ActiveMac - The Most Activated mac Resource

ActiveMac

User Controls

New User

Edit/View My Profile

ActiveMac

Articles

Forums

Links

News

News Search

Reviews

News Centers

Windows/Microsoft

DVD

ActiveHardware

Xbox

MaINTosh

News Search

ANet Chats

The Lobby

Special Events Room

Developer's Lounge

XBox Chat

FAQ's

Windows 98/98 SE

Windows 2000

Windows Me

Windows "Whistler" XP

Windows CE

Internet Explorer 6

Internet Explorer 5

Xbox

DirectX

DVD's

TopTechTips

Registry Tips

Windows 95/98

Windows 2000

Internet Explorer 4

Internet Explorer 5

Windows NT Tips

Program Tips

Easter Eggs

Hardware

DVD

Latest Reviews

Applications

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Norton SystemWorks 2002

Hardware

Intel Personal Audio Player 3000

Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer

Site News/Info

About This Site

Affiliates

ANet Forums

Default Home Page

Link To Us

Links

Member Pages

Site Search

Awards

Credits
�1997/2004, Active Network. All Rights Reserved.
Layout & Design by Designer Dream. Content written by the Active Network team. Please click here for full terms of use and restrictions or read our Privacy Statement.

IBM Throws Out Microsoft Office

Time: 16:03 EST/21:03 GMT | News Source: *Linked Within Post* | Posted By: Andre Da Costa

360,000 IBM workers have been told to stop using Microsoft Office and switch to the Open Office-based software Symphony.

Quoting an inside source, the German economic newspaper, �Handelsblatt� reports that staff at IBM have been given ten days to change to Symphony, IBM's in-house Lotus software. The use of Microsoft Office will in future require managerial approval.

Write Comment
Return to News

Displaying 26 through 50 of 352
Prev | Last | Next

The time now is 12:13:01 AM ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us

#26 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/23/2009 8:07:13 AM

#23: [1] You're trying to minimize the expense of Office by putting it down to a tiny number per workstation amortized over a couple of years, but there are a LOT of workstations. How many schools have systems running Office? How many schools does the average school board support? How many school boards are there in each state on average? How many in all of America? That's where my 100,000 guess came from (and it is a guess).

[2] The costs of transition are a one-time expense. From there, you realize greater savings the longer you use OO.

But sadly I would assert that...

Which one of Ketchum's kids are you? You may assert all you like, but MS's bogus ROI tricks have long since been debunked.

#24: [1] I made a blind guess as to how many computers running Office there were per state school board.

[2] Sure you have. Why would an MS fanboy install something he considers inferior?

#27 By 89249 (64.207.240.90) at 9/23/2009 10:26:11 AM

#26 It doesn't matter how many workstations we are talking about the costs are fixed per computer and worker when you do budgets and run a company. With increases costs are also increases in revenue (unless you are the government). It doesn't matter how many times you multiply it we're still talking about 1 computer to x workers/students. That is your cost to employ or educate that individual. It is such a small cost in almost every case that you are spending more keeping that individual comfortable through climate control or lighting.

Again, making an insignificant number significant by multiplying it is useless.
-----
See I'm explaining to you that MS's ROI "tricks" are not tricks. You're talking about about pennies a day at best for most of Microsoft's Products to support each individual or customer. Even with Windows Server you're talking about around a dollar per day cost per worker in many cases to open up your options to millions more it professionals, utility packages, and software packages alone. It is easy to understand yet hard to swallow for you I'm sure. The purchase price of nearly all software is more than palatable when looked at through the prism of logic.

Again, even ignoring the previous paragraph Microsoft's installation base has barely noticed Linux in it's primary marketplace. Common estimates put Microsoft's "Server" marketshare at a little less than half in 2000. Today Microsoft estimated to have anywhere from 60-70%. Again they realized the ROI argument didn't need to be made as I asserted because they, even after having their bogus tricks debunked, are still finding more and more marketshare.

Now, I know the default position in your head is "ppl are just dumb k?" but frankly there are plenty like me who realize the value added in running windows boxes. Saving $799 on my dell purchase on a server I will use for 3 years to accomodate 50+ users just isn't worth it.
-----
Even inferior things are still useful for some tasks. Surely I could drive a Ferrari to work every day but my Jeep does just fine and is more cost effective with my budget. OO is great for bro's who just need a bit more than Wordpad (although now I point these workers to google apps, which will soon change to MS's we office). Making a list or keeping a supply count in a spreadsheet that is for that individual's use is fine. The person most likely doesn't even have the skillset to utilize Office's features to begin with. So in my senario it still works. It's not worth the $0.52 for that user to have such a marginal increase in productivity so OO it is. Which, funny enough, is the reason it gets installed more often than not. Google Apps & MS Ad driven Web Apps will soon kill that reasoning though.

This post was edited by MrHumpty on Wednesday, September 23, 2009 at 10:30.

#28 By 89249 (64.207.240.90) at 9/23/2009 10:34:58 AM

Also I forgot to mention. On the subject of the article I think it's cool that IBM is "eating their own dog food." Frankly no product can become good w/o real world testing. This will finally get some of that testing done since I havent heard of anybody using this software let alone talking about it. Granted I don't care much to follow productivity software news but still I had to google what they were talking about.

Hopefully it will make the product decent and provide some extra competition for google/corel/microsoft. Speaking of which I wonder how long WordPerfect will survive as Governments stop using it and other feature rich and cheaper options start showing up.

#29 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/23/2009 12:51:54 PM

#27: WTF are you talking about?? You cannot simply wave away the massive costs by arguing it's pennies per day per system when you're talking about a very large amount of systems. When you add up all the systems that are pennies per day, it's tens of thousands of dollars per day. That is a significant amount of money for strapped school boards. You can't just dismiss it.

#30 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 9/23/2009 9:16:05 PM

Latch,

Be very careful what you wish for. If there is no value in software then if you work in IT by extension you provide no value to a business (Why aren't your services free?).

I would argue otherwise. I am tired of those who think all intellectual property should be free. If this is the case all regular workers in the Western World should be very afraid. The first world countries for all intents and purposes survive on intellectual property.

This post was edited by oldog on Wednesday, September 23, 2009 at 21:16.

#31 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 9/24/2009 4:28:13 AM

Latch,

Too many people look at MS Office in isolation. While the system is powerful enough in its own right, office is a system and is most often used as part of a large number of internal and external members. We can list the obvious extensions found in Exchange and SharePoint, or Live Communications Server, and these too, while very powerful, aren't enough. A great many people use Office as a means to share external data - apps data that is exchanged with key external partners. Take insurance claims processing, for example. Seems small - until you consider how many different companies process and touch such data - realizing of course, they do so not with static data in flat files, but dynamic data as dependent upon secondary, or post-processing as it is upon the applications that originally stored and helped manipulate it. Only when "Office" is assessed in this larger context can its value be well understood or compared to alternatives.

Open Office does not allow for this and it does matter - a lot. The cost of Microsoft Office has to be considered inclusive of this context (at least).

Finally, I know that the most important parts of my business are the people that work in it. The same is true of every business and practice we support. All of us work hard to ensure that the people in our businesses have the best tools possible and that coming to work - which in all cases involves using information that is exchanged digitally, presents a good experience for people. If we were to force our people to use Open Office, absent the necessary capabilities inherent to the Microsoft Office System, we'd be making their jobs much harder and they'd be much less productive as a result. There are costs associated with using any product, including MS Office, but in so many cases, the costs of NOT using MS Office are much higher.

#32 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/24/2009 8:13:42 AM

#30: Be very careful what you wish for. If there is no value in software then if you work in IT by extension you provide no value to a business (Why aren't your services free?).

I'm not Richard Stallman. I do not for an instant think that all IP should be free. However, if there is some that is free and it is suitable for your use, why not use it? This especially true if the alternative is expensive and you don't have a lot of money. It's not black & white, all or nothing. Many people donate their time & skills to make free software better. Free software can coexist with commercial software. One does not preclude the other.

#31: We're talking about usage in public schools and high schools by students. They don't need all the bargle in Office that you mentioned. They need a simple office suite that performs the most common tasks.

#33 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 9/24/2009 8:47:03 AM

#32, No Latch, young people in schools most especially need to use these types of tools and in ever increasingly sophisticated ways - that is what they are going to encounter in the real world.

Elsewhere on the board there has been a lot of discussion around what students should be learning and certainly, work flows and the tools used throughout them are among the things students need to have experience with.

#34 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/24/2009 9:26:24 AM

#33: No, no they don't. This is purely you pushing your usual Microsoft agenda. Half of these MS tools won't even exist in 10-15 years time or not in their current form. The "real world" will have changed in the meantime.

#35 By 89249 (70.177.100.33) at 9/25/2009 6:13:30 PM

When you add up all the systems that are pennies per day, it's tens of thousands of dollars per day.

If we're talking about school systems lets get something straight. You are talking about many students and teachers per computer on average for government school funded computers. That in itself strengthens my argument.

But to address your breathless argument above. The average cost of educating a single student in the United States in government schools is around $8000/year. If you think pulling Office out of the school for OO is going to make up for the thousands of easier cost cuts you're drunk. Government Schooling is plagued with waste. Trim that waste and then we can talk about the tiny amount of money spent on productivity software.

Again, the cost per student is tiny if not insignificant when put into context. It doesn't matter if we're talking about educating 1 student or 5 million. All costs can be broken down on a per student basis. Cutting out becoming familier with the productivity software they are going to use when they get a job or simply being more productive in general in classes etc. to save ~$200 of the ~$8000 costs to educate that student is a joke.

#36 By 2851815 (192.200.105.220) at 10/13/2014 7:50:24 PM