2003 is newer; both work about the same except Outlook 2003 is far better than Outlook XP.
2006-10-25 11:23:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Sir J 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I have genuine copies of each and use 2003 5 days a week, XP weekends and evenings for projects on my home PC. Very little in it, but I feel the newer suite (2003) is better.
Yes - Outlook 2003 is far better.
2006-10-25 11:24:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sorry haven't seen 2003, cannot imagine there would be that much difference. When i moved from 2M to xp it was just playing about.
2006-10-25 11:26:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by mrs mac 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not a lot of difference in either office XP or office 2003.
2003 is the latest I would go with that one
2006-10-25 12:20:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
2003.
But if the price is a problem try Open Office, its very similar and free.
http://www.openoffice.org
2006-10-25 12:01:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by sarah c 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I use 2000. Have used the newer versions at work, but would certainly not recommend forking out extra cash if you already have an earlier version.
If you are looking to buy one for the first time, go for a new version. If you already have an older version of Office, buy yourself something nice instead! There is so little in it in terms of functionality, it is hardly noticeable.
2006-10-25 11:34:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Nick E 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I got beta version of MS Office 2007, this is fantastic one. Totally different than any other older versions. It has new look, new interface, new design and everything new. I simply like the look. This is the best ever version of Office they have ever made. No other version is comparable to this Office 2007
2006-10-25 11:59:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by LemonPro 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
2003 is easily better but it is not worth purchasing if you have XP in my opinion.
2006-10-26 08:36:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Siu02rk 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I`d prefer 2003 is faster and easier.
2006-10-25 11:30:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by AMIGO DE LA WEB 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
2003 has better looks
2006-10-25 11:25:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by windy 1
·
0⤊
0⤋