Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th May 2009 19:06 UTC
Linux We all know them. We all hate them. They are generally overdone, completely biased, or so vague they border on the edge of pointlessness (or toppled over said edge). Yes, I'm talking about those "Is Linux ready for the desktop" articles. Still, this one is different.
Permalink for comment 364248
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Does anyone really find Open Office...
by Dr.Mabuse on Tue 19th May 2009 06:48 UTC
Member since:

...As bad as the article suggests?

I've heard this comment levelled at Open Office many times (slow start times) and it's something I've never really noticed on Windows (or Linux.) The difference would have to be really small on any semi-modern hardware capable of running Windows XP properly.

On the other hand, Open Office is a much smaller distribution, seems to be a more straight-forward install (and uninstall) with less unwanted (silent) "system integrations" and I've found it to be generally a far better behaving application suite that does everything I need.

Of course, I have supported Microsoft Office in the corporate enviroment for a long time (from it's 2.0 days) I've had more head-aches from this application suite than I care to recall. The list of problems over the years is, quite frankly, endless - as any honest and experienced support specialist will tell you.

How many people can really find significant differences in capabilities between Word and Writer, or Excel and Calc?

Couple that to Microsoft's perpetual upgrade cycle where you are asked to pay top-dollar for software that breaks backwards compatability intentionally, changes are made for changes sake, and existing bugs are ignored, I'm not looking back at MS Office with any sentimental feelings, that's for sure!

I have similiar thoughts about other points made in this "shortcomings" article, so I have to wonder how "constructive" this author is really trying to be?

Reply Score: 2