Beware of software auditors in a recession
in [UK Linux]
|
Prev: fedora 12 install woes
Next: Mouse prob
From: Snit on 10 Jan 2010 15:31 High Plains Thumper stated in post 4b4a3678$0$9752$6e1ede2f(a)read.cnntp.org on 1/10/10 1:20 PM: > Phil Stovell wrote: >> Snit wrote: >> >>> OpenOffice and Pages handle DOC better than they do DOCX, but they >>> still have lots of problems with it. And, unfortunately, >>> OpenOffice is simply not as capable nor easy to use program as is >>> MS Office. Other than dealing with more file formats, what >>> intrinsic benefits does OpenOffice Writer have over MS Office >>> Word? >> >> It's free. > > You mean to tell me that Snit is still on his high horse claiming all > sorts of unsubstantiated problems with OpenOffice? (Or using examples > tampered with from his website, because that is the only place he can > alter formats and call them original? Oh! Oh! Please do show where I have "tampered" with evidence! Oh, show everyone how much I have done so. What? Not a single example from you that you can actually support? Not one? Oh, poor HPT... just full of accusations and BS. Hey, as long as you are claiming my evidence is forged, why not show how to do this with OpenOffice: <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/OOIndents.mov> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/OOIndents2.mov> > I have taken complex spreadsheets and documents created in the office, > my own and others created in Office 2003, and they open up without problems. Ah, so because - you claim - some files open up fine, that means that the others which you have been shown do *not* must, well, be "forged", even when you have access to the files: <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/OfficeComp/> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/OfficeComp2/> Keep in mind, the files you deny exist are there - on those pages - ready for you to download and "prove" they do not exist! Does it occur to you, HPT, that your claims are just a little too easy to prove to be lies? :) > I have even opened docx files (not often but there are a few who use > Office 2007), and still no problems. Once in a while there are minor > format problems in docx, but those are easily overcome. Wait: now you admit that there are at least some problems. > If the document is finished, there is no reason to send it as doc or > docx. PDF is a much better format for the transmittal of documents, > basically keeps the original appearance but is universally accepted. Ah, and then edit it with... ??? You do realize that lots of the power of Office software comes from collaboration. Right? No? Oh... poor HPT. > One is better off installing the OpenOffice software and using it. Then > they can form their own opinions, instead of relying on the opinions of > others. Sure... so why do you whine about the opinion of others... even the very, very well supported opinions. Oh, and you hint that I have tried to talk someone out of using OpenOffice - keep in mind I have made it very clear I have a number of clients who use it on my suggestion. Other than complete denial, how do you explain that? -- [INSERT .SIG HERE]
From: Snit on 10 Jan 2010 15:31 Hadron stated in post hidcbo$vo7$4(a)hadron.eternal-september.org on 1/10/10 1:12 PM: > Phil Stovell <phil(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk> writes: > >> On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 12:53:06 -0700, Snit wrote: >> >>> Phil Stovell stated in post >>> pan.2010.01.10.19.46.22.128728(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk on 1/10/10 12:46 PM: >>> >>> ... >>>>>>> Yes, the best way to work with MS Word files is to use MS Word. >>>>>>> Neither OpenOffice, Pages nor any other tool I know handles them >>>>>>> well. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's a totally closed environment then. Proprietary software saving >>>>>> data to an open standards file (ODF) in a proprietary format (DOCX) >>>>>> that even other Microsoft software can't read. >>>>> >>>>> Do not get me wrong - I wish the de facto standard was not the MS >>>>> Office format, but it is. >>>> >>>> So MS reckon they've locked-in another 10 million users into MSO over >>>> OO? >>>> >>>> But DOCX is a very new format, I'd bet most existing docs are in .DOC >>>> format, which OO and even other MS products can render properly. I've >>>> yet to be emailed a .DOCX file, .DOC files I get seem OK in OO. >>> >>> OpenOffice and Pages handle DOC better than they do DOCX, but they still >>> have lots of problems with it. And, unfortunately, OpenOffice is simply >>> not as capable nor easy to use program as is MS Office. Other than >>> dealing with more file formats, what intrinsic benefits does OpenOffice >>> Writer have over MS Office Word? >> >> It's free. > > But comes with many disadvantages. The price of an office license for > the average employee is next to nothing compared to the cost of their > wages and support infrastructure. > > If you do not need compatibility with MSO docs then OO is fine. > > If you do, then forget it. > > MS Office has benefits other than just working better with MS Office files... which is not to say that OO does not serve many people well. -- [INSERT .SIG HERE]
From: Snit on 10 Jan 2010 15:37 Phil Stovell stated in post pan.2010.01.10.20.25.53.247773(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk on 1/10/10 1:25 PM: >>>> OpenOffice and Pages handle DOC better than they do DOCX, but they >>>> still have lots of problems with it. And, unfortunately, OpenOffice >>>> is simply not as capable nor easy to use program as is MS Office. >>>> Other than dealing with more file formats, what intrinsic benefits >>>> does OpenOffice Writer have over MS Office Word? >>> >>> It's free. >> >> But comes with many disadvantages. The price of an office license for >> the average employee is next to nothing compared to the cost of their >> wages and support infrastructure. > > Yeah yeah, Mr Gates. I want to open a new workplace with 4 staff, each > with 1 PC+XP. How much would 4 licenses cost me and what advantage would > that give my to my new office, when I can download, install and be up and > running with OO in less time than putting the MSO CD into the drive? > > It still leaves me with a last resort of relying on your once-excellent > software again, Mr Gates. > >> If you do not need compatibility with MSO docs then OO is fine. >> >> If you do, then forget it. > > Why should a home user install MSO, even at �40? First, before my next comments are taken out of context, for many OpenOffice is fine. So are other free options. But MS Office has some significant advantages for documents with bibliographies, relatively complex use of styles, etc. It also allows for easier working with images (esp. cropping) and the ribbon UI, once users get used to it, is generally found to be easier to use. -- [INSERT .SIG HERE]
From: harikeo on 10 Jan 2010 15:48 Phil Stovell wrote: > On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 12:53:06 -0700, Snit wrote: > >> Phil Stovell stated in post >> pan.2010.01.10.19.46.22.128728(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk on 1/10/10 12:46 PM: >> >> ... >>>>>> Yes, the best way to work with MS Word files is to use MS Word. >>>>>> Neither OpenOffice, Pages nor any other tool I know handles them >>>>>> well. >>>>> It's a totally closed environment then. Proprietary software saving >>>>> data to an open standards file (ODF) in a proprietary format (DOCX) >>>>> that even other Microsoft software can't read. >>>> Do not get me wrong - I wish the de facto standard was not the MS >>>> Office format, but it is. >>> So MS reckon they've locked-in another 10 million users into MSO over >>> OO? >>> >>> But DOCX is a very new format, I'd bet most existing docs are in .DOC >>> format, which OO and even other MS products can render properly. I've >>> yet to be emailed a .DOCX file, .DOC files I get seem OK in OO. >> OpenOffice and Pages handle DOC better than they do DOCX, but they still >> have lots of problems with it. And, unfortunately, OpenOffice is simply >> not as capable nor easy to use program as is MS Office. Other than >> dealing with more file formats, what intrinsic benefits does OpenOffice >> Writer have over MS Office Word? > > It's free. If you work for or know someone who works for the NHS they can get Office 2007 for £8. Luckily I have 3 NHS e-mail addresses so got 3 copies and handed them out.
From: JEDIDIAH on 10 Jan 2010 16:43
On 2010-01-10, harikeo <nomail(a)home.net> wrote: > > > Phil Stovell wrote: >> On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 12:53:06 -0700, Snit wrote: >> >>> Phil Stovell stated in post >>> pan.2010.01.10.19.46.22.128728(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk on 1/10/10 12:46 PM: >>> >>> ... >>>>>>> Yes, the best way to work with MS Word files is to use MS Word. >>>>>>> Neither OpenOffice, Pages nor any other tool I know handles them >>>>>>> well. >>>>>> It's a totally closed environment then. Proprietary software saving >>>>>> data to an open standards file (ODF) in a proprietary format (DOCX) >>>>>> that even other Microsoft software can't read. >>>>> Do not get me wrong - I wish the de facto standard was not the MS >>>>> Office format, but it is. >>>> So MS reckon they've locked-in another 10 million users into MSO over >>>> OO? >>>> >>>> But DOCX is a very new format, I'd bet most existing docs are in .DOC >>>> format, which OO and even other MS products can render properly. I've >>>> yet to be emailed a .DOCX file, .DOC files I get seem OK in OO. >>> OpenOffice and Pages handle DOC better than they do DOCX, but they still >>> have lots of problems with it. And, unfortunately, OpenOffice is simply >>> not as capable nor easy to use program as is MS Office. Other than >>> dealing with more file formats, what intrinsic benefits does OpenOffice >>> Writer have over MS Office Word? >> >> It's free. > > If you work for or know someone who works for the NHS they can get > Office 2007 for £8. Luckily I have 3 NHS e-mail addresses so got 3 > copies and handed them out. ....yes, but will this procedure survive an audit. With commercial software it's not just about the pricetag of the software. You also have to make sure you are in compliance with the license. That is something that is an ongoing cost and something that needs to be done on and ongoing basis. Even being afew licenses out of compliance could end up costing considerably more than the rather meagre apparent buy in cost. -- Apple: Because if it's not Quicktime, then it's pirated. ||| / | \ |