Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: antiRepublicrat
Most people don't use 90% of what Excel or Word can do.

Maybe the so-called "average user" only uses 10-20% of the features in Excel. But each "average user" doesn't use the same 10-20% featureset. Hence the need for 100% of the features offered.

Open source zealots always start out with outlandish claims of how superior their software is. But eventually they, like you, fall back on "You really don't need all those extra features that the commercial-grade software offers... and the open source is FREE! Whoopee!"

So much for quality.

Show me your average office user, then show me where OpenOffice doesn't meet the requirements...

Most people I know would rather be sent to the Russian front than be pegged with "average user" status. I've used OpenOffice, and I know its shortcomings firsthand. For one, it won't render any except the most simple Powerpoint slides. Thanks, but no thanks.

110 posted on 11/13/2003 7:25:00 PM PST by TheEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies ]


To: TheEngineer
Maybe the so-called "average user" only uses 10-20% of the features in Excel. But each "average user" doesn't use the same 10-20% featureset. Hence the need for 100% of the features offered

No, most users use, altogether, less than 90% of the features. I can give my wife as a good power-user example. She'd used Excel and Word for years, then we switched to OpenOffice at home to avoid stupid upgrade costs. She doesn't miss MS Office, and I see no advantages to the MS Office I use constantly at work.

Open source zealots always start out with outlandish claims of how superior their software is.

I can't make that general statement. I can say that certain free software in many roles and settings is better than Microsoft. I can also say that while sometimes it is inferior, it is not several hundred dollars per seat inferior.

Don't count me among the zealots. I do get mad at them when they say OSS will solve all problems in all circumstances, because that statement is plain wrong. For example, if you have someone who has some average need for graphics, go ahead and get the Gimp. However, these people try to say that graphics houses should dump Photoshop for it, but no way in hell is the Gimp up to that level no matter how much they scream it is.

For one, it won't render any except the most simple Powerpoint slides.

That's interoperability, not objective criteria of the merits of the software itself. If your entire office were set up with OpenOffice, that would not be a problem.

121 posted on 11/14/2003 9:38:35 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson