Dave Craven wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Joseph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 2:29 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [users] Some Bad Statistics > > On 19:52 Fri 05 Oct , Harold Fuchs wrote: > >> A little off topic .... >> >> I unfortunately found this: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=480 >> >> Be interested in your thoughts. >> >> > OO on MS will never be able to compete with MS Office due to the > restrictive practices of MS in witholding information about the OS. > This information is needed if third party developers are to develop > applications that can rival Microsoft's own 'integrated' apps. > > Open Office has done an amazing job in producing an extremely powerful > suite of applications allowing everybody access to word processing, > spreadsheets etc. without having to spend a month's wages every year > keeping up to date. > > I run OpenOffice on Debian at home and at work, where I also run MS > Office on XP and my, admittedly unscientific, impression is that OO on > Linux runs much faster than MS Office on XP. >
One thing Borland found out was that MS apps used hidden API, whereas the public API that Borland and others had to use delivered poorer performance. This meant that anyone competing with MS couldn't obtain the same level of performance. I wouldn't be surprised if MS wasn't still doing something similar. One thing that's obvious from this sort of thing, is that MS *KNOW* they can't compete on product quality, so they have to cheat in as many ways as possible. Just review the recent OOXML - ISO nonsense for more evidence of this. -- Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
