John Locke <johnlocke98513@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:43:39 +0000, Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>>Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> Alfresco's Open Source Barometer
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>| One of the most interesting additions to the survey this year is a question
>>>| about which office suite people use. Overall, OpenOffice.org chalks up a very
>>>| respectable 24% to Microsoft Office's 66%. This is a much higher penetration
>>>| than I would have guessed for open source on the desktop, and suggests that
>>>| among those adopting open source programs OpenOffice.org is doing really
>>>| well ? pretty much at the Firefox level of success.
>>> `----
>>>
>>> http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=475&blogid=14
>>>
>>> Last year it was 20% of The Register's reader who said they were using
>>> OpenOffice.org.
>>
>>Interesting... the only interesting metric of foss usage is foss usage.
>>As there is no market for linux itself, or at least, a very small one,
>>it's not something you can quantify, since there's nothing to quantify,
>>however, usage is the interesting thing.
>>
>>OO.org at 24% is large enough to be essentially unstoppable now, in
>>spite of all Microsoft's efforts at corrupting both ECMA and ISO.
>>
> I think the days of high priced office solutions from Microsoft are
> numbered. There are now other viable options...even Abiword
> if you just need some word processing !
But like most "advocates" in COLA you have no idea about HOW Office is
used. You don't understand how people have developed scripting and
ActiveX/COM interfaces to the office suite to do things
automagically. It's like when people say Evolution does the same as
Outlook. Wel yes if you ONLY look at the creation and management of
basic email accounts. Certainly not when you look at the vbscripting and
workflow management possibilities.
|
|
