On Thu, 28 Aug 1997, Ted Harding wrote: > However: what about clients who send you data on floppy in MS-Access > format, who send you documents, or who expect you to send them > documents, in Word format so that they can use them on their own > machines etc? Excel spreadsheets? > > In real life, Tan-Wee, you can't escape it. I would be happier if you > could. But, as I say, if you can't run it on Linux then too bad, since > you have to run it somehow.
true. MS is inescapable. Programs like WINE and WABI and Willow's TWIN are useful and necessary because linux needs more apps (preferably freeware, but commercial is fine too). The Win emulators allow (or will allow, when they are debugged enough) linux access to the enormous range of windows applications. linux native apps would be better but until there's enough of them around, we need emulators. > That sentence: "Microsoft's huge installed base of users and wide > range of applications is unlikely to be surpassed, despite what > believers in the Linux magic might hope" is depressingly accurate. > There's an awful lot of people out there using a wide range of MS > software, and if your living depends on dealing with them then you > have to come to terms with it. IMO, microsoft should get out of the operating system game and leave it to those who actually have a clue about OSes....like linux or bsd kernel hackers and unix programmers for example. MS should focus on their applications which, for the most part, aren't too bad. in fact, some of their apps are fairly decent if you like that sort of thing. if MS did do this, then they would a) have better apps because they run on a much better OS, and b) wouldn't have to worry about US anti-trust suits because they no longer control the OS (which is, of course, why they would be reluctant to do this) I think that MS will have to do this within a few years anyway. no commercial OS will be able to compete with the free operating systems like linux or freebsd. Linux isn't playing catch-up anymore, and hasn't done for at least a year...it's now already better/faster/more reliable than the commercial OSes, and development proceeds at a phenomenal rate. Linux only needs a few good "killer apps" to make the corporate world really sit and take notice - corps already see linux and apache as one of the leading contenders for their internet gateway / web server. A few good apps would make linux a winner when it becomes necessary to upgrade their "aging" and "obsolete" Pentium-166 machines which have "only" 32mb of memory and can't run the latest BloatWare 99 apps. support costs on a network of unix/linux machines are cheaper too - the support person can telnet in and look around ... which is a lot quicker than the usual "tell me what you see on the screen? .... ok, if it says this then type blah, if you don't see this little icon thingy then do that, otherwise i'll have to come up and have a look at your machine". another reason it's cheaper is that if users don't have root access on their desktop machine then they can't screw it up too badly. upgrading and maintaining software can be done over the network, easily. maybe i'm being overly optimistic, but i really do see a time in the not-too-distant future when linux WILL be a viable contender for the desktop operating system market. (and i like the sound of that because I absolutely loathe and detest having to fix severely broken Win systems, even if i do get paid quite well for doing it. i'd rather be paid for 1 hour's pleasant and stress-free work than for 3 hours of microsoft hell). > I'm looking forward to WordPerfect-7 for Linux (just out: see > http://www.sdcorp.com) which should alleviate some of the problems. this is the kind of thing that linux needs - apps, apps, and more apps. craig -- craig sanders networking consultant Available for casual or contract temporary autonomous zone system administration tasks. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
