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 101392
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: OpenOffice.org 2.0
by naelurec on Sat 4th Mar 2006 23:31 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: OpenOffice.org 2.0"
naelurec
Member since:
2006-02-15

"Then why aren't any fortune 500 companies using OO.o?"

1. OpenOffice.org doesn't come with Outlook.
2. OpenOffice.org is not compatible with many 3rd party tools, scripts, macros, etc that businesses use
3. Its not fully compatible with MSO's file formats
4. It doesn't cleanly integrate with active directory/group policy

In addition to this, there is cost involved in retraining, reprogramming and debugging the migration to OOo. Given the volume discount pricing larger companies receive (not to mention the warm fuzzy feeling of MS support), the license cost of MSO perhaps ends up equalling the same as a few hours of productivity loss per employee per year .. in other words - not that big of a cost with all things considered.

Without a strategic stake in the success of OOo/ODF, what company would want to voluntarily migrate to OOo/ODF? I think it is still way to early to see a lot of migration to OOo/ODF.. hopefully with the massive changes in Office, it might make companies evaluate the possibility of a migration (And look at it as a strategic move to eliminate the tie-in to a single technology vendor). We'll see..

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: OpenOffice.org 2.0
by Finalzone on Sun 5th Mar 2006 02:08 in reply to "RE[5]: OpenOffice.org 2.0"
Finalzone Member since:
2005-07-06

1. OpenOffice.org doesn't come with Outlook.
Not a big deal. IMHO, a mail software should not be integrated with an Office suite.

2. OpenOffice.org is not compatible with many 3rd party tools, scripts, macros, etc that businesses use
The real problem is many of these macros rely heavily on VBscript i.e optimized for Microsoft Office and most of them are not standardized. This is a very bad habit that should be avoided. You have to admit OO.o did a great job to support most of these macros. This is also apply on this quote:

In addition to this, there is cost involved in retraining, reprogramming and debugging the migration to OOo. [sic]
Which is why it is a good habit for business to install OO.o along side MSO. Within time, employers will get opportunity to adapt for the change which is why Massachutsett set for an entire year to move from proprietary format to ODF.

3. Its not fully compatible with MSO's file formats
Not OO.o developers fault because Microsoft is unwilling to release the sources of these formats. ODF was created to not depend on a single vendor. Then again, you have a great chance that doc format from Word 97 won't be the same when opening on Word 2003.

Microsoft still have time to add ODF support though.

Edited 2006-03-05 02:10

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: OpenOffice.org 2.0
by FrankNBeans on Sun 5th Mar 2006 19:18 in reply to "RE[6]: OpenOffice.org 2.0"
FrankNBeans Member since:
2006-01-30

"1. OpenOffice.org doesn't come with Outlook.
Not a big deal. IMHO, a mail software should not be integrated with an Office suite."

Are you sure you've used Outlook and not just Outlook Express? Outlook is much more than just a mail program. In fact, it's extremely useful even if you never use it for email.

Reply Parent Score: 1