On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 21:48 +0000, Joe Metcalfe wrote:
> The main difficulties I have had in reading MS files on Linux is with MS > Publisher (though I don't have Publisher in my Windows copy of MS Office > either!) and with macros in PowerPoint (dynamic content in 3rd part > educational files). > > Joe MS Publisher files can be sort of converted if you can spare half an hour of fiddling around per file and the result isn't marvellous; macros in any part of the MS Office suite don't open properly in OOo. MS Access is relied upon by much of the UK voluntary sector and it doesn't migrate. PaintShop files are a pain too and most Windows users have various proprietary Windows platform apps which don't migrate formats at all and don't run properly on WINE. However, I agree with the general point that most Windows users face bigger limitations on what proprietary formats they can open without buying every proprietary app on the planet (given that Linux at least favours open standards). It's probably about 80% perception but there's still maybe 20% real migration issues to be dealt with. Windows users are strenuously trained to think of their OS as 'standard' and anything else as weird and troublesome (although one might easily see this as an actual inversion of reality). However, whilst many proprietary Windows formats do open without any issues on many Linux distros, users will still run into migration problems with mainstream formats which either don't convert at all or which require significantly technically-savvy intervention to migrate to Linux. Even setting up WINE is pushing it for the average mainstream Windows user - although it's like rolling off a log for experienced Ubuntu users. Most orgs are also going to end up with a peripheral or two that's a brick on Ubuntu. I've been doing hands-on FOSS advocacy in the voluntary sector for the best part of a decade and experience teaches me that it's a mistake to gloss over the real issues in migrating from any Windows OS to any Linux distro. What's important is to get across the concept of open standards and to help the user understand that it isn't Linux' 'weirdness' causing the issues but use of closed standards in proprietary software and to explain that once they have made a successful migration to Ubuntu, they will experience *fewer* issues with cross-compatibility in the future. For a proportion of Windows users, though, the barriers will honestly still be too high for their resources - at least for the time being. Especially users who rely on being able to open and edit proprietary apps send by Windows users. Although times change and organisations who once couldn't see their way to migrating are looking at it again in the current climate. When I'm advocating Ubuntu with voluntary orgs, I don't really refer to technical issues beyond giving them (what I consider to be) a sensible overview of real and imaginary migration issues - I focus, instead, on simplicity, resistance to slow-down and choking due to malware, community ownership (which really appeals), keeping the economy local, longevity of hardware, ease of installing peripherals, standardisation of software used for photos, scanning etc etc, ease of maintaining a properly-installed system for non-techies. And it's *pretty*! If you gloss over migration issues, you will forfeit trust when users do experience problems. I prefer to support people migrating with their eyes open and wait for the more nervous Windows users to go through the emotional and practical issues involved for them and their organisation in their own time. We'll be here when they're ready :) Paula
<<attachment: face-smile.png>>
-- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
