To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
deathshadow,
"and at least those versions offered improvements over their predecessors -- today the new 'functionality' is usually stupid garbage like dicking with toolbar arrangement and skins."
Yep, often times things change for the sake of change rather than for the sake of improvement.
"Yeah... I'm digging out my Office 97 disk... just have to remember that it screws with UAC on Win7."
I happily used office 97 for a long time, nothing newer offered a compelling reason to upgrade. This was probably true for virtually all MSOffice users, but of course it always came down to compatibility problems forcing everyone to upgrade together.
Edit: As I recall, it was the last version of office which could be backed up and reinstalled by copying it's program files and wasn't dependent on an installer or the registry. Windows software maintenance was better in those days.
Edited 2013-02-09 07:04 UTC




Member since:
2005-07-12
Your #2 really drives home a point too - since just what the blue blazes is LibreOffice, OoO and even the latest iterations of Microsoft Office doing on startup that say... Office 97 or 2000 doesn't? Or is even needed?
It's really sad to be rocking a quad core 3ghz hyperthreaded system with 16 gigs of RAM, only to have a 'modern' office suite that does NOTHING I find useful or better end up taking longer to start and be harder to use than StarOffice, Lotus Smartsuite or Microsoft Office was on Windows 98 a decade and a half ago on a crappy K6/2-450 with only 64 megs of RAM... and at least those versions offered improvements over their predecessors -- today the new 'functionality' is usually stupid garbage like dicking with toolbar arrangement and skins.
Yeah... I'm digging out my Office 97 disk... just have to remember that it screws with UAC on Win7.