On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Andreas Lund wrote:
> On the desktop side of things, I think the MS Office suite with its
> "standard" file formats doc/xls/ppt is the most important area that needs
> work. The typical end user doesn't care if it's called "Windows" or "Linux"
> as long as the word processor menus are *identical* and files can be moved
> between the two.
<soapbox>
This is why I think the Ximian effort to make .NET services available
on Linux is so exciting. de Icaza & friends have come under a lot of
fire from the Linux Community for "collaborating with the enemy" in
their development of SOUP. To me, that indicates a very shortsighted
viewpoint.
Regardless of merit, Joe Computer-User wants Microsoft Office. For good
reason. His university instructors demand files in Office format. His
company/workplace very likely does all their documentation and
presentation in Office. Hell, I proofed a Linux proficiency test last
year for a major certification company last year, and the thing came in
Access .mdb format. The main reason I own a Win4Lin license is that
every once in a while, I can't get around MS Office. (Don't tell me Star
is MS-compatible. It's not. It gets close, but it's not.)
I've believed for a couple of years that MS *can't* port Office to
Linux. Or fail to, um, persuade Intuit not to port Quicken. Imagine
Office - NOT an Office-compatible suite, but Office itself - and
Quicken/Quickbooks available on a Linux desktop. Linux's place in
the desktop world will increase exponentially.
If Miguel de Icaza can do what he has said he is working on, making
Microsoft.Net services available on a Linux client, it's a done deal.
Office 2k, or XP or whatever, on a Linux terminal. Without the inherent
dangers of running binary-only MS code on the local machine. Not the
most ideal scenario, but a great real-world solution.
</soapbox>
See ya later,
Doc
_______________________________________________
Seawolf-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/seawolf-list
