Derek Martin wrote:
>
> Today, jim t.p. ryan gleaned this insight:
>
>
> > Putting Office on Linux is exactly what is needed to get it on the
> > desktop. Quicken too. Not to mention a decent browser.
>
> Respect for maddog's opinion aside, I can't agree less. I understand that
> people don't want to learn anything new. I think what I would have said
> is more like:
>
> "Putting something that looks and works like Office, but is much more
> stable and bug free with less bloat and security holes is exactly what is
> needed to get it [Linux] on the desktop." This can be done.
>
> Gnumeric is a good example (I believe). It basically IS excel, from what
> I understand. I can't really vouch for this, since my idea of a
> spreadsheet is what covers your bed before you put the blankets on, and I
> use neither. But from what I've heard, it has the look and feel of excel,
> and was designed specifically to be compatible with it (from a usage and
> feature standpoint). It may be missing some of the extra bells and
> whistles, but in my experience no one actually uses the bells and whistles
> anyway. Most people use very basic functionality of such packages. Even
> so-called "power users" probably use less than half of the available
> functionality, I'd venture a guess.
As a satisfied Gnumeric user, I can say it works like Excel (or for
that matter, at the basic level, like Lotus 1-2-3, Applix Spreadsheet,
Staroffice's spreadsheet, etc). I have never used the bells &
whistles, but it works for all that I do. It also reads Excel
spreadsheets very well, even those with VB in them. The only
difference is that the Gnumeric folks did the VB correctly, and it's
basically sandboxed (it can only operate on the file it's loaded from,
so the absolute worst it could do is delete itself). If you can use
Excel, you can use Gnumeric.
>
> > I've never really understood the free software thing anyway. Sooner
> > or later somebody has to pay don't they?
>
> No, not really. As long as there are people who want quality software who
> are willing to write it if necessary, OR there are people willing to put
> in the time and effort to write software SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ENJOY IT, and
> Microsoft (and others by the way) continues to put out the trash they put
> out, there will be free software, and no one will need to pay.
>
> This argument is really based on the idea that all work is unpleasant and
> people won't do a good job unless they're getting paid, therefore free
> software must suck. This is simply not true. Many of us who work in
> technology have the good fortune of having jobs that we LOVE, and likely
> would be doing in our spare time, in some capacity or another, were we not
> to have those jobs, myself included.
>
Yep, as I tell people, not only am I doing what I love, but I get paid
for it! What a revolutionary concept! What will they think of next?
--
jeff smith
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thought for the day: Ninety percent of everything is crap.
-- Theodore Sturgeon
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
