Is it worthwhile to upgrade Office 2000 to Office 2003?

Anyone have it? If so, what's worth the upgrade?

Hi Tim:

Speaking only for Excel, I don't believe that there are any huge differences
between 2000 and 2003. In fact, the general consensus seems to be that
there's more to dislike in 2003 than any previous version of Excel. This is
why I'm sticking with 2002, which IMO is not greatly different from 2000.
Just my $0.02, of course.

Regards,

Vasant


"Tim Zych" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> Anyone have it? If so, what's worth the upgrade?
>
>
>

Hi Vasant.

What's to dislike in Excel 2003?


"Vasant Nanavati" <vasantn *AT* aol *DOT* com> wrote in message
news:u%[email protected]...
> Hi Tim:
>
> Speaking only for Excel, I don't believe that there are any huge
differences
> between 2000 and 2003. In fact, the general consensus seems to be that
> there's more to dislike in 2003 than any previous version of Excel. This
is
> why I'm sticking with 2002, which IMO is not greatly different from 2000.
> Just my $0.02, of course.
>
> Regards,
>
> Vasant
>
>
> "Tim Zych" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:%[email protected]...
> > Anyone have it? If so, what's worth the upgrade?
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Hi Tim:

Again, this is second-hand information, but Help is even more abysmal than
in 2002. There is also some issue with task panes which I don't fully
understand, but people seem to hate it. A few MVPs that I know have
uninstalled 2003 and gone back to 2002.

John Walkenbach has some information on his site; I don't know if it's been
updated since he first wrote it:

http://j-walk.com/ss/excel/xl2003.htm

Hope this helps a bit.

Regards,

Vasant

"Tim Zych" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> Hi Vasant.
>
> What's to dislike in Excel 2003?
>
>
> "Vasant Nanavati" <vasantn *AT* aol *DOT* com> wrote in message
> news:u%[email protected]...
> > Hi Tim:
> >
> > Speaking only for Excel, I don't believe that there are any huge
> differences
> > between 2000 and 2003. In fact, the general consensus seems to be that
> > there's more to dislike in 2003 than any previous version of Excel. This
> is
> > why I'm sticking with 2002, which IMO is not greatly different from
2000.
> > Just my $0.02, of course.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Vasant
> >
> >
> > "Tim Zych" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:%[email protected]...
> > > Anyone have it? If so, what's worth the upgrade?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

thanks. Doesn't look very promising, sad to say.

Tim

"Vasant Nanavati" <vasantn *AT* aol *DOT* com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi Tim:
>
> Again, this is second-hand information, but Help is even more abysmal than
> in 2002. There is also some issue with task panes which I don't fully
> understand, but people seem to hate it. A few MVPs that I know have
> uninstalled 2003 and gone back to 2002.
>
> John Walkenbach has some information on his site; I don't know if it's
been
> updated since he first wrote it:
>
> http://j-walk.com/ss/excel/xl2003.htm
>
> Hope this helps a bit.
>
> Regards,
>
> Vasant
>
> "Tim Zych" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:%[email protected]...
> > Hi Vasant.
> >
> > What's to dislike in Excel 2003?
> >
> >
> > "Vasant Nanavati" <vasantn *AT* aol *DOT* com> wrote in message
> > news:u%[email protected]...
> > > Hi Tim:
> > >
> > > Speaking only for Excel, I don't believe that there are any huge
> > differences
> > > between 2000 and 2003. In fact, the general consensus seems to be that
> > > there's more to dislike in 2003 than any previous version of Excel.
This
> > is
> > > why I'm sticking with 2002, which IMO is not greatly different from
> 2000.
> > > Just my $0.02, of course.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Vasant
> > >
> > >
> > > "Tim Zych" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:%[email protected]...
> > > > Anyone have it? If so, what's worth the upgrade?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

"Tim Zych" <[email protected]> wrote...
>Anyone have it? If so, what's worth the upgrade?

The only real improvements to calculations have been in some of the stats
functions. If you don't use 'em, then nothing worth upgrading for calcs.
There are SmartTags, which some people may find useful. There are lots more
user options, but probably nothing worth upgrading there unless you want to
use right-to-left languages. Finally, there are colored worksheet tabs and
full pathnames in print headers and footers.

Tim,

One aspect that has changed is its integration with .Net, it is far more
comprehensive. Not my bag, but it is there.

--

HTH

RP
(remove nothere from the email address if mailing direct)


"Tim Zych" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> Anyone have it? If so, what's worth the upgrade?
>
>
>

I might be more of a casual user, but I don't see a big difference in
day-to-day stuff. Task panes and some other annoying "conveniences" have been
added that you will want to immediately turn off or disable - at least you
can disable them;

On the lighter side, a new printer driver does allow you to print Excel
directly to TIFF files. If converting your stuff to a graphical format is a
good thing, then that could be helpful. I have found though that MS has added
their own format (MDI) that is not compatible with Acrobat (at least as far
as I can tell). You can stick to the basic TIFF but then you lose color, so
graphs and charts won't look so good.

HTH.

"Tim Zych" wrote:

> Hi Vasant.
>
> What's to dislike in Excel 2003?
>
>
> "Vasant Nanavati" <vasantn *AT* aol *DOT* com> wrote in message
> news:u%[email protected]...
> > Hi Tim:
> >
> > Speaking only for Excel, I don't believe that there are any huge
> differences
> > between 2000 and 2003. In fact, the general consensus seems to be that
> > there's more to dislike in 2003 than any previous version of Excel. This
> is
> > why I'm sticking with 2002, which IMO is not greatly different from 2000.
> > Just my $0.02, of course.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Vasant
> >
> >
> > "Tim Zych" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:%[email protected]...
> > > Anyone have it? If so, what's worth the upgrade?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>

personally i like the way the function syntax displays as you type a
function (introduced in ver 2002) ...

--
Cheers
JulieD
check out www.hcts.net.au/tipsandtricks.htm
....well i'm working on it anyway
"Tim Zych" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> Anyone have it? If so, what's worth the upgrade?
>
>
>

JulieD wrote...
>personally i like the way the function syntax displays as you type a
>function (introduced in ver 2002) ...
....

But that begs the question whether the OP may not be better off finding
Office or Excel 2002 rather than 2003.