Author Topic: Open Office: is it poo?  (Read 9793 times)

Woofage

  • Ain't no hooves on my bike.
Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #50 on: February 24, 2009, 12:34:38 pm »
They had an article in PC Pro a little while ago about a bloke who was only going to use Ubuntu for a week. The first day was spent getting it to work and the third day he broke and switched back to windows because the system was not stable enough for him to have confidence that his work would not be lost!

Well the guy is clearly an eejit and I am sure the same would happen to him for any change in platform.

Whereas I only "dabbled" in Linux between the years 1995 approx and 2007, when I bought a new computer just over a year ago I went over to Linux full time. How many times has it crashed? 0. How many files have I lost? 0.

I will add that my computer is important to me as it is a tool with which I earn my living. Therefore, I don't tend to mess about.
Pen Pusher

gonzo

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #51 on: February 24, 2009, 12:55:30 pm »
PC Pro: Blogs & Analysis:  Features: My life with Linux

I got the wrong system, it was Fedora that went horribly wrong!

Jezza

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #52 on: February 24, 2009, 12:58:57 pm »
I agree with ljerams. As computer use becomes more widespread in different parts of the world I think people are going to switch to Linux based systems due to Microsoft's high costs.

Much of the Windows software used in parts of Asia is pirated - I think it was something like 95% of government computers in Vietnam that were running pirated copies of XP. As a result the Viets are now pushing to introduce Linux on all government computers, which will probably have a trickle-down effect across the market. As Windows updates have become more and more 'inclusive' (Genuine Validation or whatever), people are finding their pirated copies no longer work and are switching to Linux. I believe the Finnish government runs Linux on all machines, and the French gendarmerie have also switched to Linux from MS. More and more private users in developing countries will follow suit.

inc

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #53 on: February 24, 2009, 01:55:18 pm »

They had an article in PC Pro a little while ago about a bloke who was only going to use Ubuntu for a week. The first day was spent getting it to work and the third day he broke and switched back to windows

Yes I don't suppose you will see many articles in PC Pro  knocking MS, not many mags bite the hand that feeds them.

Woofage

  • Ain't no hooves on my bike.
Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #54 on: February 24, 2009, 02:08:58 pm »
They had an article in PC Pro a little while ago about a bloke who was only going to use Ubuntu for a week. The first day was spent getting it to work and the third day he broke and switched back to windows because the system was not stable enough for him to have confidence that his work would not be lost!

Well the guy is clearly an eejit and I am sure the same would happen to him for any change in platform.

I've just scanned over that article and I was correct ;).
Pen Pusher

ian

  • fatuously disingenuous
    • The Suburban Survival Guide
Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #55 on: February 24, 2009, 04:45:21 pm »
They can get the Computer on monthly payments. But let's face it, there is a lot more to a Computer than a bit of software.

And Ubuntu is free and also the software is free. Why pay 40 quid when the latest Ubuntu Desktop is so easy to use and relatively ( perhaps totally) free of bugs and visuses.

In my view Microshaft have been screwing people for far too long :demon: and we all fell for it ::-)

I think you are muddling up open source and free. Ubuntu (or other Linux distro) and the software you use may be free to you, but ultimately there is a cost. Just because the costs are buried and offset doesn't mean it's all created by the magical and infinitely charitable software fairies.

Microsoft haven't been screwing anyone. People make reasoned purchasing decisions. Yes, their products were highly priced (and they're not the only culprits, hello Adobe) and they are having to get real - £500 for an application may have seemed reasonable when computers cost £5k, not so in 2009. If they want to compete, then they need to price appropriately, and distinguish themselves against lower priced or free products. This is a challenge.

And bug-free. Ho. That's just being silly.
!nataS pihsroW

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #56 on: February 24, 2009, 06:31:45 pm »
Microsoft haven't been screwing anyone.

I'm not sure that's entirely true...
If you don't like your democracy, vote against it.

inc

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #57 on: February 24, 2009, 06:54:09 pm »

Microsoft haven't been screwing anyone. People make reasoned purchasing decisions.

You obviously  haven't tried to buy a PC without Windows installed, or get a refund for the the installed system, the MS tax.  Microsoft say they are great innovators, maybe of restrictive business practices, certainly not software, if fact they do all they can to prevent others being innovative and when they want a new product they buy out a company who have already done it. Ignoring the software I can't understand why people are so indifferent to such a corrupt company.

gonzo

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #58 on: February 24, 2009, 07:03:31 pm »
I for one am glad that systems all come with one make of operating system and office type ap; it makes compatibility very easy!

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #59 on: February 24, 2009, 07:25:18 pm »
Out of the 8 PCs I've bought in 15 years only 2 had OSes installed (Windows both times) but then I don't buy off the shelf PCs.
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

ian

  • fatuously disingenuous
    • The Suburban Survival Guide
Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #60 on: February 24, 2009, 07:29:55 pm »

Microsoft haven't been screwing anyone. People make reasoned purchasing decisions.

You obviously  haven't tried to buy a PC without Windows installed, or get a refund for the the installed system, the MS tax.  Microsoft say they are great innovators, maybe of restrictive business practices, certainly not software, if fact they do all they can to prevent others being innovative and when they want a new product they buy out a company who have already done it. Ignoring the software I can't understand why people are so indifferent to such a corrupt company.

Oddly, I have bought several computers with no operating system. And several operating systems without computers. I don't recall it being a particular challenge beyond picking up the phone and asking. No, they tend not to be advertised, but then I can't imagine there's much consumer demand. And yes, you don't get the deals, but I wouldn't expect to.

Microsoft bashing is a bit dull. They're a behemoth with a big market footprint, and they do all the things that big stompy companies do. It's hardly news or evidence of some grand conspiracy.
!nataS pihsroW

David Martin

  • Thats Dr Oi You thankyouverymuch
Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #61 on: February 24, 2009, 07:57:53 pm »
I've run Windows with the exception of Vista, Linux in many flavours. Irix on 32 and 64 it architectures. Mac OS 9 and X. We currently run GPFS over 500+ nodes on a quarter of a petabyte filesystem. I have crashed every single system I have had to use in anger.

Windows was shockingly poor till XP. Which is usable. That isn't the same as the apps being sane. The linux desktop is fine but some of the apps lack serious investment. Library hell is the same on both platforms though Windows tries to brush it under the carpet more and pretend it isn't there.

Linux is more DIY, wearing all the plumbing on the outside but usully more stable. 

Linux office apps are basic and lack enterprise level scripting/automation. There are some very smart things in them though.
"By creating we think. By living we learn" - Patrick Geddes

inc

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #62 on: February 24, 2009, 08:16:00 pm »
Oddly, I have bought several computers with no operating system. And several operating systems without computers.

So have I but most computers for home use are bought through the mass market with MS installed. Why not have a choice at point of sale, you will struggle to find a laptop without an OS installed.

Microsoft bashing is a bit dull.

You may think so but others have a social conscience. And MS do not just operate like other large corporations, they are corrupt recently demonstrated by the OOXML saga, that is not normal business practice.

Woofage

  • Ain't no hooves on my bike.
Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #63 on: February 24, 2009, 08:23:07 pm »
Windows was shockingly poor till XP.

That's because xp was the first "consumer" M$ OS that wasn't DOS. NT, first launched in the mid 90s IIRC, is a pretty decent OS (and xp is based on NT).

I'm not necessarily defending M$ here, but their OS's backward-compatibility strategy is quite commendable. However, such a strategy did mean that most PC users were forced into using a sub-standard system when a much better one was available from the same company ???.
Pen Pusher

gonzo

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #64 on: February 24, 2009, 08:28:01 pm »
Windows was shockingly poor till XP.

That's because xp was the first "consumer" M$ OS that wasn't DOS. NT, first launched in the mid 90s IIRC, is a pretty decent OS (and xp is based on NT).
Win 98?

David Martin

  • Thats Dr Oi You thankyouverymuch
Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #65 on: February 24, 2009, 08:36:54 pm »
Windows was shockingly poor till XP.

That's because xp was the first "consumer" M$ OS that wasn't DOS. NT, first launched in the mid 90s IIRC, is a pretty decent OS (and xp is based on NT).
Win 98?

Don't make me laugh.. 98 was rebadged 95. The user interface for 95 was a pale imitation of Indigo Magic.

NT was flaky as hell, but in a different way to DOS. It was half VMS and the other half was broken.  XP fixed NT and got a lot of the user interface (at the application install/management level) right.

Still brain dead though when it comes to background processing.

(Am I biased? I'm writing this on XP on a netbook while sat on a train )

..d
"By creating we think. By living we learn" - Patrick Geddes

ian

  • fatuously disingenuous
    • The Suburban Survival Guide
Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #66 on: February 24, 2009, 08:39:51 pm »

So have I but most computers for home use are bought through the mass market with MS installed. Why not have a choice at point of sale, you will struggle to find a laptop without an OS installed.

How much consumer demand is there for PCs with no OS? It's a niche. Unsurprisingly, big volume retailers don't tend to sell them. It's hardly sinister. I'd hazard a guess that most users want something familiar, that they can take out of the box and just use. And they want to be able to call the supplier when it breaks.

You may think so but others have a social conscience. And MS do not just operate like other large corporations, they are corrupt recently demonstrated by the OOXML saga, that is not normal business practice.

Woo-wee, they threw their weight around at the ISO. I mean, no other business has ever done that. It's not like they're making cluster bombs or something.

And to be honest OOXML is so profoundly bloated and horrid, it'll probably kill itself off.
!nataS pihsroW

gonzo

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #67 on: February 24, 2009, 08:40:47 pm »
Don't make me laugh.. 98 was rebadged 95. The user interface for 95 was a pale imitation of Indigo Magic.

But it worked and was stable!

David Martin

  • Thats Dr Oi You thankyouverymuch
Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #68 on: February 24, 2009, 08:42:50 pm »
Don't make me laugh.. 98 was rebadged 95. The user interface for 95 was a pale imitation of Indigo Magic.

But it worked and was stable!

No it didn't and no it wasn't, unless you retrict youelf to a few  apps and have no interest in a multiuser OS.
"By creating we think. By living we learn" - Patrick Geddes

inc

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #69 on: February 24, 2009, 09:20:44 pm »
Woo-wee, they threw their weight around at the ISO. I mean, no other business has ever done that. It's not like they're making cluster bombs or something.


We obviously have a different perspective on the facts. I don't think you could have read much of the detail to the ISO saga or the continuing international disruption to standards processing. Microsoft would be better spending its time and considerable wealth developing decent competitive products rather than trying to negate anything it sees as developing competition.

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #70 on: February 25, 2009, 12:20:01 am »
The simple point is that if Microsoft welcomed and truly encouraged competition by opening themselves, and all of their intellectual property up they'd be 10% of what they are now within 2 years. To do so would be recklessly irresponsible to their shareholders. The same could probably be said of 90% of large corporations.

Of course they're going to buy up competitors and their technology, just like CA, IBM, Oracle, etc do. It's not as if most of the little companies didn't have a mission statement of "Challenge Microsoft and get bought out by them in 3 years time" anyway. They're started by people in the hope that this will happen and they can retire in 3 years.

Standards have nothing to do with it. Market dominance is all that matters. Until MS lose this they can continue to write themselves a nice big healthy cheque ($16bn in income after tax last year) and given that the "Linux is coming" story has been running for over 10 years now they're not particularly worried (although they're good at putting on a very stern face and throwing a few chairs about for show).
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #71 on: February 25, 2009, 12:58:48 am »
Linux has either forgotten its less IT literate possible user base or just doesn't bother to correct information about itself.

I'm not an IT phobe, while by no means trained I do look after the computers & network at work.  I'm happy that with the application of google and enough time I can fix pretty much any problem.  Everything runs on either xp or server 2003 and all seems pretty stable.

That said, I love the idea open source and not filling Bill's pockets and use OO and am trying to get in introduced at work.  But as soon as I googled installing Linux I saw lots of references to some sort on command line inputs and long series of switches, which might have retro chic.  And then you have to install all the bits you might need one by one...

Sorry but even the evil Microsoft wins out on being customer friendly compared to Linux.

(P.S. all the Linux evangalists who criticise when people express similar views to this on Linux forums need to realise they are part of the problem, not the solution)

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #72 on: February 25, 2009, 02:44:21 am »
Regret you are a little out of date. As I said earlier  the recent Ubuntu Desktop (8.04 & 8.10) are just as easy to use as Microshaft. And with dual boot one can open all your Windows files and save them to Open Office.

Incidentally, one would be hard pressed when I last checked to buy a Computer in Bangkok with Windows installed.

As to Microshaft, I fell for their ME OS that was simply a big con and useless. I had at that time to revert back to Windows 98 once I discovered where the problem lay. As to Linux I have had one minor problem in years of post ME use.

That point speaks for itself I believe. ;)

"100% PURE FREAKING AWESOME"

inc

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #73 on: February 25, 2009, 09:04:24 am »

Standards have nothing to do with it.


Standards have everything to do with it. With closed formats and APIs not ISO recognised or approved  open formats it is almost impossible to produce an IT product that is compatible with MS software without their approval, which is anti competitive which is why they  were fined last year $1.4 bn by the EU and  are now under further investigation.  Document formats and Web standards are the obvious ones but there are others. The problem for MS is having tried to block competitors unfairly the quality of the opposition needs to be better and is gaining ground, such as Apache, by far the biggest server and  running non MS software, Firefox, now with 20% of the browser market, Open Office is making inroads into Government, Education and SOHO where the realisation that archived documents may well end up being irretrievable because of closed document formats. MS's biggest competitors IBM, Sun and Novell are spending millions developing Open Office for the corporate desktop and then there is the biggest threat of all Google and cloud computing although personally I think they will struggle with that. I am not bashing MS just stating the facts they will probably be a good study case for business schools in the future of how not to retain market share just like the previous giant to fall IBM who thought there was no future for the desktop PC.

Re: Open Office: is it poo?
« Reply #74 on: February 25, 2009, 09:52:30 am »
Well said :thumbsup:
"100% PURE FREAKING AWESOME"