Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on May 29, 2005 07:17 PM
But you must have missed the part of the article where it said that, in addition to the 110 older PCs running Windows NT and Office 97, they also had 158 newer PCs running Microsoft Windows XP.
Yes, I did. Thanks for pointing that out. If something is offered for nothing then I would take that offer seriously, particulaly if I don't have any money. However I would also take seriously the fact that my users will be cursing me for lumping them with OpenOffice.
I have, and it is just as slick as MS Office.
I should add that Open Office is the only Office suite I use, and I have no choice. Oh for the days of MS Office, [sob]!. That you consider OpenOffice as slick as MS Office is just bizarre. Even the install is a pig (for multi-user systems), and I would go so far as to suggest : unusable with an enterprise environment.
And how about that Microsoft Office? It won't even write PDF files! Shocking!
PDF's are a publishing feature. It isn't technically within the scope of a document editor to provide such a feature. How may other innapropriate add-ons is OpenOffice going to add as standard weighing it down even more. SWF generation? O, I forgot: it already has swf generation. Absurd! One may as well add a coffee maker as well, and I could do with a swimming pool.
You made some reasonable points about Open source later in your reply. However you are blaming the wrong people for the short-comings of commercial offerings. That Microsoft uses extortion is only true in so far as it is allowed to use extortion. You can't entirely blame commerce for the sins of law-makers and the justice system. If one accepts the concept of competition then one must also accept that competitors are forced to do whatever they can to the limits of the law - even testing those limits - to survive and ultimately to win the race. (And yes I know that MS was found guilty of going beyond those limits, but that would be to miss the point).
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Why bother
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 29, 2005 07:17 PMYes, I did. Thanks for pointing that out. If something is offered for nothing then I would take that offer seriously, particulaly if I don't have any money. However I would also take seriously the fact that my users will be cursing me for lumping them with OpenOffice.
I should add that Open Office is the only Office suite I use, and I have no choice. Oh for the days of MS Office, [sob]!. That you consider OpenOffice as slick as MS Office is just bizarre. Even the install is a pig (for multi-user systems), and I would go so far as to suggest : unusable with an enterprise environment.
PDF's are a publishing feature. It isn't technically within the scope of a document editor to provide such a feature. How may other innapropriate add-ons is OpenOffice going to add as standard weighing it down even more. SWF generation? O, I forgot: it already has swf generation. Absurd! One may as well add a coffee maker as well, and I could do with a swimming pool.
You made some reasonable points about Open source later in your reply. However you are blaming the wrong people for the short-comings of commercial offerings. That Microsoft uses extortion is only true in so far as it is allowed to use extortion. You can't entirely blame commerce for the sins of law-makers and the justice system. If one accepts the concept of competition then one must also accept that competitors are forced to do whatever they can to the limits of the law - even testing those limits - to survive and ultimately to win the race. (And yes I know that MS was found guilty of going beyond those limits, but that would be to miss the point).
#