| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
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 |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
"Goodbye Windows" | |
|
||
| Time: 09:27 EST/14:27 GMT | News Source: CRN | Posted By: Andre Da Costa | ||
|
Four years ago this week, Frank Ohlhorst, who is now director of CRN Labs, turned many heads when he wrote a piece headlined, "Constructing A Windows-Less Office." The upshot of his story, and findings by the CRN Test Center, was that a Linux-and-Open Source-based office network was not only do-able, it could actually help IT providers close sales. A Windows-free environment could, in fact, be deployed. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 215 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:03:27 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 9589 (66.56.129.233) at 11/29/2005 11:30:57 AM |
|
Well, I guess it just gets down to who you want to pay software licensing fees too. In this case, a IBM's software standards strategy group member, is replacing Microsoft software for IBM's (hey, what a surprise!).
Meanwhile, for the price of Lotus Notes client, this guy could buy the entire Office suite of applications instead of using the just down right irrating (it goes beyond clunky) Lotus Notes and the nearly non function, in an enterprise, Open Office. Then, the author states he is using DB2 and WebSphere. Well, DB2 is only second to Oracle's database in price and WebSphere has no peer in terms of price. It is by far the most expensive web server on the market. So, the author very cleverly leaves out the part about saving any money or actually improving productivity and therefore profits. He leavea out both up front costs and the cost of training your staff to using these other tools. Then, there is the lost productivity and profits when your staff tries to communicate with employees of another firm. Yeah - just send me the .doc file on that contract - whoops! We don't use Word. Never mind, I'll send the contract to your competitor! lol! Yeah - but we are using "standards" based software - IBM standards! lol |
| #2 By 8556 (12.217.111.92) at 11/29/2005 11:41:33 AM |
| Same old boring story. Just because one can, doesn't mean one would or should go "Windows-less" in a company. There are few business's larger than a mom and pop shop, that currently use Windows that don't have at least one important app that is Windows specific and doesn't have a direct open source offset. People in general don't want to change what they are using, if it works well, until it becomes painful, as in a serious money pit or loss of productivity At the present time Windows can be an annoyance at times. However, Windows has not been an ongoing source of pain for (I presume) almost all users, or it would already have been replaced by a Mac or Linux. |
| #3 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 11/29/2005 12:01:36 PM |
|
#1: How is OO non-functional in the enterprise? The desktop paradigm has been around forever now, so any training costs will be minimal and one-time. Just like moving to Vista and Office 12 (but MS never talks about training costs when moving to newer versions of their software.) Lastly, OO can open Word documents, in case you weren't aware.
|
| #4 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 11/29/2005 12:11:31 PM |
|
Lastly, OO can open Word documents, in case you weren't aware.
So can WordPerfect (much better, incidentally), but that didn't prevent the mass exodus from WordPerfect--the one-time leader. The problem is, if it isn't Word, it simply isn't Word. 99% compatibility doesn't matter one whit when that 1% takes "just a little bit of time" on each document to do clean-up work--or even if it's just the occasional document. Multiply that 1% across each worker in the business, and the aggravation and time lost (not to mention the effect it has on your company's reputation amongst its external collaborators and others) far, far exceeds that of the software expense. I've witnessed it first-hand with WordPerfect--it's simply not worth the effort. The product has to be significantly BETTER, not simply compatible and a copycat. This post was edited by bluvg on Tuesday, November 29, 2005 at 12:13. |
| #5 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 11/29/2005 1:29:21 PM |
|
#4: Agreed, and hopefully the age of document format nonsense is coming to an end.
Posted with Firefox 1.5 Final - w00t! Get it while it's hot, Parkkker. |
| #6 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 11/29/2005 1:41:14 PM |
|
#5 Well, hot or not, most Firefox users are on Windows.
Linux has a trivial share of the desktop market, and it isn't growing. |
| #7 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 11/29/2005 3:16:53 PM |
|
#6: Just admit that you love open source and you'll be able to sleep better at night.
|
| #8 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 11/29/2005 3:44:29 PM |
|
#8: It's on the mozilla FTP servers. Neowin also has links to the binaries.
|
| #9 By 9589 (68.17.52.2) at 11/29/2005 4:24:23 PM |
|
#3. Latch, if you worked in an enterprise no one that posts to this site would have to tell you how it is - over and over and over again.
By the way, like most companies today, we don't spend money on basic computer training. It is required and depending on the position the employee is accepting, the employee is tested as to his or her proficiency with Office. And, again, elementary schools, junior highs, high schools, community colleges and colleges are all teaching Office not some raggedy copy-cat crap like OO. Also, Microsoft, as just one example, has gone to some lengths to ensure that the Office suite of applications lend themselves to how a law office works: the formats that they use; templates for depositions, pleadings, etc.; tutorials on how to create contracts, billable hour formats, numerous specific types of contract formats, etc; legal user guides, etc. Plus, there are third party software that work with Office to further enhance making a legal office run efficiently - one of the many drags on corporate profits - mostly to entertain the various levels of government and regulatory bodies with the data they require and/or mandate by rules, regulations, and laws. The reason that I mention what is probably obvious to most in this audience, but seemingly you, is that all of the above would have to be recreated using another software product or set of products. And, this is just one area of a business that this is so. Why are you here, again? #4. bluvg, ditto |
| #10 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 11/30/2005 8:17:04 AM |
|
#11: So, to make a long story short, you have no idea. That's what I thought.
|
| #11 By 9589 (68.17.52.2) at 11/30/2005 9:38:52 AM |
|
#12. Latch, I think I answered your question with alacrity as did bluvg.
However, for more information, I would get hold of the CTO of the City of Munich, Germany. He seems to have a handle on open sore in the enterprise. What is it now? 3 years and counting and they still haven't migrated to open sore. lol Now, to answer my question - why are you here? |
| #12 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 11/30/2005 10:02:58 AM |
|
#13: Because I'm here, roll the bones.
|
| #13 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 11/30/2005 10:48:11 AM |
| Rush fan? Or you believe you're "just a curious accident in the backwater"? |
| #14 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 11/30/2005 11:45:33 AM |
|
#15: R30, baby!
|
| #15 By 37047 (216.191.227.68) at 11/30/2005 2:07:05 PM |
|
#11: You make a valid point. The only way that MS could get legal firms to switch to MS Office was to create all the templates for them that they had created already in WordPerfect, which was the standard for law offices everywhere. If someone were to recreate all those templates in another word processor, like Open Office or Star Office, then they might be able to make inroads into that market. Bribery is indeed a powerful marketing tool, as MS has known for a long time. Those are the sortof issues that will decide if Company X will switch or not, as most word processors can be figured out fairly easily by an experienced user.
And as Latch mentioned, upgrading to the next MS Office will require some relearning, no doubt, as will switching to Vista. But these are not exactly horribly difficult transitions, and an experienced user can re-learn the new skills over time. MS does not need to worry about competing technologies, as they have deep enough pockets that they can either buy a competitor, in the case of a proprietary product, or buy the best spinmeisters to completely discredit the open source alternatives with the portion of the market that is gullible to the MS marketing machine, which just so happens to be the majority of the management types who decide such things in the corporate world. In short, if the decision was made on technical grounds, by technical people, MS Office would likely be a runner up already. However, since managers and executives make these sorts of decisions, marketing abilities win the day. And MS can market their wares better than almost anyone. |
| #16 By 9589 (66.56.129.233) at 11/30/2005 4:45:41 PM |
|
Yeah, MysticSentinel, you just keep thinking that its Microsoft's marketing machine that keeps them on top. lol
By the way, show me a tech magazine article comparing feature by feature Office vs. Open Office. Back when Word Perfect and Office where competing with each other there were these kinds of comparisons galore from the likes of PC Magazine, PC World, etc. Not one of them has done one between Office and Open Office, because it would only highlight the stark differences between the feature rich Microsoft Office and a crude, knock-off, me too Open Office. In other words, (this is for the thick Latch) Microsoft Office is far and away technically superior. The "marketing" you here from the open sore crowd about Open Office is that it is . . . er open source or . . . er its "free." Yeah, that's working! lol By the way, Word Perfect lost the Office suite "wars" because they didn't create a Windows version soon enough, they didn't have an Office suite - yeah, you guessed it - soon enough, and they didn't make the several applications work as an integrated whole and carry much the same UI accross not only the apps in Office, but accross all Microsoft created apps and a road map for third parties to do the same - something that Word Perfect never really followed. By the way, corporations adopted Office not because of "management types" so much as people buying and using Office at home and in schools and demanding that it be used at the office. Also, I don't where you work, but the "tech types" are the ones making the decisions where I work as to what software is used, what it is run on, and how it integrates with other operating systems and applications. Where I work "management types" focuses on the core competencies of our corporation - in our case financial services. That is there job, not IT. Maybe you are working at the wrong company? |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 215 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:03:27 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
