Template talk:Microsoft 365

Untitled
Isn't Office Live Meeting is missing from this list? --Pinnecco 10:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Bold italics for major apps
Bold italics look ugly and badly rendered...any ideas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.147.174 (talk) 06:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

OneNote
I do not believe Onenote is a core application. OneNote is only in Student edition and in Enterprise/Ultimate. OneNote does not have the ribbon, used in core applications. I have removed bold italics from OneNote. If anyone wants to override me, please do so. -- Whiteandnerdy111 (talk) 22:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It is also not a mature app. Introduced only in 2003 and was not present in any SKU in 2003. Besides, note-taking using a specialized app is not that major an activity as word processing, email, spreadsheets etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.147.147 (talk) 14:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

WordArt
I've moved WordArt from "Discontinued" to "Tools and Technologies" since WordArt is very much alive and well in Office 2007: http://www.uwec.edu/Help/Office07/wordart-w.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by W3bbo (talk • contribs) 18:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Microsoft Delve
¿Could Microsoft Delve already be added to the list or should we wait until it's more mature ah? Sincerely, --Namlong618 (talk) 16:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Power BI
Would Microsoft Power BI be considered part of Microsoft Office? Daylen (talk) 02:09, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, Daylen.
 * No. Power BI is not showing any evidence of being part of Microsoft Office.


 * Please note that Microsoft produces almost strictly business software, but not all of them are part of Microsoft Office family. For example, Dynamics, System Center, SQL Server, or Visual Studio.


 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 10:38, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Office 365 placement
No, that's not some ad attempt, but merely for better navigation. LOL.

I think the way the template is presented currently doesn't make Office 365 stand out and communicate what type of product it's about.

Currently, the template places the same office product in multiple rows; yet, a subscription product such as Office 365, different from the other fixed price software, doesn't get its own category and row.

The current text link is simply placed under another heading on the far left, and in parenthesis, as if it's not a proper product. I'm sure people can easily miss it. For me, I nearly missed it.

You're saying the hypothetical scenario where people viewing Wiki template and thought "Oh that's so unduly conspicuous...how dare they put Office 365 in its own category and row." I think that's very unlikely. In addition, I don't think Office 365 will likely be the only subscription product ever released.

However, I don't have a strong opinion on this as this is merely navigation. If you feel the original is fine as it is, then go for it. --Zzzplayer (talk) 15:15, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello,
 * Wikipedia and Microsoft have different focuses, sometimes conflicting ones. Microsoft makes money. We educate. And we have a WP:NOTPRICES too. (It doesn't apply here; I just wanted to show we have conflicting policies.) The problem is that Office 365 is just a licensing scheme. There is not much to read in its article and it has no existence other than the apps that are sold under that title. It is unlike, say, Microsoft Office 2016, which is a tangible collections of apps.
 * Then, your wording was problematic too. "Subscription Service", aside from being improperly capitalized, is recursively wrong. A subscription is always a service too, unless you are talking about a service that finds you subscriptions. Then you make it even more incorrect and nonsensical by adding "cross-platform"! Only software can be "cross-platform", not services. Now, you might argue that you strictly mean the Office 365 Dashboard, which is a web app. (Again, a web app is not cross-platform; its platform is the Web.) In that case, you should put that in the Applications → Online category, which is already present.
 * Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 05:57, 5 February 2018 (UTC)