On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Paul Heinlein <[email protected]> wrote:
> When full read/write compatiblity is the key, then "well enough"
> starts to approach 100%. Most organizations which which I've been
> affiliated don't want to spend staff time testing compatibility break
> points. The compatibility problem is magnified by differing release
> cycles between MS Office and, say OpenOffice.org.
>
> Even when alternative apps are acceptable, there's the question of IT
> support, both for installation and ongoing maintenance.

Absolutely correct. I doubt very much that we will ever see a
patchwork of supported applications/platforms within a single
organization be a common phenomenon. Even just tacit acceptance of
non-supported applications and platforms is unlikely. The efficiencies
to be gained by standardizing are simply to great.

Regardless, I was not talking about patterns within an individual
organization. I was talking about the scope of the entire IT industry,
wherein each individual purchase-making "entity" is a single
datapoint. Within that context, I think that the question of "which
platform?" as a technical acquisition criteria is in decline, and in
the next 5-10 years will likely be completely irrelevant in the vast
majority of cases. The only reasons it will be a consideration for
purchasers will be aesthetic ones.

> Finally, a note about iWork. I use (and like) a Mac at work and at
> home. I'm no anti-Apple bigot. I rule out iWork, however, because it's
> the most platform-tied office bundle in mainstream release. There's no
> iWork for Windows, much less one for Linux. Apple has no native
> remote-display protocol (and VNC isn't multi-user in OS X), so IT
> can't provide Windows or Linux users a mechanism to edit iWork docs.
> At least MS Office is available for OS X, and RDP is a reasonable
> remote-access solution. Regardless of its usability or features, iWork
> is the embodiment of vendor-lock-in and only has a place in a Mac-only
> shop.

Yeah, I am not much of an Apple fan. Apple products are cages. They
are shiny, comfortable, generally well-appointed cages, but they are
still cages. But some people like that, and their needs don't require
freedom.

-QH-
_______________________________________________
PLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug

Reply via email to