Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Microsoft Running Scared Of OpenOffice

Reply
Thread Tools

Microsoft Running Scared Of OpenOffice

 
 
Simon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-15-2010
On Oct 15, 5:51*pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:

> Except there are restrictions on what use you’re allowed to make of
> Microsoft Office, in return for the low price. Like “non-commercial use”:
> but if you use it to write a CV and get a job, does that count as
> “commercial” use?


No.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Simon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-15-2010
On Oct 15, 3:54*pm, Richard <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> When I tried openoffice it was unable to do page numbering the way I
> needed, couldnt mix landscape and portrait in the one document.


The latest versions can certainly do that, but IMO it's rather
cumbersome compared to Microsoft Office. I'm sure they'll get it right
in the next release though.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-15-2010
In message
<(E-Mail Removed)>, Simon
wrote:

> On Oct 15, 5:51 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand>
> wrote:
>
>> Except there are restrictions on what use you’re allowed to make of
>> Microsoft Office, in return for the low price. Like “non-commercial use”:
>> but if you use it to write a CV and get a job, does that count as
>> “commercial” use?

>
> No.


And so you find, as is typical with proprietary software, that you have to
fudge your interpretation of the licence agreement, otherwise you couldn’t
make use of it on a day-to-day basis...
 
Reply With Quote
 
Sweetpea
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-15-2010
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 15:54:08 +1300, Richard wrote:

>>> I still use an old version of MSOffice - about 8 years old. It is
>>> much, much better than OpenOffice3.x.

>>
>> Would you care to elaborate on the way(s) in which you think Microsoft
>> Office XP (AKA Microsoft Office 10, AKA Microsoft Office 2002) is
>> "much, much better" than Oracle Office 3.2.1?
>>
>> This is no real surprise given that OpenOffice.org 1.0 did not exist
>> when MS Office 10 was released. Even now OOo is only at version 3.2
>> while MS Office is at version 13!
>>
>> Given comparative version numbers, OOo is significantly further
>> advanced than Microsoft Office in both feature set and in quality of
>> code.

>
> When I tried openoffice it was unable to do page numbering the way I
> needed, couldnt mix landscape and portrait in the one document.
>
> I seem to recal it was unable to handle making sub tables of contents
> too, but it was such a long time ago I tried it.


The wording of your post is suggestive of having tested OOo a long time
ago.

How long ago is it since you last tested OOo 3.2.1?


--
"Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-16-2010
On 16/10/2010 11:09 a.m., Sweetpea wrote:

> The wording of your post is suggestive of having tested OOo a long time
> ago.
>
> How long ago is it since you last tested OOo 3.2.1?


It was when I had just moved to vista, which was soon after its release.

Have no interest in trying it again, as the cost of office IMO is
immaterial, and if the best feature of something is that it doesnt cost
then its not really very compelling.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-16-2010
In message <i9bt00$v1o$(E-Mail Removed)>, Richard wrote:

> Have no interest in trying it again, as the cost of office IMO is
> immaterial ...


It’s not a cheap package, especially now Microsoft is no longer offering
“upgrade” pricing.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Simon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2010
On Oct 15, 7:06*pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:

> And so you find, as is typical with proprietary software, that you have to
> fudge your interpretation of the licence agreement, otherwise you couldn’t
> make use of it on a day-to-day basis...


That's not an indictment on proprietary software, it's an indictment
on the quality of the license agreement.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Simon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2010
On Oct 16, 11:33*pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> In message <i9bt00$(E-Mail Removed)>, Richard wrote:
>
> > Have no interest in trying it again, as the cost of office IMO is
> > immaterial ...

>
> It’s not a cheap package, especially now Microsoft is no longer offering
> “upgrade” pricing.


For an enterprise class customer, the situation is entirely different.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2010
In message
<(E-Mail Removed)>, Simon
wrote:

> On Oct 16, 11:33 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>
>> In message <i9bt00$(E-Mail Removed)>, Richard wrote:
>>
>>> Have no interest in trying it again, as the cost of office IMO is
>>> immaterial ...

>>
>> It’s not a cheap package, especially now Microsoft is no longer offering
>> “upgrade” pricing.

>
> For an enterprise class customer, the situation is entirely different.


“Enterprise-class” customers are not known for their nimbleness in the
marketplace. Most of the world’s GDP (and, I would argue, innovation), comes
from small businesses, not large ones.

And small businesses can’t afford to shell out large sums on proprietary
software just because it’s the only thing their IT department understands.
Cheaper to replace those obdurate IT staff with imaginative ones who can put
together flexible systems that look forward rather than backward.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2010
In message
<(E-Mail Removed)>, Simon
wrote:

> On Oct 15, 7:06 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand>
> wrote:
>
>> And so you find, as is typical with proprietary software, that you have
>> to fudge your interpretation of the licence agreement, otherwise you
>> couldn’t make use of it on a day-to-day basis...

>
> That's not an indictment on proprietary software, it's an indictment
> on the quality of the license agreement.


To prove your point, all you have to do is find one piece of proprietary
software that doesn’t have such a one-sided licence agreement.

Go on, then.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Microsoft must be scared stiff of ODF format peterwn NZ Computing 7 10-03-2007 04:41 AM
microsoft.public.certification, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsa, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcad, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsd loyola Microsoft Certification 3 11-14-2006 05:18 PM
DVD Verdict reviews: KISS KISS, BANG BANG, RUNNING SCARED (2006), and more! DVD Verdict DVD Video 0 06-12-2006 08:26 AM
microsoft.public.certification, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsa, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcad, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsd realexxams@yahoo.com Microsoft Certification 0 05-10-2006 02:35 PM
microsoft.public.dotnet.faqs,microsoft.public.dotnet.framework,microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.windowsforms,microsoft.public.dotnet.general,microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb Charles A. Lackman ASP .Net 1 12-08-2004 07:08 PM



Advertisments