Talk:Office 365/Archive 2

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1 Archive 2

Contribution by ConradS reverted

Hi.

This a notice that I have reverted ConradS's contributions to the article, in accordance to WP:BRD's method of registering my objection. (I am hoping you are seeing this, ConradS.) Updating an article is important, but there is no priority attached to it. We are an encyclopedia; we develop contents for the next 100 years. So, there is no reason render the article useless by downgrading its layout, violating MOS:STABILITY in process.

If you wish to update the article, please take your time and deliver a quality update. Reducing the article to a bulleted list with "yes" or "NO" entry in front of each bulleted item is not useful to anyone.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 01:31, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Update: Hi again. I am comparing ConradS's version to the old table version and now it seems there has been no updates at all. Only the format is changed (deteriorated) to one that resembles a Microsoft announcement and consumers plans (Home, Personal, Office Online) are removed. Sorry, but this is purely unacceptable. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 02:03, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Update 2: Hi again. It appears there has been minor new points after all, which I added to the table. A few "No" items in the table are now changed to "yes" and a new "Yammer Enterprise" item is added. However, I maintain that the original claim of "a clearly outdated version from 2011" is not accurate and dropping the three entire consumers plans (Home, Personal, Office Online) from the table as well as the new bulleted layout are unacceptable. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 16:48, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Changes to plan comparison table: Icons gone

Hi.

I've made changes to the plan comparison table. Mainly, {{Y}} and {{N}} are replaced with {{Yes}} and {{No}}, per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Icons § Inappropriate use. Just wanted to know what everyone thinks because ... well, huge changes can sometimes be controversial. Saying that I am open to discussion or negotiation in advance might ease any BRD challenges.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 11:05, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

What "app" implies

Hi.

I am a little concerned about the accuracy of a revert by ViperSnake151 which says '"App" implies "mobile" or "downsized"'.

I have two concerns:

  1. This would be correct if we take "app" to mean mobile app. We have web app (especially Office Web Apps which are part of the suite) and desktop apps.[1][2][3][4][5][6]
  2. Actually, I agree with mobile part and that was exactly my purpose. But "downsized" is wrong; clearly, anyone with iPhone knows that app updates as big as 0.55 GB are not uncommon.

Maybe I should add these to application software article, after some more research.

Refs
  1. ^ "Windows 8* Store vs Desktop App Development". Developer Zone. Intel. Retrieved 27 September 2014.
  2. ^ "Desktop App User Interface". MSDN. Microsoft. Retrieved 27 September 2014.
  3. ^ "Get the Desktop App for Battle.net Now!". Battle.net. Blizzard Entertainment. Retrieved 27 September 2014.
  4. ^ "Download Desktop App". Can You Run It?. System Requirements Lab. Retrieved 27 September 2014.
  5. ^ "Download Desktop Weather App for Windows". weather.com. Retrieved 27 September 2014.
  6. ^ "Desktop App". LogMeIn. LogMeIn, Inc. Retrieved 27 September 2014.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 10:22, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

"App" has a very specific context in Microsoft's software line. It refers to reduced functionality software designed for online or mobile devices. Unfortunately, Windows 8 went so far in its attempt to be everything at once (pun intended) that much of the operating system refers to any program, regardless of platform, as an "app". Wikipedia should reflect common usage of the word "app" and use it exclusively for mobile/reduced functionality software only per WP:ASTONISH. ViperSnake151  Talk  14:34, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Had, not has. It had a very specific context two years ago. As you can see from the sources, "desktop app" is now in common use. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 10:12, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
“app" might imply Applicable, Personal, and Portable, rather than only the abbreviation of APPlication. For the following reasons,
Applicable, yeah, app could not be system utilities, only provided for purpose of application.
Personal, app could not be copied onto other's computer or even another partition of this same HDD, tricks are exceptions.
Portable, no matter Windows 8 or Windows RT, no matter IA-32, x86-64 or ARM might potentially share the same app without worries.
OK, that is only my guess. Janagewen (talk) 12:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

VBA and Office 365

I added a section at the beginning to try and clarify what Office 365 actually is beyond the marketing hype. In particular I needed to know whether VBA is supported in "Office 365". The old article did not make that clear, so having done some research I added the paragraph.

It is certainly not perfect. But if somebody wants to change it then please address the VBA question cleanly. Tuntable (talk) 09:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Not perfect? It is self-contradictory, contradictory, wrong and badly written. So, yes, it is not perfect; it is lightyears away from perfect. It is a synthesis of published material to imply a new conclusion that is not mentioned by either of the sources.
Concerned,
Codename Lisa (talk) 09:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Your response is pretty generic. How exactly is it self contradictory, for example. But as I said before, my main issue is the VBA. Address that in a clean sentence anywhere in the article and I will be content. Tuntable (talk) 09:27, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Very well. I guess now that you are in a discussion, it doesn't matter whose revision gets to stay. Here is the details.
Our subject of the discussion is this paragraph:

There are essentially three different technologies that are called Office 356. The first is conventional client side applications that can store files in the cloud,[3]. The second is "Click to Run" applications which are essentially the same but can be installed automatically and asynchronously over the web.[4] The third is "Apps for Office" or "Office Online" which is a different lightweight HTML/JavaScript technology.[5] Only the first two can run Visual Basic for Applications(VBA) (There reports that Click to Run may not always be able to run VBA).[6][7]

Here are the problems:
  1. Contradictory: It says Office 365 is or consists of three different technologies. The rest of the article says Office 365 is a licensing model of software plus service. It specifically contradicts with Office 365 § Features.
  2. Self-contradictory: The three mentioned are not technologies. Client-side apps are software; Click-to-Run is a process; Office Online is again software.
  3. Verification failed: None of the sources even establish a link between these three and Office 365
  4. Wrong because of bias: First, you label the marketing model as "marketing hype" and then try to prove that it is best for Wikipedia not to write about a hype. Both accounts are wrong. It is okay for Wikipedia to report a hype if it is notable and a marketing models are not automatically hypes.
  5. Uses unreliable sources: Forums and other self-published source ([6] and [7]) are not reliable.
I'd like to invite other editors that are active in the computing area to this discussion: Jeh, ViperSnake151, Czarkoff, FleetCommand and AussieLegend.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 09:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Comment by uninvolved editor. Imho the disputed para doesn't belong in the lead in any case as the topic doesn't appear to be in the body of the article. See WP:LEAD (and WP:UNDUE). Also, the language and accuracy is crap. get rid. -Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 10:50, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
After reading Tuntable's revision, at least, I enrich my knowledge on Office 360. Yeah, I do agree with "It is certainly not perfect. But if somebody wants to change it then please address the VBA question cleanly." Thank you! Janagewen (talk) 11:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Nice sarcasm. :) Fleet Command (talk) 03:40, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
No, I do agree with Tuntable, he is excellent. And you, Fleet Command, you might have something wrong with understanding others and expressing yourself. Are you retired? Why are you so active always? What such a retired and inactive editor could have made me experience blocked for 24 hours? I do appreciate with you so much, and this is the nice sarcasm for you, Fleet Command. Janagewen (talk) 15:04, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Wait a second... did you say you were blocked? Fleet Command can't block you; he is not an admin.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 17:54, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

In addition to the concerns already raised, this material is inappropriate for the lead, mainly because the lead has to summarize content contained within the article proper. Rarely should a lead be used to introduce content that is not elaborated further in the body. It is also confusing, because the article already emphasizes that access to the main, desktop Office programs is included in the service, along with these additional hosted services. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:23, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I am not sure I understand what is "self-contradictory" but the quotation is so awful one does not have to split hair. I am going ahead and deleting it now. Fleet Command (talk) 03:28, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
    Oh, I see ViperSnake151 has done a through job of doing that already. Also, Tuntable, there is no second R in BRD, especially not with your attitude. You were edit warring. Fleet Command (talk) 03:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Fleet Command, have you actually read BRD? Do you know what the "D" stands for? Have you actually looked at the history? Did I revert or did I address the issues vaguely raised by my good friend Codename Lisa?
The big issue is that it is so much easier to destroy than to create. That is why that "D" is important. And was completely absent. Tuntable (talk) 05:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
@Tuntable: Your beautiful words are like lucrative decorations for a peerless mansion in a paradise but all you have instead is a heap of debris in the middle of a wasteland. It is easier to write patent-nonsense than to delete it and that's what you are doing. Fleet Command (talk) 23:01, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Plan changes on the 1 october 2014

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/business/office-365-business-premium-FX103037625.aspx It looks like access is not listed there. The removal of access is confirmed in the comments of that blog: http://blogs.office.com/2014/07/09/evolving-office-365-plans-for-small-and-midsized-businesses/ and there seems to be is a little known new plan ProPlus to combine with Business Essential to fill E3/E4 price gap http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/business/office-365-proplus-business-software-FX103213513.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.180.7.170 (talk) 18:57, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Expired Software, Read-Only Mode

Hi,

I just saw this FAQ and think it would be a valuable addition to this article, as it just fundamentally changed my perception of how useful this "subscribed" software would be over time[1]:

Q: What happens if my subscription ends and I haven’t renewed yet? A: If auto-renew is not enabled for your subscription, as the expiration date approaches, you will receive notifications in the Office applications and via email, alerting you to the upcoming expiration. If you choose to let your subscription expire, the Office software applications enter read-only mode, which means that you can view or print existing documents, but you can’t edit them or create new ones. To return to full Office functionality, you can purchase a new version of Office by visiting www.microsoftstore.com. You could also use Office Online for free for basic editing.

In fact, there's no mention anywhere in this article about expirations, which go hand-in-hand with subscriptions. Is that deliberate?

Any suggestions on where this information should go?

Zacharysyoung (talk) 16:24, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Office 365 Renewal". Microsoft Store. Microsoft. Retrieved 13 October 2015.
Hello, Zacharysyoung
No, it is not deliberate. Nobody noticed this before. Please, help yourself!
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 12:49, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 Done by ViperSnake151. — Codename Lisa (talk) 12:50, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I understand the edit of removing the entire FAQ bit and condensing the information into one line.
I do not understand, however, understand why the official Microsoft FAQ link was dropped in favor of a 3rd party explanation for the citation. Is it more reputable/veracious because it's another party?
(Oh, and if this is not the appropriate channel for this discussion, please point me to the correct one.)
Thanks,
Zacharysyoung (talk) 01:36, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello again, Zach
I'll answer your question first: It is the proper channel. The primary purpose of article talk pages is to discuss the changes to the article.
The reason for removing the FAQ reference is twofold: First, in Wikipedia, the word "official" is something of a taboo, in a manner of speaking. An official source is a primary source; hence our policy about primary, secondary and tertiary sources apply to it. ZDNet, on the other hand, is a secondary source, which per our policy, is more acceptable. Microsoft references are notoriously volatile. Microsoft recurrently deletes its webpages, even its blog posts every few years. Those that survive suffer from link rot.
In addition, I see ViperSnake151 has removed your direct quotation, which is again a good thing. The quotation is protected by copyright laws and Wikipedia has very stringent rules for treating non-free contents.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 23:29, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. I understand now.
I had read the guidelines for copyrighted material, but had not seen the NFCC. Looks like my usage went against at least points 2 and 3, and probably 5.
Thank you, again
Zacharysyoung (talk) 21:59, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Planner, Outlook Groups, Power BI, Video?

We need to work on adding these: https://blogs.office.com/2015/09/22/introducing-office-365-planner/ http://www.winbeta.org/news/office-365-planner-simple-highly-visual-way-organize-teamwork https://blogs.office.com/2015/01/28/first-look-new-power-bi-preview/ http://blogs.microsoft.com/?p=46713 http://www.windowscentral.com/outlook-groups-app-now-available-windows-10-mobile https://blogs.office.com/2012/10/16/sharepoint-public-websites-in-office-365/

Thanks, WikIan -(talk) 15:14, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Indeed. As I understand, Power BI was actually released in 2015 as a separate product, not just a function of Excel. New features have been added later, like embedding in websites in 2016. --Oop (talk) 09:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Outdated info

Hello.

As of today, 8 June 2017, information about Office 365 plans is wrong and outdated, and two of the key sources are dead. To prepare everyone for a re-write, here is a quick summary of status quo. As of today, Office 365 consists of the following places:

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 17:48, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2019

According to the use case approach, each collaboration tool suits a particular collaboration scenario.<ref="https://suyati.com/blog/3-simple-ways-for-choosing-the-right-office-365-tools-for-your-collaboration-needs/"></ref> Pawanmandav (talk) 06:45, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. - FlightTime (open channel) 06:47, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2019

add paragraph to the end of the Plans section to describe new "Microsoft 365" offering: Microsoft 365 is an integrated bundle of Windows 10, Office 365 and Enterprise Mobility plus Security. This is the evolution of the bundles formerly known as Secure Productive Enterprise E3 and E5. JudyDuke (talk) 01:22, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 01:23, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:22, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Office_365/Archive_2"