On 3/23/07, Chris Monahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
can't really -objectively- compare between 3 competent platforms with their own distinct (sometimes seemingly militant) user bases... Apples and oranges really... :P
Except there are plenty of people, like me, who run all three. I run all three on the same laptop. I've been a Windows user from 3.1 to Vista. I've been a Mac user from OS 8.6 to Tiger. I've been using different distros of Linux for 4 or 5 years. There are benefits to each. There are drawbacks to each. That's why I run all three. However, if I had to get stuck with one operating system for the rest of my life - I'd choose Mac OS X - no contest. It has the security, stability, and benefits of a *n*x based system. It has the consumer level / retail / 3rd party support of Windows, or close to it. And it looks better and acts smoother than either one. Plus, with Parallels Desktop, I can run Windows and Linux on top of it. ;) I'm contemplating whether to recommend NO or OO to a freind who's
'getting a mac' and from reading this thread the answer is definitively... both
That's kinda pointless, really. It's not like you can do something with OOo that you can't do with NeoOffice. There is no benefit to having both. NeoOffice has all the features of OpenOffice.org, but without the bugs that X11 causes. Once OOo "goes native" - if that ever happens - then OOo will have all the features of NeoOffice, and NeoOffice will cease to be. and then would be the time to get OOo. Having both only wastes hard drive space, download time, installation time, and can lead to confusing file associations. But, if you really want to have both, feel free. I do. I have both just to test for differences. NeoOffice wins every time. -- - Chad Smith http://www.chadwsmith.com/
