Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] [OSS] Tesco Fails to Recognise OpenOffice.org, Sells Proprietary Alternative

On Wednesday 23 May 2007 14:16 amicus_curious wrote:

> 
> "SomeBloke" <stuff@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:135862hord4qc49@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> Who, apart from some numpies is going to pay for an office 'suite' when
>> you
>> can get OOo for free!
>>
> I think that issue is decided mostly by the usage category of the person
> buying the application.  If you have a long history of using MS Office and
> have archived files and dependent procedures that are based on MS Office
> features, you obviously would lose more in terms of beneficial use than
> you would ever hope to gain by saving money on purchase costs of new
> copies of Office.  

That's an excellent argument, and particularly true of a change from Windows
XP to Vista, or a change to Office 2007.  Thank you for pointing it out.
It also serves to illustrate the disadvantage of allowing oneself to become
locked-in to a single foreign vendor in the first place.  Again, thank you
for your vivid illustration.

> If you are a non-commercial or home user or are otherwise not in 
> a situation where an overall office automation suite is valuable, then
> there is no need to use MS Office unless you are just trying to obtain
> some experience to reference in, say, an employment application.

- and even then, there is still no reason to have MS Office.
Well argued, and thank you.
 
> An interesting corollary to the case where MS Office is not necessary is
> the case where no office automation product, even a freebie like OO, is
> necessary since the user is only doing simple things like e-mail and web
> browsing.  Those needs are covered with the basic, free software generally
> provided with new computers in the form of MS Works.

I honestly was not aware that MS Works did "simple things" like e-mail and
web browsing, so I am obviously not in a position to contradict you.

However, I'm interested in the concept of it being "free" software.  Does
one simply download it, or does one ask for a CD?
I ask out of idle curiosity, since I was (perhaps wrongly?) under the
impression that MS Works tended to use formats not used by anything else,
and would not read or write (for example) .doc files. ODF files etc.  Do I
have that wrong?

> And so there is very little opportunity, in my opinion, for using a clone
> such as OO.  Either the incompatibilities will destroy any economic
> benefit or there is no need at all.

I'm not really following the "incompatibilities" bit.
OO uses International standards, approved by ISO.
Refresh my memory - can MS Office use these?

If not, then it's not OO that is incompatible, but MS Office.  Your argument
seems to be back to front, a statement which some people might interpret as
meaning that you are talking out of your arse.



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index