Microsoft Office

**Doc M** · 12-15-2008, 08:46 PM

Ok, I have an issue and I'm turning to the geek squad here (just kidding!!). Anyway, I had to reformat my wife's computer because it was totally ****ed. I went out and bought Vista and during the course of that I erased the version of Microsoft Office I had on there. I had bought the upgrade to Office a few months ago and it obviously won't let me install that version.

Does anyone have a hacked version of Office that they can send me? I'm going to overwrite it with the Office upgrade I have but need the initial program to get started. All in all I need help because I don't want to go and buy another office program that I've already purchased twice! HELP!!

Doc M

**g0dsend** · 12-15-2008, 11:10 PM

sent ya a pm

**Kale** · 12-15-2008, 11:14 PM

serves your self right for going within 1000 miles of Vista

**Tock** · 12-15-2008, 11:52 PM

Ya, you have bigger problems now than losing Microsoft Office. My new laptop has Vista, and sheesh, it's as unstable as Windows 95 was.

But . . . rather than do something unethical, why not download StarOffice? It's free for the downloading, works pretty well (I've used the word processer and spreadsheet).
Look here:
http://openoffice-software.com/new/h...D=174185120522

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org
OpenOffice.org (OO.o or OOo), commonly known simply as OpenOffice, is a free cross-platform office application suite available for a number of different computer operating systems. It supports the ISO/IEC standard OpenDocument Format (ODF) for data interchange as its default file format, as well as Microsoft Office formats among others. As of November 2008[update], OpenOffice supports over 45 languages.[1]
OpenOffice.org was originally derived from StarOffice, an office suite developed by StarDivision and acquired by Sun Microsystems in August 1999. The source code of the suite was released in July 2000 with the aim of reducing the dominant market share of Microsoft Office by providing a free, open and high-quality alternative; later versions of StarOffice are based upon OpenOffice.org with additional proprietary components.
The project and software are informally referred to as OpenOffice, but this term is a trademark held by a company in the Netherlands co-founded by Wouter Hanegraaff and is also in use by Orange UK. [2], requiring the project to adopt OpenOffice.org as its formal name.[3]

**Doc M** · 12-16-2008, 01:16 PM

My cousin recommended OpenOffice too. I don't think it's unethical though considering I paid for the original office program and the office upgrade. My wife can't find the original disk anywhere which renders the upgrade worthless as well. Microsoft has such a strangle hold on all of these programs that if you lose the disk, you are basically screwed.

Doc M

**IM708** · 12-16-2008, 01:24 PM

Go to torrent website and download Office 2007 enterprise edition w/ keygen. Thats what I got on 4 computers right now never had a problem. I turned off option for them to observe me using it (wtf?) or w/e that option meant.

**Bryan2** · 12-17-2008, 02:28 PM

look on the side of the package it will give you al link to download a patch off of microsofts website for the upgrade to work

basically it uses microsoft works in order to upgrade and the newest version at least version 9 has to be installed for it to upgrade off of.

after you download that you will be able to install your upgrade version of office

**daem** · 12-18-2008, 04:15 AM

What kind of computer / specs do u have?

Seriously, 99% of the upgrade / functionality issues come from having a PC that is inadequate by modern standards.

If anyone mentions Apple in this thread, they deserve a beating.

**Warrior** · 12-18-2008, 04:54 AM

Apple!

**Warrior** · 12-18-2008, 04:56 AM

Originally Posted by Tock

Ya, you have bigger problems now than losing Microsoft Office. My new laptop has Vista, and sheesh, it's as unstable as Windows 95 was.

I'm running Vista 32-bit on my Mac laptop and Vista 64-bit on my desktop... both run great. But like daem mentioned, they're both full of new parts.

**T_Own** · 12-18-2008, 05:54 AM

Originally Posted by daem

What kind of computer / specs do u have?

Seriously, 99% of the upgrade / functionality issues come from having a PC that is inadequate by modern standards.

If anyone mentions Apple in this thread, they deserve a beating.

thats not true.. microsoft shouldn't make an os that takes 1gb ram overhead just to run a 3d wallpaper...

cpu's and gfx cards are so far ahead, the biggest problem is the TERRIBLE 64 bit support, and the 4gb ram ceiling on 32 bit. so ms needs to focus on 64 bit for windows 7 and just burn every vista disc so it can be seen from space

also, i hate open office and office 2k7. i like the layout of 2003 so much more, and i use none of the new features of 07

**IM708** · 12-18-2008, 05:18 PM

microsoft shouldn't make an os that takes 1gb ram overhead just to run a 3d wallpaper...

Thats a complaint that goes around alot. Yes there are thing MS can do to improve the amount of memory the OS uses BUT anytime we have had advances with anything related to computers it tends to require more memory, hd space, cpu & gpu power.

problem is the TERRIBLE 64 bit support

What would you be referring to? The only support issues I've ever had is with old outdated hardware/software.

and the 4gb ram ceiling on 32 bit

Thats nothing you can complain about, it's impossible to change that. 2^32=4,294,967,296 doesn't change no matter if you have a mac, linux, or pc.

**T_Own** · 12-18-2008, 07:49 PM

if they made a good 64 bit then it would be fine to use up so much system resources.

64 bit is terrible.. so many drivers are inadequate, benchmarks suffer across the board. its pretty clear that they still haven't decided to focus on 64 bit yet, although cpu's have been able to run 64 bit for like 6 years now

i'm not complaining about the ram limit, i'm saying that if they are going to use 25% of all the ram you can have they really need to move on to 64 bit. i don't know how you can argue that. probably 95% of people still use 32bit OSes.

**IM708** · 12-18-2008, 10:48 PM

64 bit is terrible.. so many drivers are inadequate, benchmarks suffer across the board. its pretty clear that they still haven't decided to focus on 64 bit yet, although cpu's have been able to run 64 bit for like 6 years now

Support for any relatively new software is usually poor. When it becomes the new norm then it will improve. I personally havn't had much of any problems with support besides trying to hook up 5+ year old tech to it, maybe it's because I have more knowledge of computers then your joe schmoes.

i'm not complaining about the ram limit, i'm saying that if they are going to use 25% of all the ram you can have they really need to move on to 64 bit. i don't know how you can argue that. probably 95% of people still use 32bit OSes.

That will eventually change. A lot of people still have old P4 processors which can't run 64 bit OS & is usually coupled with lousy outdated hardware. I definitely agree that people should use 64 bit vs 32 bit. If optimized then it will run faster than 32 bit and viruses won't be so rampant since it will require programmers to make make more complex code. I personally use 64 bit and love the 6 gb of RAM I got.

**quarry206** · 12-20-2008, 11:29 AM

When it comes to computers, no matter what your level is. get the computer that matches what you want to do. or you will have problems.. not saying people on this board, just saying in general. too many people buy the latest and greatest but its not what they need, so they don't know how to keep up with it. or buy software, supporting mildware, and hardware to make it run smooth.. computers are like a car. u have to know what goes in it, what you have. and you have to know when to do maintence.

i work in the computer field, my work computer has everything and every upgrade i could get. but my home laptop, is a gateway T-1628. paid all of 550 for it at bestbuy. because all its for is to play online and email my wife while i'm in iraq.

my point is don't be scared to tell the people at the corner that u don't need the extras if u truely don't need them. because it might end up setting you back.

T own had a good point. 2k7 might have alot of great features, but why oh why spend the money on the upgrade if 2k3 is all u need.. just like RAM for MOST, not all, people the different between 2gb and 3gb of RAM is not noticeable at all. and the extra $250 dollars to change your processor from 2ghz to 2.4ghz is also not noticeable to 90% of people.

last example, my old desk top (got it in 2004) dell 2600 1.33ghz processor, 1.25GB RAM still running XP.. my dad now uses it for internet surfing and music. and he can still download porn just as fast as everybody else.. haha

**T_Own** · 12-25-2008, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by ironmaiden708

Support for any relatively new software is usually poor. When it becomes the new norm then it will improve. I personally havn't had much of any problems with support besides trying to hook up 5+ year old tech to it, maybe it's because I have more knowledge of computers then your joe schmoes.

That will eventually change. A lot of people still have old P4 processors which can't run 64 bit OS & is usually coupled with lousy outdated hardware. I definitely agree that people should use 64 bit vs 32 bit. If optimized then it will run faster than 32 bit and viruses won't be so rampant since it will require programmers to make make more complex code. I personally use 64 bit and love the 6 gb of RAM I got.

yes, it usually is subpar, but not as bad as vista. they are already hurrying out windows 7 or vienna to cover up awful vista. i know it is true people think their ancient p4s that run at 3.0 can handle vista just because the box says you only need a 2.0 (or w.e it is) its not hard to know more about computers than most people, but thats one of my strong spots.

i know the p4s are ancient, i built myself a new comp with a c2d e5200 (2.5 stock, OCed to 4.0) but besides the clock speeds, the instruction efficiency is more than double that of a pentium i think. something outrageous.

quarry, you are right. i leave my good comp at my apartment when i come home and just use my normal desktop here. its nothing great, but it does have a 3.0 pentium d which is slightly better than the p4s and it gets the job done. i'm considering buying a netbook just so i can carry it around and browse where ever, although they are far from powerful.

those little increments you mentioned aren't much if they are in the same family, but 2gb ddr compared to 3x1gb ddr3 with the triple channel and the new IQC is a monstrous difference. same with a 2.0 pentium (or celeron lol) compared to a 2.4 core i7. worlds apart