Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 16th Nov 2005 18:35 UTC, submitted by Frank Suhn
Thread beginning with comment 61335
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-15
Might just as well run windows then, right? Somehow, I don't think this was how it was supposed to work out. An OOo/FF duopoly is not much of an improvement over an MS monopoly. Competition was supposed to *increase* our choices ..
It is a huge improvement over MS monopoly because of one thing: open standards. If ODF becomes the de facto standard, competing products will have a far lower treshold to climb when entering the market. An office can choose to use another office suite without having to worry about compatibility with other offices.
OOo is currently the only opensource office suite that can stand up against MS Office, and it runs on Windows which makes transitions way easier. Moving over to KOffice would be a far more difficult task for an office running windows.
OOo/FF might be standard among OSS but that doesn't mean that there aren't choices.