[dba-Tech] Xandros running MS Office?

"It seems like the results of your reviews often are quite different
from those of others." gustav

...I have no drum to beat other than TCO ...I don't personally like or
dislike either MS or Linux ...just use the best tool for the job ...so far
I've not found a Linux implementation w/supporting apps that comes anywhere
near doing what MS XP/Office Pro is capable of ...not even close re
functionality ...and even further, much further, when it comes to non-geek
user support requirements ...which is why I crack up every time I read some
buzz head going on and on about how cool the latest Linux desktop is ...I
don't need a "cool" interface, I need one that works for technically
incompetent users.

...I'd love to be able to provide my clients a "free" OS and apps that did
everything they need and allows me to provide extended solutions for their
business ...but at $89 a pop PLUS, the "free" quickly becomes a money sink
:(

...as for my use of "proprietary" I'll grant that the gnu license says its
all public code ...but in reality how many people are going to support the
code themselves ....maybe 0.00000000000000003% of the targeted users
...which makes implementations like this effectively proprietary from most
potential user's viewpoint ...imnsho :)

William Hindman
<http://www.freestateproject.org> - Next Year In The Free State!


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gustav Brock" <gustav at cactus.dk>
To: "Discussion of Hardware and Software issues"
<dba-tech at databaseadvisors.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: [dba-Tech] Xandros running MS Office?


> Hi William
>
> > ...Linux is open source gustav ...Xandros wants $89 for its
implementation
> > ...Xandros either adds value via their cross-Windows code or wants me to
pay
> > for what I can otherwise get for free ...if they actually add value to
> > justify an $89 price, who besides Xandros is supporting their
> > implementation? ...ergo, its a proprietary implementation of Linux :(
>
> Ahh, William, you know better - it's an implementation ... proprietary is
> a difficult word to append to Linux.
>
> > ...as for your comments re IBM, you'd best update your news source
...IBM
> > backed WWWAAAAAAYYYY off that statement the very next day saying it was
only
> > a desired objective, had no force de jure, and no division even had such
a
> > move on the planning board ...the very next day Forrester Research
released
> > a study showing that despite the hype, its survey of corporate IT showed
> > less than 5% of  firms even had a plan to explore open source in the
next
> > five years :(
>
> Sorry, haven't heard of that.
>
> > ...in other words, just like with Sun's alleged conversion to Open
Source,
> > the Linux community hyped something that is at least as bad as the vapor
> > ware we're used to from MS ...if Linux is to gain any credibility in the
> > real world as a viable business/consumer desktop OS, it has to stop this
> > continual spin and start delivering ...as in Open Office ...I put it on
a
> > test system a few months back and came away angry at wasting so much
time on
> > something with less functionality and far more bugs than the old MS
Works :(
>
> It seems like the results of your reviews often are quite different
> from those of others.
>
> /gustav
>
>
> >> Linux proprietary ... that was new, William.
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-Tech mailing list
> dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>