On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Ed Leafe <[email protected]> wrote: > That's what previous highly-publicized switches back to Windows were > like: lots of vague, hard-to-believe claims that reinforced the stereotypical > objection to Linux from a decade ago. > > That's why I'm curious to see if this instance is another case of > Microsoft throwing lots of $$ behind the scene to them to get them to switch, > and then having them issue a bunch of lame, contrived reasons to the public > as the reason for the switch. ----------------------
Or it could be undereducated users that expected it to be there and they learned that you had to accept deficiencies. What if the finance group for the government was uber rich in Macros? OO didn't take sophisticated macros from excel easily. That is just one case of real world that I have run into when I attempted to have a user low on cash take spreadsheets from his new employer. I have no idea what happened. Just stating that when somebody says I have the source I'll fix it for you, it may not be as cost effective or user effective as we think. In my current waterfall I am in the same place. The users don't want to learn any new tricks. They are closing a broswer instead of hitting the save button. They saying the data isn't updated. >From my POV finding out what users are doing is a lot harder and COSTLY then you think. -- Stephen Russell Sr. Production Systems Programmer CIMSgts 901.246-0159 cell _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
