On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 09:29 +0000, Andrew Brown wrote: > Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > > It is for many people, it certainly is for me and a growing number of > > others. I'm going to Spain for the second time in a couple of months > > because they seem to think its good enough for them. It'll never be good > > enough for die-hard Windowsphiles. > > > > It's got nothing to do with the operating system.
Its the people that use Windows and who are used to Outlook that are making all the fuss. Most Linux users don't seem to have the problem. I can get calendaring through web calendar and have it accessiblt anywhere. Its not really anything to do with E-mail anyway. Whatever is done, some people will not be satisfied unless the development exactly mirror what they are used to on Windows and Outlook. That is why its a platform issue. That's why I said for some Windowsphiles, unless the environment is an exact clone of what they are used to they won't be satisfied. > It's simply a question of > functionality. I'd use linux if it did anything that I need better than > Windows does. But the point about disruptive technologies is whether it does what is needed well enough at least initialy for a sizeable minority. Clearly it does. I'm a member of the sizeable minority, you probably aren't. As the new technology improves it becomes "good enough" for more people. That does seem to be what is happening now. It does not have to be better, it has to tend towards becoming as good as in key areas at lower cost. In fact its a bit more complex because Linux and OOo are better than Windows and MSO in some respects. There are also probably no massive new aspects of functionality that the majority of people need to enable MSO to stop people adopting OOo. But some people will stick with Windows, the majority at present but than there are still WP users years after it became the minority and these will also say why its better for them to stick with what they have and know. > But it doesn't. What's on offer is a large collection of > "good enough" apps which almost imitate what I can get on Windows. Which is not a surprise since IT methods have evolved to this mature position over a number of years and the applications on all platforms are fundamentally pretty similar. I can't say that there really is much functional difference for me in using Evolution on Linux to Outlook on Windows for what I need to do. That might be different for you. > So I > woul go through a huge opportunity cost in retraining That is a contradiction with what you just said about the apps being very similar. So similar in fact that the need for training is actually very small. > and futzing around to > end up with something neither better nor quicker than what I have now, > which is also importantly lacking the software ecology that I presently > have. So stick with what you have. No-one is forcing you to change. There are plenty of people using OOo on Linux and the number increases daily. If you want to stick with Windows stick with Windows, its not going to change the overall trend in migration significantly. > all they want of an operating system is that > it should be invisible. Pie in the sky while there are thousands of viruses floating around. But hey, no-one said you were being paid by Bill Gates, on the contrary, you are probably paying him for the priviledge of promoting his products ;-) But that is your right and if you want to do it carry on. -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMS Ltd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
