Micoshaft oriffice no more! - Use OpenOffice
in [UK Linux]
|
Prev: (F3) Find Files can't work, after installing SP3 ; os says a
Next: Installing package ending rpm.run ?
From: RonB on 15 Jan 2010 18:22 On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:26:14 -0600, JEDIDIAH wrote: > ...I wouldn't be surprised if the last DOS version of 123 was more than > what most people would ever need (with notable exception of the GUI > being bolted on top of course). You can still get Lotus 1-2-3 for Windows -- it's part of the IBM/Lotus SmartSuite. -- RonB "There's a story there...somewhere"
From: Nix on 15 Jan 2010 19:29 On 14 Jan 2010, Baron stated: > True ! Not only but its a criminal offense to publicly identify a > juror ! Its probably the same in the USA. Not that likely actually. The UK's laws regarding juries are fiercer than just about any others anywhere else in the world. Much, much fiercer.
From: PeterC on 16 Jan 2010 03:40 On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 19:39:52 -0000, Conor wrote: > In article <pan.2010.01.14.22.38.12.518987(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk>, Phil > Stovell says... > >> The UK Government used to have (may still have) a policy of only using >> software that is ISO standards compliant. OO is, I'm not sure about MSO. > > UK Govt runs on MSO. That settles the arguement! -- Peter. 2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.
From: Phil Stovell on 16 Jan 2010 03:55 On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 08:40:48 +0000, PeterC wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 19:39:52 -0000, Conor wrote: > >> In article <pan.2010.01.14.22.38.12.518987(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk>, Phil >> Stovell says... >> >>> The UK Government used to have (may still have) a policy of only using >>> software that is ISO standards compliant. OO is, I'm not sure about >>> MSO. >> >> UK Govt runs on MSO. > > That settles the arguement! Now we know why our taxes are so high, MSO at £547 for the tea ladies!
From: TMack on 16 Jan 2010 05:57
chrisv wrote: > TMack wrote: > >> This whole debate about OOo vs MSO is missing the major point. > > I don't think it is being missed... > >> The vast >> majority of MS Office users in the workplace barely understand the >> basic functions of Word. They haven't a clue about Excel or >> PowerPoint. They might (just) be able to view an Excel spreadsheet >> or a PowerPoint file but actually doing anything else with either is >> beyond them. > > The above I agree with, and is, essentially the point that some of us > have been making all-along. Most users just need the basic functions. > The vast bulk of MSO, or OO, is waste, for most users. > >> It took them ages >> to master the few basic Word functions that are within their >> capability. > > This I do not agree with. The basic font/formatting/printing options > that are mostly used are easy and fast to learn, for all but the most > "technically challenged" people. > >> Employers know that the real cost of migrating to OOo would be a >> substantial proportion of their workforce being rendered useless >> overnight and huge costs associated with training people to use OOo >> instead. > > Nonsense. If you can use one word processor, you can use another. > You might stumble-around a little bit at first, finding things. Big > deal. > >> (snip) >> These people would NOT adapt easily despite the >> extent to which OOo and MS Office are alike in basic functions. You and I would have no problem in similar circumstances. However most users are afraid of anything that is the slightest bit different. OOo wouldn't look exactly the same as MSO and that would put many of them into a blind panic. Its a bit like the three-year old who was asked how many apples there would be if 2 apples were put with 3 apples. The child answed correctly "5". He was then asked about 1 orange being put with 4 oranges and he burst into tears, saying "I only know how to do it with apples". ( ....and with a bit of luck that will start an Apple vs PC branch of this thread!) -- Tony '04 Ducati ST3, '08 DL650GT, '87 semi-rat LS650, OMF#24 |