I had to add my two cents. Being so huge and monopolistic isn't so bothersome. What bothers me is that they charge an exhorbitant price for products that JUST DON'T WORK!!!!!!!
Example: Windows 95 had FOUR DIFFERENT RELEASES!! Microsoft insists that their first release of programs do not have bugs. Then, when they issue a newer version, even though everyone knows it's just a bug fix, Microsoft does not call them bug fixes, rather "software enhancements." It's bad enough that they charge you such outragious prices "for permission to use their software." Then, after a rediculous "warranty" they charge you again an outragious price for "extended support." It always frosted me that if you wanted help with Windows for your brand new computer you just bought at K-Mart, you weren't allowed to contact Microsoft. You had to contact "where you bought your computer." Well, never mind K-Mart. So you call the computer manufacturer and who do you get? SOME YAHOO in INDIA that you can't understand and can't understand you! You want to know how to connect to the Internet and he's telling you how to hook up your printer. In May 1998, I purchased Word Perfect Suite 8 Professional. Microsoft Office was just too expensive. Later, I discovered that a lot of what you could do with Word Perfect, you just couldn't do with Microsoft! Greg --- Vincente Aggrippino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I apologize now for the long email... but didn't you > realize you were > posting a pro- MS Office message to the OOo user's > group? :) > > Let's forget the price for a moment. In real life, > Microsoft Office is > available to everyone for free. Those who choose not > to use pirated software > are noble, but that is a choice. It's not because > it's not available. > > Availability under Linux is also not a problem. I > can tell you from > experience that Microsoft Office XP works perfectly > under Linux with > Crossover Office. > > So, why use OpenOffice.org? How do I love thee? Let > me count the ways... > > 1. I don't like a monopoly. Even if it doesn't > fit the legal > definition of a monopoly, I don't like the > feeling that Microsoft Office is > the end-all and be-all of office productivity. In > this sense, if Microsoft > was the one with the smaller market share, I > would probably support them. > 2. I like the concept that I might have some > input into the creation > process. I have the source code and I can even > make changes myself. Does > anyone know a Microsoft programmer? Does anyone > know someone who has worked > on the code of Windows or Office, or even clippy? > I think they are locked in > a secret bunker 25 miles below the ground in Area > 51. > > If Microsoft and OpenOffice.org (or any other > alternative) ever have close > to an equal market share, I may re-examine my > decision. However, I will not > use Microsoft products for the forseeable future. > > Often people come to me for advice in their > computing purchases and > decisions. I'll show them OpenOffice.org and > Firefox. Having worked in the > Information Technology field for over 15 years, I > can say that the advice I > give is at least valid. > > Microsoft has had the greatest measure of success in > making computers easier > to use for people who didn't know how to use > computers. The newest > generation of computer users know how to use a > computer. Having never known > life without a computer, they will blow us away... > yes, even the best of us. > They will make good, informed decisions based on > their own experience. And I > don't think they will overwhelmingly choose > Microsoft or any other > particular vendor. I mean to say that, someday, > there will be a fair > software market again. > > > On 10/25/05, John P Wohlscheid > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > To Whom It May Concern: > > > > First off I would like to clarify something. I'm > biased towards Microsoft > > products since they are the only things I have > ever used. I looked at the > > screenshots of your products out of curiosity and > I was surprised how much > > they look like Microsoft products. I understand > that you want to make it > > easy so that the few people the convert from > Microsoft products will not > > have > > trouble using yours, but in my opinion you should > try to give your > > products a > > different look. > > > I'll choose one very basic item to explain this: Why > is it that the File > menu is on the top left and, from that menu, you can > choose New, Open, and > Close? Because people are used to it. > > In computing, we've progressed to a stage where we > kind of do know how to > use computers as long as they work a certain way. I > have to honestly give > credit to Microsoft for this. Why change what > everyone is familiar with if > there's no problem with it and there's no > improvement to make. > > In fact, even if there is an improvement to make, it > might not be worth it. > For example, the "QWERTY" keyboard was designed to > slow down people typing > in English because old typewriters couldn't handle > fast fingers. Is anyone > using a Dvorak-style keyboard? > > Let me phrase it another way. Let's pretend that > there are > > two cars. They look a lot alike, except that one > has been around for > > years; > > it is trusted, and owned by hundreds of thousands > of people. > > > Haven't you noticed... in come classes cars do all > look and feel the same. > Have you seen a recent model sportscar without an > aerodynamic shape? How > about the SUV phenomenon? I don't even know where > that came from. It's all > for the same reason. > > There are proven methods that work for everyone. > Everyone is used to them > and there are no significant problems. When an > improvement is made, all of > the auto manufacturers will eventually adopt the > improvement. It might even > be mandatory: air bags, seat belts, third brake > light, anti-lock brakes, > 4-wheel steering, etc... > > If a > > middle-aged man was shown the two cars and it was > proven that they looked > > and > > felt the same, he would probably buy the older one > because of looks were > > the > > same, but the older one had more experience behind > its manufacturing. > > > This is just an unfortunate analogy... of course he > would choose the free > one. I get your point, but consider this: The > younger car company came into > existence because the users of the older car > company's products were unhappy > with the products and the way they did business. So, > they did something > about it and created an alternative. > > My > > advice (one man's opinion) is come out with a new > look and feel to your > > products. If you have a better product and a > different feel, I would saw > > that people would switch to you. > > > Now I'll be the target of some flames... We don't > have a better product, > just an alternative one, but a different look and > feel might hurt OOo and > might even make it difficult for the most faithful > of us. > > By the way, New Look and Feel? ... > > - Mac OS / Xerox PARC Alto -> Microsoft Windows > - Wordperfect -> Microsoft Word > - Lotus Freelance / Harvard Graphics -> Microsoft > Powerpoint > - ??? -> Microsoft Access... ok this is original > and terrible. Even MS > knows it. Hence: MS SQL Server > - Lotus 1-2-3 -> Microsoft Excel > > > Again, this is just one man's opinion. > > > You don't realize how fanatical us Open Source > people are, do you?... you > might want to move and change your name... Well, it > doesn't really matter. > We're all hackers... The Matrix has you and you're > not Neo... Just > kidding... you'll survive :) > === message truncated === --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
