the biggest problem with Linux, OpenOffice and relative project is that they are created not in order to bring innovation, but to resemble as much as possible to Microsoft products... so, who would use OpenOffice? only a geek that wants to create and use something that MS already has created (just like a university thesis: create an MS Office clone) or only users that want to use something different from MS Office, because they hate MS or because they don't have money for MS Office-kalos
Interesting perceptions, but for the most part, OpenOffice died once Oracle bought Sun last year. From now on, we'll say
LibreOffice. Microsoft didn't invent the word processor or the spreadsheet or the database or the email program. So why would Microsoft create something that had already been invented and done (WordPerfect, Lotus, dBASE, etc.)? Not everyone wants to use Apple. Not everyone wants to use Microsoft. Some of us want that alternative. And when taxpayers don't have to fund their software through large corporate contracts, it's a big savings for everyone.
the biggest challenge OpenOffice, Linux, etc must overcome is this: a user thinks that doc documents are meant to be opened and edited by MS Office, why would he use OpenOffice for it, even it advertises that it is fully compatible? Consider Nvidia's slogan: Nvidia - the way is meant to be played. you can play games with other graphics cards, with emulators and so on, but it's not the way they meant to be played you can use Linux and install Wine in order to run MS Office, right... does this sound clever?-kalos
I don't quite follow your Nvidia reasoning; I hope you don't take marketing/ad copy literally! In 2011, not too many .doc files are thrown around anymore and MS-OOXML files (MSO-'07>) are almost nonexistent on the web. I don't know of any other office suite that cannot open an old .doc file. Linux users are not confused by this.
ofcourse Linux has some advantages, eg possible faster startup, possible fewer reboots, etc, but these don't even touch everyday usage of an average user, in order to consider them a real advantage-kalos
I agree.
all these thoughts from a user that has tried many many distros, window managers, OpenOffice from years ago, and find out how they fail to bring innovation and make the user think, I will definately switch to these alternatives-kalos
You need to try them again this summer! It depends on how you use your computer. There is lots of innovation between the two big window environments, and KDE brings far more flexibility and advanced features than Windows 7 has. That said, for me it's fluff; I don't use them. Most of my computing is centered on utility and efficiency -- most of my time is spent inside a text editor and browser. But I'm not average by that measure.
ofcourse these do not apply to numerous opensource projects are innovative and have real advantages-kalos
Can you name a few that you find innovative and advantageous? I'm curious. Chrome browser is the big one lately. To quote Glyn Moody:
Since the code base is open, companies can - and do - start tweaking it to make it “better” - where the metric for that improvement will vary from company to company. For some it might be speed, for others security, for yet more it might be a small footprint and so on. These different versions then compete in the market and Darwinian selection allows “better” versions to survive and thrive. That's shown most clearly in the world of GNU/Linux distros, which do indeed start from the same main code base, but then split off in hundreds of different ways - this incredible diversity is part of the huge strength of the open source ecosystem. In any case, since open source programs nearly always use open standards - unlike many proprietary products - it is much easier to create new codebases that support those standards than it would be if proprietary standards dominate. (
http://blogs.compute...source-fud/index.htm)
Recent Posts
-Edvard (March 03, 2011, 03:33 PM)