Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 3rd Mar 2006 21:44 UTC
Microsoft While Microsoft faces a host of challenges in maintaining its market share numbers and persuading customers to upgrade to its 2007 Office System suite of products when released in the second half of this year, its competitors face an equally daunting task of winning users away from Office 2007 and growing their numbers. Heading the list of challenges facing Microsoft is the fact that Office 2007 has a new user interface, which could require extensive staff retraining at a significant cost, as well as a new file format, which has the potential to create compatibility issues.
Thread beginning with comment 101140
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
OpenOffice.org 2.0
by visconde_de_sabugosa on Fri 3rd Mar 2006 22:07 UTC
visconde_de_sabugosa
Member since:
2005-11-14

Now that

- OpenOffice.org 2.0 has the same menus of today's MS Office and MS Office 2007 will have different UI and menus
- OpenOffice.org 2.0 is free (as beer and freedom) and multiplatform and MS Office 2007 will be not cheap, open and multiplatform
- MS Office 2007 will use another file formats, like OpenOffice.org (when compared to MS Office), and probably file imports won't be perfect (on both programs)
-MS Office 2007 probably will not run on windows 9x and NT 4. OO.org 2.0 will run.


there are not reasons to delay migration to OpenOffice.org !

Reply Score: 4

RE: OpenOffice.org 2.0
by sappyvcv on Sat 4th Mar 2006 00:24 in reply to "OpenOffice.org 2.0"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Oh there are plenty of reasons:
- OO.org uses a lot of memory and is kind of slow[er than MSO]
- OO.org lacks a lot of features MSO does that businesses and power users use

Ther eis more, bhut that's off the top of my head.

Hey, if you just need basic formatting, OO.org is fine. However it is NOT a solution for everyone, and you are delusional if you believe so.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: OpenOffice.org 2.0
by kaiwai on Sat 4th Mar 2006 01:28 in reply to "RE: OpenOffice.org 2.0"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I think there is a bigger reason, which is this - taken directly from the article, page 2:

"But I am still tracking it and may use it in pilots," Rosen said. "Compatibility is critical, since we receive so many documents from outside sources. We also have a Microsoft Enterprise license, so there is also not a big motive to move to OpenOffice or StarOffice."

Having played with OpenOffice, the incompatibilities and interface differences were sufficient that the cost to change would be significant, he said, adding though that how this plays out with Office 2007 remains to be seen.

If IBM had a really robust workplace client and Sun an innovative offering that included an e-mail client and better collaboration support, even more of Microsoft's market share could be eroded, but "those alternatives just don't exist at this point," McNabb said.


1) There is no viable alternative to Office - Office is more than just typing up word documents; many people here just don't get it.

2) Incompatibility is a big issue - atleast with Office 2007, it'll be simply a matter of savind in the Word XP/2003 format - hardly something terribly difficult.

I'm sure if we sat down with Fortune 500 companies and asked 'what features do you require in the applications you use', OpenOffice.org wouldn't even come to close to meeting half of them - thats the sad reality; too bad SUN has a greater interest in acquiring poorly performing companies then running them into the ground than purchasing companies with possibly winning products, such as Wordperfect Suite, porting them to UNIX using Mainsoft and creating a bundle with Solaris.

But hey, why invest money when you can do something even easier, whine, whine, whine and whine.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: OpenOffice.org 2.0
by hal2k1 on Sat 4th Mar 2006 05:35 in reply to "RE: OpenOffice.org 2.0"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

"Oh there are plenty of reasons:
- OO.org uses a lot of memory and is kind of slow[er than MSO]
- OO.org lacks a lot of features MSO does that businesses and power users use"

This is just not true.

Please stick to the facts.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: OpenOffice.org 2.0
by gustl on Mon 6th Mar 2006 12:52 in reply to "RE: OpenOffice.org 2.0"
gustl Member since:
2006-01-19

- OO.org can handle huge documents (100 pages with 70 graphics included) on my Athlon 1200+, 512 MB RAM. My conclusion: OO.org does not waste memory, it might just have a larger footprint when started with an empty document.
- I never found anything that I could not do with OO.org. The advanced features just are not face-offs from MS Office like the interface is. If you want to do the advanced things do not expect from yourselves to learn how to do them in a few days.

Most businesses use Excel as a front-end for some Visual Basic scripts (all they need is a programming language), there are better databases than access, and MS Word has problems handling large documants (needs to split them and does that badly).

I know that MIGRATING is impossible for lots of businesses, but that only shows how much of a lock-in MS tries to maintain (and succeeds to maintain). Businesses have repeatedly proven that it is cheaper to go with non-MS software than being MS-dependant.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: OpenOffice.org 2.0
by Deviate_X on Sat 4th Mar 2006 16:10 in reply to "OpenOffice.org 2.0"
Deviate_X Member since:
2005-07-11

visconde_de_sabugosa: "MS Office 2007 probably will not run on windows 9x and NT 4. OO.org 2.0 will run."

OpenOffice.org 2.0 is a terribly slow and resource intensive application on even todays multi-Ghz, multi-Gb computers.

I seriously doubt that any machine still running win 9x or Nt4 would even be able to load OpenOffice.org 2.0 without bringing such a machine to its knees.

http://groups.google.co.uk/groups/search?hl=en&q=OpenOffice.org++sl...

Edited 2006-03-04 16:11

Reply Parent Score: 0