On Tue, 27 Jun 2000, jim t.p. ryan wrote:
> All I'm saying is that in 20+ years of working in companies I can't
> comprehend suggesting that they change their internal desktops over to
> sendmail and star office, or whatever.
Except MS-Office isn't 20+ years old.
Before Office, it was Word Perfect and Lotus 1-2-3. Remember those?
Everybody thought everybody would be using them until time ended (at 3:14:07
AM on Fri, Jan 19th, 2038). Now they are practically non-existent.
Before the IBM-PC, it was software like VisiCalc and Bank Street Writer.
They ran on single-sided, 180 KB floppy disks, on the Apple ][ series.
VisiCalc was the first spreadsheet, and is credited by many for really
enabling the personal computer revolution.
Before *them*, everybody uses IBM mainframes and dumb terminals. Everybody
thought everybody would be using *those* forever.
And before the programmable computer was invented, everybody thought we'd be
using punched cards and tabulating machines.
I have seen absolutely *ZERO* evidence that businesses will stick with what
they're running over the long term. Generally, businesses seem to use what
network effects indicate they should use. For several years now, that's been
Microsoft Office. However, the winds are beginning to shift, as more and more
corporate managers wake up to the fact that they've been shafted royally by
Microsoft. Managers may not understand much about technology, but they know
what being ripped off is about, and they don't like it.
Being locked into a single vendor (be it software or anything else) is
always considered a Bad Thing, unless the vendor in question manages to pass
it off as a "feature". This happens rather depressingly often, but the wakeup
call generally comes eventually, and payback's a bitch.
Open Source offers too many advantages to be ignored. You're free to choose
and change your software and support suppliers independently. More then
anything else, I think that's what is going to enable Open Source to win in
the business world. It makes software and support commodities, and thus makes
the network effect universal.
Want proof? Look at email. Look at the web. Look at the Internet. All of
it was designed with Open Source methods, and most of it still runs on Open
Source software. Open Source promotes networking, which maximizes profit.
No two ways about it. And profit is the one and only thing driving business.
RMS is right; Free Software is great for users and hackers. But ESR is
right, too. Free Software is great for business. It's two sides of the same
coin.
The only group Open Source software doesn't help is the companies deriving a
revenue stream from software licensing fees. Well, times change. I'm sure
horse buggy manufacturers hated the automobile, too. Such companies are going
to have to adapt, or die out and be replaced. Such is the nature of the free
market.
> But say they could have office on Linux, they at least the OS is "in the
> door". From there it would be an easier road to acceptance. Sometimes
> you might have to join 'em a bit to win.
As far as I'm concerned, MS-Office on Linux makes absolutely zero difference
to me. I don't like Office on Windoze; I'm not going to like it on Linux,
either. Furthermore, within a year or so, I believe you'll see everything
MS-Office does, done on Linux, but cheaper and better. At that point,
MS-Office on Linux becomes moot.
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| "People say that life is the thing, but I prefer reading." |
| -- Logan Pearsall Smith |
**********************************************************
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
**********************************************************
