"Meanwhile, Microsoft FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) attacks raise concerns about Linux and other open source software"

Once again Joe chooses to discuss Microsoft FUD, while ignoring Linux FUD spread by the macros. Secondly, he makes it appear as if it's only the FUD that's holding back Linux. Way to go, Joe.

Reflections wrote: "Once again Joe chooses to discuss Microsoft FUD, while ignoring Linux FUD spread by the macros. Secondly, he makes it appear as if it's only the FUD that's holding back Linux."

Mmmm, really?

From the story and referring to Microsoft FUD: "I'm not convinced that any of these efforts are all that effective."

Read again. Topic is Office, Linux and successful desktop-to-server integration.

Joe

We all know that Joe is a fucking piece of shit. Poor pig :(

Visit:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/
She really knows what she says.

Joe,
I do not disagree with most of what you wrote about Linux and MS Office, up to a point.

On the Business desktop, there will be businesses that need MS Office, and others that can use a different one. Not everyone is a "power user" or someone like you who writes these articles and is dependent on using the latest MS Office they can get their hands on. I can actually see where you would need the latest MS Office for your work.

For many Businesses, that can get by without MS Office, Linux is actually a reason to switch as the cost of MS Office can be saved. The cost of MS Office being higher than the savings of MS Windows alone.

For home desktop users, most are not going need MS Office. OpenOffice or others will do at least what 80% or more home users need.

And there are OpenOffice versions available for Windows versions too.

So the question is, what would make people or businesses change over to Linux? Savings, Freedom of licenses, stability? Yes, Linux has those, but doubt that is what is going make people switch.

Vista, perhaps is. Is it because Vista is so bad, or what? Maybe, maybe not. Is it the expense, partly, most users are only getting Vista on new machines.

I think the Jury is still out on Vista yet. While I have not have too much good to say about Vista, it will, I think improve with Service Pack 1 Beta, due out on the 14th of this month.

Now while I think some distro's of Linux are very good, (and some not so good for some users) I do believe that Linux can only get new users from Windows market share. My point, no matter how good Linux is, Vista and perhaps even Seven to follow, are going have to be train wrecks for Linux to gain a lot of market share.

Also, as much as I hate to say it, in the short run, Mac OS X, will probably make the most gains in the desktop for awhile.

It is possible, to run MS Office (at least I think some versions, like 97) in Crossover or Wine, from what I have read. Also, as most users are those who are also Windows users, they can either dual boot into Windows and Linux, or run Linux and then their Windows with MS Office in a free Virtual Machine. And yes, you should have a valid Windows and pay M$ its due to do that. So their are work a rounds, as you really don't have to give up on Windows/MS Office (if you already have em) if you use Linux.

The strong points of Linux like Mac is the security. (here comes the flames) Far safer to surf and get your email with Linux or Mac OS X.

Why do people not see this? Whenever I comment at blogs about this problem, I get flamed. But my goal isn't to destroy Linux, it's to point out the one crucial area where Linux needs to improve to compete with Microsoft. It needs applications that are on a par with ones that run on Windows. Someone said to me that Quickbooks runs on Wine, but I feel uncomfortable using Wine for production apps, and I can't find anything that comes close to it in Linux. When is OpenOffice.org going to come out with anything near MS Office? Is there a way it could be forked so development could move faster? I am tired of waiting years for features like animation schemes and improvements to the database!

I really wish (I am not a programmer so can't do it myself) that more people would work on these all-important apps rather than creating yet another distribution just like all the others, but with a few added features.

That's a very good point. I sure would love to have MS Office running on the solid Linux OS.

It is true that Open Office is very good but it's just not good enough. I used to use it a lot for my lab reports and it was fine as far as the writer went but I found the spreadsheet too much lacking in feature for what I needed to do. Things were worst when I had to do team reports as I always was the only Linux/Open Office user in the group. MS Office would never open a .doc file written with OO properly, especially big files with lots of tables, images, graphs and equations. So I stuck with Windows and Office.Although now I've switched for WordPerfect Office and love it. I don't use OO much these days. Maybe a deal with Corel to make a Linux Version of WordPerfect Office would help the cause?

You're right chips. It's possible to run MS Office with Crossover and Wine. It works with 97, 2000, and even 2003. The older the better. I've tried them myself and they work but in my case, thre were always missing features and the programs were very unstable. Conclusion, good but not good enough.

However I know that my personnal experience isn't representative of the majority of the users of office suites out there. And like Chips says, the majority of them are not heavy users. However, the problem is more one of publicity than of compatibility. Most of those people don't even know that alternatives exist. They don't know that there's a free OO and/or OS that would be perfect for their limited needs, in fact many don't are not even sure of what they need when they buy a computer.

Dell and Levono will have some machines with Linux pre-installed. Thats good news, but are we gonna see ads on TV and in news papers about that? If the answer is no then what's the point?

Also, office isn't the only major issue. It's a secret to nobody that PC gaming is a major handicap.

"Mmmm, really?

From the story and referring to Microsoft FUD: "I'm not convinced that any of these efforts are all that effective."

Read again. Topic is Office, Linux and successful desktop-to-server integration.

Joe"

Yes, really. Your actual statement was: "I'm not convinced that any of these efforts are all that effective on the server, because of where and how Linux is used there. The desktop is another matter..."

You seem to attribute desktop Linux's problems to Microsoft's FUD campaign. That sounds good, but it's not true because:

1. Linux is not as user friendly as Microsoft Windows. And I know what I'm talking about here. For all its improvements, Linux is still behind Windows in terms of usability.

2. Microsoft doesn't sell support and software. Linux may be free. Support is not.

Also, I repeat my question: why is it that you focus your attention only on Microsoft's FUD campaign. Aren't Microsoft's competitors indulging in it too? r

Ryannoyed;
Quote;
"Maybe a deal with Corel to make a Linux Version of WordPerfect Office would help the cause?"
---------------------------------------------------
Corel did make a version of Corel Wordperfect Office 8 Personal for Linux, I bought a copy when it came out back years ago at CompUSA. Corel might have, not sure, made Corel Wordperfect 2000 for Linux as well.

Corel fell on hard times, and like Mac did at one time, and got an infusion of Microsoft cash, and dropped any Linux versions at that point.

The corel Office 8 is very dated however, made back in, about 98, guessing. So there are lots of problems installing it in modern kernel Linux distros now, if you can even get it to run. OpenOffice, and even the older StarOffice that OpenOffice is based on are Probably far better options. While the Latest KOffice is also very good, doubt it has compatibility with MS Office, as not everyone (like me) needs or even wants that.

What I would like to see is for IBM, to port their Lotus Smartsuite over to Linux, as I used to be an AMI Pro user back a long time ago.

I have never hardly ever use the spreadsheets functions in an Office Suite anymore, but have heard similar comments to yours.

Linux User;
I think GNUcash is the native program that you might be looking for. As far as running Quickbooks in Wine, I would say give it a try on some non critial stuff for awhile. It works for you, or it dosen't, simple.

I have about one game that I use crossover to play a windows game in, and it actually works better (without crashing) than in XP, where every 2 to 3 hours it crashes. So you never know. It just depends of the app or game.
---------------------------------------------------
The thing to remember sometimes is we expect Windows programs to run on Linux, but why should we? Do native Linux or Mac programs run on Windows? Just a thought.

Re: Linux on the desktop
It sure seems to me that the #1 reason that Linux will not soon (or ever) replace Windows on the desktop is because of Microsoft's Windows monopoly. The monopoly was created by clever financial and political deals, has since been declared illegal (but with no penalty). Wow! Break the law, be convicted, and continue to wildly increase your profits.
Be that as it may, the monopoly exists, won't be going away anytime soon, and that's that. However, regardless of how much or little chance Linux has, Linux is enough to cause Balmer's blood to boil. So it must be taking something away from his chances of becoming the CEO of a trillion-dollar corporation.
For a rather balanced view, check out the blog of Adrian Kingsley-Hughes:
30 things I've learned from using Linux.
Yes, gaming and Wine is on the list as being less than compelling.

Actually, Linux distro's like Ubuntu, PCLinuxOS, Mint, Mepis, and some others, that are very easy to use and install, and can be run from live cd, first, to check if they will find all the hardware, and if you like them, They are free downloads as well

If you want very good free community support for those, its available through the forums. Both the download links and forums links are available at distrowatch.com

The day people no longer use Microsoft Office will be the day Linux will have a majority in OS market share...and that'll probably be the day we all die and go to hell.

When I read Chips's last comment, I realised the reason that Linux will never have as good an "Office" as microsoft.
Look at the various types of "free" OS you guys play around with.
Ubuntu, PCLinuxOS, Mint, Mepis ... I do not know if the same programs will run on each type, but you guys are not satisfied with just making one competitior to MS you have heaps of them, and yet none of them measure up ... do they !
Albert
In other words .... it won't happen !
Chips
Wordperfect ... you have to be joking, the same old problems come into it, that plagued Wordperfect way back when, still plague it now.

Joe, you make some good points about Office and XP (or Vista) and how they must be connected.

My skill level with Office is probably just a couple notches above novice, but I actually use Excel, Word and OneNote quite successfully. They play well together and are versatile, especially OneNote, which author Ed Bott has called a "killer app", and I agree.

Neil, nobody is saying that Linux will take over the desktop market from Windows. Well, nearly nobody. It has to do with the power of a monopoly to create the self-sustaining mass market that pulls in nearly all shrink-wrap product developers. It's a natural state of affairs in which the rich get richer and can afford to buy out competition, purchase market share, and buy lobbyists.
Yes, I agree with you that there are many different Linux-based distribution, though I think you are wrong to state that "you guys" are behind them all as if Linux arises from one cohesive group of people.
You must also admit that there are many different kinds and brands of cars, foods, forms of entertainment, clothing styles, housing designs, vodkas, beer, and so on... Is this wide and confusing market choice a problem? Not to many of us!!! Does it hinder the attainment of a monopoly in personal computing operating systems. Of course! So Gates and Balmer should be giddy with joy and be sitting back quietly and laughing at the struggle and demise of Linux, shouldn't they?
But on the other hand, Linux-based distributions (of which I agree with you that there are many and it can be confusing) has done something that no gadfly operating system has ever done before. It has refused to go away, it has hung on to increase its teeny-tiny share of the desktop market. (Has OS/2 done the same? Amiga? CP/M? Mark Williams Unix? NO!) Nealy 100% of all gadfly operating systems die after a heroic but brief struggle... except for Linux-based operating systems.

Does Steve Balmer openly accuse Amiga of violating his patents? CP/M? QNX which is POSIX-based and shares a lot of the same API-level functionality and "patentable" methods that Linux-based operating systems have. If it upsets Steve and Bill, well, it may not be threating their next billion dollars in personal income, but it IS posing enough of a threat to cause them to worry. And I apologize if I sound like a Microsoft hater (which I wasn't), but a day spent worrying a convicted monopolist is a day well spent! (But that is only an opinion, and there's no attempt to ram it down anyone's throat or anywhere else.)

I happen to have several Windows systems installed at home, and though some of the family uses MS Office and Publisher, a couple of us use OpenOffice. And at work, I use the x86-64 (64-bit) Fedora Core 5 for software development, email access to our Exchange server, web browsing, OOo document creation and reading --- and OO Calc to update MS Excel spreadsheets on Windows shares without causing ANY damager to the spreadsheet!
This 64-bit FC5 system was rebooted on 20 Dec 2006 and then again this June (it was an in-house application integration issue and the quick reboot was deemed easier than undoing the pre-alpha application integration mess). That's a heavily used system that is building applications, running them, running web services, reading email and creating documentation, handling IM... in short, it's a replacement for Windows as a desktop and it never really needs to be rebooted for years at a time. Is it for everyone? NO! Is it for you? Probably not, though I don't mean to put words into anyone's mouth. Is it for me? YES!!!!!!!!!! And should Bill and Steve be upset? Only if they have reason to worry.

Chips;
I'm aware that Corel once made WordPerfect for Linux. It was back when they were making Corel Linux. However, the Linux venture died (in 2001 I think) and Corel Linux changed hands to become Xandros. Right now, I'm using WordPerfect Office X3 on Windows XP and I sure wouldn't mind to see it make a return on the Linux platform. I don't know what Lotus Smartsuite is like so I can't comment on it because unlike Neil I actually try the programs before complaining about them.

Neil;
You bring up an interesting point. While also showing your ignorance. I too wondered what was the point of making all those different flavors of Linux. Especially back to the day when I had to chose which one to use for the very first time. But "free" Linux is as in free speech; everyone can chnge it and make it to his liking. Although I sometimes kind of think that energy is being wasted by scattering it too much (but that's just my opinion). It sure would be more convenient if everybody worked on a single flavor of Linux. On the other hand, I think of the big homogenous network of Windows computers that permitted crap to the "I Love You" proportions to happen and then I realize that both worlds have their advantages and their inconvenients.

Brian,
Even I am not saying that Linux will take over the desktop market, at least anytime soon. I have stated before that it is possible to pick up a few points in market share in the next few years. Then again, who knows without a crystal ball.

It does seem that Dell sales of computers in the USA with Ubuntu Linux on them are not doing badly. Dell is now expanding these sales to Europe;

www.ubuntu.com/news/dell-available-in-europe

Also, Lenovo has been selling to corporate users Suse preinstalls, but this is now extended to anyone;

http://www.informationweek.com/story...eed_ IWK_News

And some perhaps even Acer now might do it;

news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1...9288366,00.htm

The point I am trying to make, is there is some interest in Linux for the Desktop and Business. Or are these companies trying to get something on their computers to sell when XP is not available as an option?

Ryannoyed :

I saved all my old linux disks and the wordperfect 8 for Linux disk. I also have both versions of Corel Linux as well. Now a lot of people was say what a waste of space, and maybe they are right.

But I am thinking to dig them out and run an earilier version of Linux (maybe Red Hat or Corel) with Wordperfect and a bunch of Loki games in it, all in a Virtual Machine. VirtualBox should do it, and its free. That way old and good software can still live.

Other than the Linux version of Wordperfect, I only used Wordperfect 4.2 for Dos at work, remember the big blue screen? I used PFS First Choice back in those days on my first computer, and really liked it. But there was something about the early versions of Perfect, that felt powerful. My first experience with MS Works 3 or 4, not sure which, left me not wanting to ever use another MS product. Although, like everything else, to be fair, MS word products did improve.

Lotus Smartsuite was the Office suite by Lotus, which I think is still owned by IBM. I liked it, AMI Pro was the word processor in it. Lotus Smartsuite being the only commercial suite to be ported to OS/2 and eComStation as well.

The link you gave for your last bullet (Concerted efforts to divide the open-source community) simply summarizes your previous bullets. LOL at that technique. Quite dishonest of you, IMO.

Regardless, that final link also contains a statement that says...

----------------
I think it's obvious at this stage that really what Microsoft is doing is trying to unsettle the marketplace. It isn't working and has not had the slightest impact
----------------

So, there goes ALL your bulleted points.

to penandpaper

The last link I gave gave me an error 404. Its also possible I goofed and pasted in the wrong link. Sorry, I messed it up somehow, here is the correct link;

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39288366,00.htm

yep, error 404, some of the middle numbers got crunched. So not sure how u got that "other page" but maybe you are using IE? LOL Just Kidding.

Even the 2nd link I gave is hosed; try this one;

http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201203176&cid=RSSfeed_IWK_News

I think you either don't know much about Linux, or like many "journalists" don't have the guts to point out its inherent shortcomings for fear of getting flamed. Suggesting that the lack of MS Office or MS FUD is the key to that is ridiculous.

Joe-

You're right. It's about access to eachothers' documents (formats) and the business processes of workgroups working around Word & Excel.

OpenOffice.org will never catch up -- no matter what the very independent OpenOffice/StarOffice engineering team in Hamburg think or believe. It's because their corporate boss, Jonathan Schwartz, has a $ 2Bn deal with Microsoft putting Sun hardware in Microsoft data centers, which saved SUNW and presently accounts for the company's minor turn-around.

The deal accounts for the death of ODF in an OASIS TC dedicated to not interoperating with Microsoft document formats.

It was a handshake -- McNealy's Swansong -- and friends of Linux, the Internet & Free Software should be furious, raging mad, that OpenOffice and document interoperability have been traded as corporate assets under the false banner of openness, open source and Free Software. Weak competitors appears to be our Achilles' heal.

It's historic, like Halloween.

Chips,
Three events at the start of my career have done the most to shape my technology views of the operating system landscape:

I wrote a multithreaded microkernel operating system and the test applications for a product test stage of a manufacturing line. Immediately seeing the value of writing the platform and applications together, the operating system was efficiently tuned to the exact needs of the testers and no more. (For instance, there was no exit function: Once a thread was started it ran forever--until power dropped.) A visit from a Carnegie Mellon professor was well timed: Her discussions of microkernel operating systems was clear and proved quite valuable.
While recovering from wisdom tooth extraction, I read the famed July/August 1978 (or thereabouts) Bell Labs Technical Journal on C and Unix. Wow! My eyes were opened wide.
My next job involved using MS DOS on an early IBM PC/XT. Uggghhhh. Single-threaded, clunky, just like a tinkertoy. Instead of developing a background threaded application in under an hour, an entire industry was required to support Terminate and Stay Resident (TSR). And yet, this piece of junk started Bill Gates on his road to vast wealth and power. Who would have thought it, other than Bill himself???

Fast-forward to today. Linux gives me reliable modern and remarkably up-to-date access to my favorite productive working environment: *IX. Linux is playing catch-up in usability (though, I do administer FC5 nearly 100% from the GUI and the menus are self-explanatory and well organized, unlike later versions of Windows). But Windows is playing catch-up in reliablity, security, and cost .
But I don't mean to fan any flames. I don't have any delusions that Linux will take over the desktop. But Vista's delays and stumblings, Linux's progress, and the world-wide backlash against an illegal monopoly (not Microsoft per se, but the illegal monopoly that it has become) provides an interesting environment. And you are absolutely right: Nobody can predict what will happen. I for one can hope, but that's not a prediction.

Very astute, Joe. I've become somewhat of student of the Bill-and-Steve-Show over the last 30 years. I hadn't quite seen the significance of Office in the overall dynamic. But, I think your are exactly right. And I couldn't have said better myself.

So its about the Office as a reason why Linux is not moving ahead? To some extent that is true. There are people who have determined that they must have MS Office to use, and nothing else will work for the, and lets face it, in at least some of those cases thats true.

But I would point out again that MS Office, will run in a Virtual Machine inside Linux, or as a dual boot solution with windows and linux on the same hard drive. For new uses to Linux, it is wrong to insist that then either run Linux or Windows. There simply is no reason they have to give up either at this point. Which is why I say, the having to have MS Office as a reason I cannot run Linux, is really not as big a hurtle as believed.

Now a lot of folks believe that MS Office is the King (in search of a better word) right now, and I would agree with them, even though I don't use it. But so wasn't Wordperfect back in the days of Dos, and Lotus 1-2-3 then as well. Times change, while the crystal ball is still not working, I think its fair to stay "at some point in time" things will change.

Now,remember a previous article by Joe;
www.microsoft-watch.com/content/business_applications/office_go_smaller_to_get_bigger.html

This articles talks about Microsofts efforts to get people to actually pay for MS Office for home use. So if its piracy that allows MS Office to dominate the home computer, then the ground under MS Office is perhaps a little more unstable than perhaps first thought. Especially if the new file formats remain incompatible with the old pirated Office versions. That bit of lock in is in itself a reason for users to upgrade to the newest Office 2007 which its increased anti-piracy features. For those who will not pay for MS Office 2007, in the long run, (years from now) the older versions of MS Office will be of limited functionality to them. At that point, it becomes easier from another Office program to challege MS Office in the market.

Games for Linux, as stated by Ryannoyed, is most likely a fair greater problem for Linux adoption than is MS Office. But even here, the same work arounds are used. Yes, Wine, Crossover, and Cedega will run many Windows games in Linux, although, the truth be known, there are more that will not. So once again, the Virtual Manager. or dual boot with Windows works.

I am one of the lucky ones, I only use a few must have old retro games from Linux, and all will work with Wine or Crossover. Cedega being used for cutting edge windows games, which are more problematic.

For those who can't seem to find enough Linux games, emulators work very well, by using programs like the very good Dosbox (Dos games and apps), and Playstation 1 emulators (Tomb Raider) work excellant, within Linux.

I think there is a place for Linux on many users desktop soon, as there is a well for Windows. What has been left out of most conversations, is that one really dosen't have to make a choice, either "Linux or Windows."

Sorry, I think you have missed the point. The major cost for a change is not the cost of the software but the cost of training! By just moving from Win2k/WinNT to WinXP, we used to give half day training to all staff. That means, half a day of work + half of day of hiring temp staff to cover and continue the business, not to mention the cost of trainers and hiring space for training. The logistics and the disruption of business is enormous. Unless there is competitve advantage of the change, the cost of software licence per year is only a very small part of the IT running cost that does not necessary make a significant impact on the bottom line. So why change? What is the benefit (extra value) for my enterprise to change?

Chips: Don't take this the wrong way, but do you have a job?
Seriously, I'm just interested.

The confusion resulting from the number of Linux distros is overstated. The fact is, there are only two or three distros worth considering in the mind of the general public: Ubuntu, Novell, and maybe Linspire. All others are background noise in terms of Linux "market/mind share."

I've compared Ubuntu with Windows and I don't see much difference in terms of usability. They're both pretty easy for the layperson.

I used to be a MS Office user but I recently switched to OpenOffice.org and I haven't looked back since. The fact is, for most consumers MS Office is way overkill. I agree that it'll be damn difficult to extract MS Office from the enterprise--we just have to live with that reality.

Reflections wrote: Also, I repeat my question: why is it that you focus your attention only on Microsoft's FUD campaign. Aren't Microsoft's competitors indulging in it too?

Joe's columns focus on Microsoft's FUD because this is Microsoft Watch. I guess you neglected to read his FUD column because Joe states that reason there. Take your head out of the sand.

Besides, Microsoft has the most insidious, wide-reaching, and often most harmful FUD around. The FOSS community should be very concerned about it. Sure some other companies engage in FUD too, but you have to concentrate on the biggest threats first. That just makes sense.

One other thing... reflections mentioned MS support for Windows.

When has support from Microsoft ever been worth jack shit? If you call them up for anything but a trivial question, they give you the ol' runaround and offer stupid advice. Even in the Windows world, the best support comes from the community via forums.

And in this regard, Windows community support is no better than Mac community support or Linux community support. They're all on equal footing.

I sure as hell wouldn't pay for MS support. So if support is your only concern, you might as well go with Mac or Linux.

Richard -
in my experience, MS is better supported in the marketplace for businesses, because just about every Windows installation is the same, and so many more people use Windows than Linux, therefore there is a much bigger market of support.
If you decide to go with Linux, you're generally stuck with one company for support for the cycle. I know I've experienced this problem, we went with one company for Linux and ended up paying them for years because they were the only company that knew how to untangle the mess they created.
We upgraded 2 years ago, going with Windows Server 2003, and have needed far less support, and, although we're still using the same company for support, we could go with someone else if we chose, something that just wasn't possible with the previous server configuration.

Ben wrote: If you decide to go with Linux, you're generally stuck with one company for support for the cycle.

Your experience is quite the exception rather than the rule. If you install Red Hat's Enterprise Linux, you are NOT tied to Red hat for support. I know because I have been able to provide support for Red Hat installations and I don't work for Red Hat.

Just about any company with the proper skills and management can provide local Linux support. It's more a matter of the customer shopping around.

Ben, the fact that you're still getting support from the same company indicates to me that you just don't do enough shopping around. Right now you think you can change support companies if you want, but then you may run into the same reasons for sticking with the old one. If you can overcome those, chances are you could have overcome them too when you were using Linux.

Perhaps your support company was just scaring you or deliberately made your particular Linux server configuration too customized or proprietary (they maybe got a hint from Micrsoft's lock-in practices). That's their fault, and not a general trait of Linux.

Joe, it appears you do not get very involved into Linux. i could not disagree with you more about your assumptions that Linux does not have OFFICE and is the reason why it is the major consideration for the lack of its use. First nearly every version of Linux for the Desktop and especially all of the major versions, include automatically openoffice.org. openoffice is a very complete version of OFFICE, even though not identical, it more than offers most of the functions available and used by 90% of all users. Plus you forgot about WINE which allows you to install MS OFFICE on Linux. So now with that said,, what is the excuse you have for companies making their choice on windows versus linux? Xandros, makes it even easier with their Crossover program allowing windows applications to be installed, including OFFICE. Linux is so much more stable and for every customer i have found frustrated with windows and converting and installing Linux on their machine have never been happier with their computing and online experience, without the hassles of outside intrusions.

The biggest problem with Linux is trying to figure out which version or distribution to standardize on for a company wide distribution. What are the priorities for making a choice and the needs and requirements of the company and their users.

Joe i would recommend you not write and title open writings such as this one, when you are not prepared, nor have a clue as to what you are writing, and could not be more off base. Sorry Joe.

Rand you misunderstood what he was saying and he is correct. I used open office as my primary office suite for 3 years, before any hardly knew it existed. I now use Microsoft Office and I will never go back unless I absolutely have to. I think their price of $300-$400 is well worth the money. If you think their software is overpriced just look at companies like Adobe and what they charge for a single copy of Photoshop. As a business owner I will not switch to linux because of the very fact that Microsoft office is not supported on Linux, at least not officially. So Joe is correct...and I'm not against linux, I run linux on my laptop but I dualboot becaus of Office and Macromedia/Adobe Products.

I am primarily a linux user. I have ubuntu and gentoo installations on my home boxes. I have been using linux only for the last 6 months.

The reason I switched from Windows is that I found Linux to be simpler, more straightforward and friendlier to a newbie like me. Yes, I did have to learn how to use the bash. Yes, often I have a problem with the littlest of things and have to search the internet for a resolution. Yes, I do not know the bash command line interface well enough to be able to resolve many problems on my own. Yet I think Linux is more user friendly. Why? Perhaps because my perception of software friendliness is a little different from the norm. I would like my computer to do what I want it to do. If that means getting my hands dirty with the terminal, so be it. The terminal to me is not an impediment to user friendliness but a very very handy tool. And there are plenty of online communities that patiently tell me what to do every time I have a problem.

But yes, I do think that not having a full featured office-capable office suite software is a huge hole in the linux app-space that needs to be filled. I am so used to linux I hate going to work and using windows. My office is giving me a new laptop and I've asked them to let me build my own laptop, I will be dual booting linux & windows on the machine. I wish I did not have to. But evolution does not do what Outlook does. Openoffice can screw up complicated powerpoint presentations. I cannot use Scribus or Inkscape as effectively as Indesign or Illustrator (simply because the file formats are not very compatible with other software formats or even older formats of the same software). I need to use project manager because my boss does.

I am not really a geek or anything (even though I would love to be able to program myself). Neither do I follow Microsoft vs Linux vs MacOS battles. I am simply interested in having a computer that is conducive to ME and my whims and fancies. Linux takes care of that for me as far as a base operating system goes. But, like mentioned here before, I need apps too.

I promote Linux to my friends as much as I can. My office cubicle has printouts of ubuntu and gentoo posters that I made myself. But can linux replace a windows installation in my office? No. I wish it could, but not yet. I hope a day comes when people concentrate more on apps rather than distributions.

Anyway, my two long cents. Thanks for the article!