Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 5th Mar 2015 19:52 UTC

It's slowly approaching five years since Microsoft first released Office for Mac 2011 in October 2010. While a final version of Office 2016 for Mac isn't ready just yet, Microsoft is announcing a preview program today for Mac users to get an early look at the company's work. Microsoft has been doing some great work with Office, bringing it to the iPad, extending it to Dropbox, and even acquiring impressive apps like Acompli to power Office on iOS and Android. Office 2016 for Mac is the latest result of Microsoft's focus on cross-platform apps, and it finally matches its Windows equivalent.

Considering Office is the primary tool for my work - and thus, my livelihood depends on it - I recently jumped from Office 2011 to Office 2013. However, I decided to not buy the traditional software package, opting for an Office 365 subscription instead. For €99 a year, you get the full Office 2013 suite, and you can install it on 5 PCs and 5 tablets/phones. So, as a heavy user, I'm very glad Office for Mac is finally getting a new version. For us Office 365 subscribers - we get this new version "for free".

Now that I've made the jump to Office as a subscription, I wonder how I ever did without.

Thread beginning with comment 606496
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The size of this thing
by ins0mniac on Fri 6th Mar 2015 22:27 UTC
Member since:

The download package has 2.5GB. It needs 5.2GB of drive space to install. Really, how much new content or functionality could it add over Office 2011 which "only" needs 1.25GB. Turns out it doesn't, it's a simple case of indolence, or plain stupidity as it simply wastes about 3.3GB of data in redundant copies of the same files. The Microsoft fonts (500MB) are copied 3 times, once for Word, Excel and PowerPoint. The proofing tools (285MB) and the frameworks (about 300MB) are each copied 5 (FIVE) times, once for each of the afore mentioned apps plus OneNote and Outlook.
This is an incredible waste of bandwidth and disrespect toward the users. Hopefully they'll fix this in the next releases, because otherwise Office is still the best office suite by a large margin.

Reply Score: 1

RE: The size of this thing
by Ford Prefect on Sat 7th Mar 2015 00:01 in reply to "The size of this thing"
Ford Prefect Member since:

Let's save some space and convert that into hardlinks. Ooops, Windows.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE: The size of this thing
by Drumhellar on Sat 7th Mar 2015 19:35 in reply to "The size of this thing"
Drumhellar Member since:

I'm surprised Microsoft isn't utilizing hard links. They use it extensively in Windows.

I found a perl script that looks for identical files in a given list of directories, and links them together via hard links. It brought the size down by more than half, from 5.4GB to 2.3GB

(if you're interested, it's right here: )

Can anybody with the previous version of Office check to see if it uses hotlinks?

Running find . -type f \! -links 1 from the console should work, after cd'ing to one of the application directories

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: The size of this thing
by ins0mniac on Sat 7th Mar 2015 19:51 in reply to "RE: The size of this thing"
ins0mniac Member since:

Thank you for sharing the script, HDDs might be cheap but SSDs still aren't so I could really use those 3.2GB Microsoft was wasting me.

They don't seem to be using links in 2011 either, but at least they had the common sense to put shared files in an "Office" folder and the applications folders only have about 30-50MB.

Reply Parent Score: 1