software is scary. It scares me to know that my bank's software is "janky".

Your mention of 'unintuitive' jogged a thought. Many people learned basic Microsoft Word use in a class or on a work computer (or a trial version installed on their new computer) early on, likely without thinking a lot about alternatives. If they stay at a fairly basic level of word processing the big majority of the time (as many of us do), it's 'intuitive' in the sense they're familiar with and know how to use it. Call it 'acquired intuitiveness.'

Now let's say for argument that Pages is more 'naturally intuitive,' in that if a large group of average home computer users somehow naive to either Word or Pages were split into 2 groups, each randomly assigned to Word or Pages, the average user would find Pages more intuitive to figure out and use than Word, with less learning curve. Does that matter?

Maybe not much. Because in the real world, that's not how most people come to the party, so to speak. How many people meeting Pages for the first time have never developed basic Word fluency? Yes, it's an unfair competition on these terms, but Life is not fair. It's not enough for Pages to be more naturally intuitive if pre-existing acquired intuitiveness with Word is fine. Many who'd like Pages better if they took time and effort to learn it won't (after all, people who value intuitiveness may not want to invest unnecessary time and effort).

I am currently using both in tandem and Office seems very buggy and unstable. Yes it does do more but reminds me of Windows 98. "Janky" as throAU puts it. As a MacOS user, everything is rock stable for me.

 

[throAU]

I always imagined they are "professional" and super stable. After all the price of that software is scary. It scares me to know that my bank's software is "janky".

They're stable. Stability is absolutely nothing to do with it.

I'm referring to janky-ness in the accounting process to work around limitations.

They just aren't quick to get modified for ad-hoc accounting demands. Getting a change made to your ERP, or a custom screen, etc. is weeks of meetings, change management sign off, testing, etc.

Getting accounts to run some journal entries via existing import/export functionality is not.

That's where excel import/export comes in.

 

[jlc1978]

They just aren't quick to get modified for ad-hoc accounting demands. Getting a change made to your ERP, or a custom screen, etc. is weeks of meetings, change management sign off, testing, etc.

Getting accounts to run some journal entries via existing import/export functionality is not.

That's where excel import/export comes in.

It's not just accounting; any time you want to do some ad hoc data analysis or display, exporting the raw data to Excel and doing it there, as you point out, is much faster. From there you can paste the results in Word and write a summary for distribution. I created a whole 360 review process using Office and SurveyMonkey doing just that; in a fraction of the time it would have taken to get approval to buy a commercial product and for a lot less money. It was also tailored to the organization instead of a generic survey.

 

[HDFan]

Average consumer does not pay for Microsoft Office,

How so?

 

[H2SO4]

How so?

I would agree with the OPs point.
The average punter doesn't want to make the investment. I remember starting my business some years back. I learned a few things.
You need the tools to do the job. Yes you can have the tools you prefer but they might not actually be the ones you need.
This sentiment is what made me switch to Microsoft Office and Microsoft Windows. I use the Mac where I can because I prefer it but at times it's more trouble and less productive to choose the nicer way.
I had to decide whether it was worth it.

 

[MacBH928]

How so?

what do you mean how so? people are reluctant to pay and Apple gives them free software that will get the job done for 80-90% of the average user for free.

I was one of the people who almost never needed a use for Office and get by Apple suite and even LibreOffice.

 

[HDFan]

people are reluctant to pay and Apple gives them free software that will get the job done for 80-90% of the average user for free.

Reference to source documenting that more people use Apple software than Microsoft Word, Excel?

 

[upthetoffees]

Microsoft Office is their main trojan horse. All businesses use it

 

[bogdanw]

I’ve recently re-watched Steve Jobs: One Last Thing 2011

 

[throAU]

Yeah people seem to forget that without an infusion of cash from Microsoft and the continuation of MS office, apple most certainly would have died in the late 90s.

 

[jfreedle2]

I use MS Office at work, apples equivalents have different menus, functionality and such.
I also have an office 365 license that wife and kids use, so I have it installed on my macs.
i don’t have a need for the Apple apps...

I have switched to Apple iWork and no longer have a need for Microsoft Office (which has a vulnerability that Microsoft is less interested in fixing— how-multiple-vulnerabilities-in-microsoft-apps-for-macos-pave-the-way-to-stealing-permissions) even though my employer and school has standardized on Microsoft Office.

 

[MacBH928]

Reference to source documenting that more people use Apple software than Microsoft Word, Excel?

You want to convince me the average consumer will opt for the paid option over the free option? to quote the OP of the argument

Work.


Apple's own programs are fine, and free to Apple users. Average consumer does not pay for Microsoft Office, and they get excellent document-creation programs from Apple that enable them to do the things they do.

People who WORK, however, are only going to encounter office docs and sometimes Google docs in the work place. People who work get company paid for versions of Office. Plenty of other people will also pay for it in order to interact with documents they share or receive from others.

***

I’ve recently re-watched Steve Jobs: One Last Thing 2011
View attachment 2399574

I will never understand why Microsoft did this. Now it took away from them the ipod, music&video, mobile apps, ipad, and iphone market. Plus $115 million sounds like a chump change that they didn't need Bill Gates to give it to them. Now Apple probably spends like kind of money on emoji designers 😂😂

 

[bzgnyc2]

I will never understand why Microsoft did this. Now it took away from them the ipod, music&video, mobile apps, ipad, and iphone market. Plus $115 million sounds like a chump change that they didn't need Bill Gates to give it to them. Now Apple probably spends like kind of money on emoji designers 😂😂

I'm guessing to deflect anti-trust. As such at the time it seemed like a strategic investment -- even if they had to write down the whole $115 million in the future, it might give them more room to continue collecting billions on the Windows and Office franchise (along with various other adjacencies and tie-ins). At the time I am sure it seemed unimaginable to them that they'd be one day playing leapfrog for #1 in market cap.

 

[bradman83]

I will never understand why Microsoft did this. Now it took away from them the ipod, music&video, mobile apps, ipad, and iphone market. Plus $115 million sounds like a chump change that they didn't need Bill Gates to give it to them. Now Apple probably spends like kind of money on emoji designers 😂😂

Microsoft did it for several reasons:

1. To deflect and soothe concerns over Windows having an essential monopoly on the consumer and business desktop computer market. This was around the time that anti-trust regulators began sniffing around Microsoft for their dominance in that space.
2. Part of the agreement was that Apple was to drop all further legal action around their lawsuits arguing Microsoft copied the Mac OS look and feel.
3. Apple agreeing to make Internet Explorer the default browser on the Mac was a win for Microsoft over Netscape.
4. It was good PR for Microsoft during an era when they were perceived as a ruthless leviathan buying up and crushing their competition. (See The Simpson's well know Bill Gates "Buy 'em out!" scene)

Microsoft for their part made out extremely well. That $150 million cash infusion was in exchange for non-voting stock, which Microsoft sold between 2002-03 for $550 million. Microsoft likely knew that if Apple survived their nadir in 1997 that they'd get their investment back, which they did several times over.