Be the first to like this
Many enterprises currently face the daunting task of migrating to Microsoft Ofﬁce 2010. The need to do so is prompted by Microsoft’s plans to sunset Ofﬁce 2003, a version that many enterprises stayed with in lieu of migrating to Ofﬁce 2007. Even for those businesses currently running Ofﬁce
2007, some may choose to migrate to Ofﬁce 2010 since this latest version provides a signiﬁcant advancement in features—much more so compared to the advancements that Ofﬁce 2007 offered
over Ofﬁce 2003.
For those IT administrators as well as business-unit managers who have previously managed a Microsoft Ofﬁce migration, they will most likely recall just how much planning is involved and how long the process can take. Applications such as Excel, Word, PowerPoint, and Access will all
present issues as users open ﬁles in Ofﬁce 2010 that were initially created in Ofﬁce 2003 or Ofﬁce 2007. Generally, 80 percent of Ofﬁce ﬁles will not have any issues after the migration, but that
leaves another 20 percent that will present varying degrees of problems.
For enterprises migrating from 2003 to 2010, IT administrators face an additional challenge due to the ﬁle-name extension change (Ofﬁce 2007 extensions sync with Ofﬁce 2010). With different extensions, ﬁles with links to other documents in Ofﬁce 2003 will break in the Ofﬁce 2010 format unless remediation is applied. When enterprises migrated to Ofﬁce 2003, they did not face this same issue.
As plans are developed for migrating to Ofﬁce 2010, enterprises have three options when considering how to deal with ﬁles that will not work properly after the migration.
In this white paper, we analyze these three Office 2010 migration options, key differences, and best alternatives. For more information please visit www.convertertechnology.com