Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Microsoft FUD Machine Aims at OpenOffice.org

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the head-shot dept.

Microsoft 693

Roblimo writes "If you're using Microsoft Office and considering a switch to (free) OpenOffice.org, Microsoft would like you to read their Open Office Competitive Guide first, in which they tell you how much better/faster/cheaper MS Office is than OOo. Taran Rampepersad, an IT consultant in Trinidad, believes this "Competitive Guide" is nothing but FUD, so he wrote a detailed rebuttal to it -- and released his article under the FDL so you can feel free to republish his piece or share it with anyone you like, however you like." A followup to this story. Newsforge and Slashdot are both part of OSDN.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

And now the poll you've been waiting for (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691812)

Who polishes more cock?

Taco [calcgames.org]
Hemos [calcgames.org]

yep (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691818)

Ah, let's see, when I want an advice on software technologies, who do I turn to - the largest software company in the world or some consultant from a screwed-up third-world country? Yeah, I am pretty sure Bill Gates and 20,000 employees that work for him have no clue about software business, I better send off my money to Trinidad, and then go bitch about my job being outsourced to India.

Re:yep (-1)

Real World Stuff (561780) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691850)

The count is actually closer to 50,000 employees.

Currently writing my theisis with OO.org (5, Interesting)

The Ape With No Name (213531) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691832)

and my MS Office-using (on a Mac even) advisor is sixpence none the wiser. Total FUD.

Is he wise to the fact that you suck lots of cock? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691858)

n/t

This article was menitioned... (-1, Redundant)

dbglt (668805) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691833)

the other day :P Since it is MS, I guess it ok to dupe... It gives us something to bitch about on the weekend :)

What'd you expect... (4, Funny)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691835)

It's the job of Microsoft's marketing people to come up with literature that says their programs are better than anything else out there.

Re:What'd you expect... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691860)

It's generally expected that you do that without lying. And likewise, it's our job to come up with literature that says Free Software is better. Without lying. No Bushist marketing.

Re:What'd you expect... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691876)

Unfortunately the Open-Sores movement have failed to produce any true results along the lines of this theory.

What's better:
1. A GUI
2. Editting .conf files

Now, try to look this from the perspective of the average human that has a healthy sexual cycle.

Re:What'd you expect... (2, Insightful)

smitty_one_each (243267) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691994)

What's really better is an analysis that doesn't oversimplify the question into some asinine dichotomy.
How about a clear separation of data, presentation and logic? Or, if you will, model, view, and controller.
That lets a particular tool have a GUI for general stuff, particularly the FNG, and a .conf file for commenting, and easy versioning, or even scripting.
But hey, I lay no claim to being an average human, for all I enjoy good health.

Re:What'd you expect... (1, Funny)

Libor Vanek (248963) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691874)

I'd expect them to leave Evil Empire and start working in FSF as voluntary community job ;-)

Re:What'd you expect... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691881)

Microsoft's programs are better. Much better, in fact. What's your point?

Re:Ironic observations (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691900)

A couple of things to note about Microsoft's
fud:

1) It's not in Word format. Why not?
Not everyone can afford Microsoft Office,
although everyone can afford Open Office.

2) Microsoft office doesn't export to pdf.
A third party app is required --- unless
of course you open the word document
in Open Office 1.1 and export it as pdf.

3) The fud was written in Quark express on a
Mac --- looks like Microsoft doesn't use its
own tools.

4) Had they written it in Word format, folks
who couldn't afford Microsoft Office would have
to download open office so they could
use open office to view a word document
telling them why they shouldn't use
open office to view word documents.

Re:Ironic observations (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691924)

The article is geared toward companies, not individuals. Sure, everyone can afford open office. But not many companies can afford to replace all their windows desktops!

Re:What'd you expect... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691903)

Why is that funny? That IS their job...that's pretty much ANY marketing person's job, regardless of the quality of the product.

Two Faced Slashdot (0, Interesting)

Pave Low (566880) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691836)

Slashdot hates Microsoft with a passion, yet it has no problem taking advertising dollars from them. I'm typing this as a big fucking banner for Visual Studio.net is on the top of the page.

I guess Microsoft is evil, except when that blood money comes your way.

Re:Two Faced Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691902)

Shhh! You can't let the secret get out!

Re:Two Faced Slashdot (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691910)

The advertisements are there to keep everything Fair & Balanced.

analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691947)

-- the ad revenue question comes up frequently. here's an analogy:

You're on the battlefield, shooting it out with "the enemy". You are running low on ammo. there's several _expired_ enemy laying around your position. Each enemy has an almost full ammo belt, BUT, you would have to use one of their weapons.

Pick one choice:

A:Use only your own piece until out of ammo, then give up fighting, to "stay pure".

B: Use yours until ammo runs out, then switch to captured enemy's piece and ammo

good luckski

zogger

That is called ... [Re:Two Faced Slashdot] (1)

clarkie.mg (216696) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691981)

That is called freedom.

Re:Two Faced Slashdot (4, Insightful)

eLoco (459203) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692008)

Don't confuse politics with business, or donations with payments for services provided. Microsoft is paying for a service: slashdot displaying their ad. The price of the ad placement should be more-or-less equal to its value (Economics 101), thus Microsoft owes no more to slashdot, nor does slashdot owe Microsoft anything besides display of their ad.

I think it's fairly safe to say that Microsoft would not advertise on a "hostile" site such as slashdot if they did not perceive some benefit from that greater than or equal to what they paid for the ad placement.

Links to www.openoffice.org (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691845)

I've never understood why a lot of authors pepper their articles with redundant links. I mean, look how many links to www.openoffice.org are in that article -- it's crazy, especially when considering what this program is called (ie a website in itself!).

Otherwise, very good rebuttal.

Re:Links to www.openoffice.org (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691899)

There's probably some automated system that marks certain keywords (OpenOffice, Mozilla, etc) with links to their websites.

The author probably has nothing to do with it. Talk to the webmaster...

Re:Links to www.openoffice.org (2, Funny)

oldosadmin (759103) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691917)

There's only one link, ya dork.

I bet you think the moon landing actually happened, too.

THE SCO Group Recommendation (2, Funny)

linuxislandsucks (461335) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691851)

Ten out of Ten SCO Group Vice Presidents recommend MS Office over OpenOffice.org ..oh wait only for unsecure data..ass cahnges show up in wor ddocumetns

WOW! THAT'S SO FUCKING FUNY! (-1, Flamebait)

James A. M. Joyce (764379) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691908)

Oh, wait, it isn't! You're just rehashing an old Slashdot story which will immediately get modded up by the SCO-bashing and "M$"-bashing sheep which frequent this sordid site! Congratulations on your complete lack of humour!

Re:WOW! THAT'S SO FUCKING FUNY! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691941)

That's 'Sofa King' funny...

Re:WOW! THAT'S SO FUCKING FUNY! (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691980)

Welcome to slashdot. Kick your feet up and relax - Make yourself at home.

WOW! THAT'S SO FUCKING INSIGHTFUL! (-1, Troll)

yutt (699680) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692006)

Oh, wait, it isn't! You're just trying to appear superior by being sarcastic, which will be immediately modded up by the pedantic and irrationally hostile pricks which frequent this site! Congratulations on your complete lack of humor!

You spelled "humour" wrong. (1, Troll)

James A. M. Joyce (764379) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692015)

Posted AC to avoid losing the karma I whored to the deranged Slashbots.

Re:THE SCO Group Recommendation (1)

Democracy_0001-Alpha (764742) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691918)

Why you think they try to sue two federal government office for using OpenOffice? And I believe everyone remember the most imfamous MS trademark: The "Blue Screnn of Death".

Re:THE SCO Group Recommendation (1)

Imperator (17614) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691976)

Yeah, but at least it has a spelling checker...

Re:THE SCO Group Recommendation (-1)

PoorPost Troll (697855) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692021)

PoorPost Form v. 0.24

Your post has been moderated positively but that moderation must have been in jest or error. Your post sucks. Please review this form to understand the weaknesses in your post and how to produce higher quality posts in the future.

[*] Your post was modded funny but is not really funny. This is because:

  • ( ) You post simply used M$ instead of MS
  • (*) You went back to beating the Windows security dead horse
  • (*) You made a tired SCO joke
  • ( ) You made an MPAA/RIAA joke
  • ( ) You made a Jon Katz joke (who?)
  • ( ) MS blowz, linux rules (or a variant)
  • ( ) You made an unoriginal joke about Slashdotting (servers turning to powder, melting, etc.)
  • ( ) Other (please comment here: )

[ ] Your post is modded insightful, informative, or interesting. In fact it is none of the three. This is because:

  • ( ) You stated the obvious
  • ( ) You simply tossed out lots of five-dollar words
  • ( ) It was in response to a poorly-written post or troll
  • ( ) You copied text from a previous post that really might have been one of the three I's
  • ( ) All you did was copy text from the linked article
  • ( ) You simply criticized Microsoft without making it funny
  • ( ) It is bloated with unnecessary technical claptrap
  • ( ) All you did was pose questions (like a stoner)
  • ( ) All you did was pose questions (like a lawyer)
  • ( ) You utterly failed to comprehend the article or article blurb and made entirely irrelevant comments

[ ] Your post may be rated too highly in general for the following reasons:

  • ( ) You are an asterisk who has, knowing the story's release time in advance, pounceposted to get first p0st and get modded up early
  • ( ) You are one of the editors and are getting your ass kissed
  • ( ) One of your fans has weighed in for you
  • ( ) One of the editors has blessed it with an "underrated"

[ ] Additional comments:

Thanks for posting! Better luck next time! :)

(This form is currently in alpha and suggestions for its improvement are always welcome.)

meh (5, Insightful)

Vlion (653369) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691853)

I read that document actually. In short, it shows the disadvantages of OO: which there are- and then it shows the advantages of MS.O. It only goes head to head with OO on one point, the point of integration with the Outlook suite. Unfortunately, MS makes the assumption that we want more than a write-clone and a basic spreadsheet.MS believes in the extreme abundance of features. I don't care for gazillions of features, myself. I want essentially Write from Win 3.1. Anything more tends to be utterly unused. Spreadsheets need to have math functions, coloring, some decent copy functions, and a decent grapher.(Excel ain't a great grapher) Anyway, it is mostly FUD.

Re:meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691923)

in a related article dedicated to you.. Notepad beats Vi :)

Re:meh (1)

Vlion (653369) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691971)

You better believe it ! (Notepad ~ Pico/Nano) > vi/vim ($ALL_EDITOR) > vi/vim *wink and grin*

Re:meh (1)

black mariah (654971) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691963)

Well, that's YOU. Personally, I use Nedit for all my writing needs, but that doesn't preclude EVERYONE ELSE ON THE PLANET from needing more than I do. Those features might go unused by YOU, but there are a lot of people out there that need them and use them.

Re:meh (2, Interesting)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692023)

MS makes the assumption that we want more than a write-clone and a basic spreadsheet.MS believes in the extreme abundance of features. I don't care for gazillions of features, myself. I want essentially Write from Win 3.1. Anything more tends to be utterly unused.

When writing text, write will do but for doing layout? not at all.

You can go 2 ways there:

  1. Use seperate layout software (alternatives exist for almost every plaform)
  2. Use a program that allows doing layout together with content.
When you don't care about layout, you wont need either. When you are writing for some kind of professional publication, you should end up with the first solution, but for all those who write things that must look decent on paper, but for whom writing and layout is simply not their profession, nor somethign they need to do a lot professionally, an intergrated content/layout program is really what you want.

Do MS Office and OpenOffice have a lot of features that you personally have no need for? most likely. Do most users only use some 10% of the features? sure. The problem is that they do not use the same 10%, and as a result a lot more features are needed to serve the entire potential userbase then the few that you specifically use, and no, you are not going to see the need for those features, but try to get it into your head that there are many features that others do need, and thus the features you need are very likely not representative for the majority of users.

Having said that, I believe both OO and MS Office have features that are used by so few that not havign them wouldn't hurt either. Also, as soon as the basic feature requirements are covered, features themselves become more of a marketing then a usability issue.

At any rate, suggesting that all most users ever need is write and a very simple spreadsheet is like saying that noone will ever need more then 640kbyte memory. We know how stupid the later turned out to be.

I think that Microsoft Office won in the marketplace, and did have quite a bit of serious competition untill relatively recently, and now got some again with OO.
I'd say that MS Office won from its competition because Microsoft actually offered combinations of features that people found practical, and despite my rather strong dislike of Microsoft, I did agree at the time that their Office suite was simply more usable then anythign the competition had to offer. That said, I am using OO now since it offers all the usability that I personally need.

What's the big deal? (2, Insightful)

MSFanBoi (695480) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691864)

I forgot, Microsoft is not allowed to publish any marketing material. Go look at Sun, Apple or RedHat's sites and watch all the drivel they post that is anti-Microsoft FUD. Hell isn't that what mostly Slashdot is?

Re:What's the big deal? (-1, Troll)

black mariah (654971) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691986)

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA! I'm with you. It's funny how everyone gets their undies in a bind when Microsoft tries to promote their own products. What's the point of arguing? Nobody cares, either way. It's a fucking press release. Get over it.

Microsoft does not mention multi platform support (1)

grautgrams (739832) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691866)

But, they probably assume everyone is using their OS. on the TOC part, how much does a regular home user spend on deployment and support? not very much I suppose.

Clippy says... (5, Funny)

the_twisted_pair (741815) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691870)

It appears you are contemplating jumping $hip. Do you wish to:

[ ] believe our obfuscation of your choices?
[ ] wait until you don't have any choices?
[x] make your own mind up?

Re:Clippy says... (4, Funny)

Hi_2k (567317) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691958)

I'm sorry, I can't let you do that, Dave...

Why OO.o is better than Microsoft Office? (2, Funny)

Realistic_Dragon (655151) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691871)

When Microsoft is sued out of existance by China, the EU and Asia for anicompetative practice there will still be support for Open Office.

Office compatibility (5, Funny)

alokeb (764754) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691873)

Given how many times MS has talked about cross-compatibility of Office one has to wonder why that document itself is PDF???

Re:Office compatibility (1)

black mariah (654971) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692017)

It might have something to do with that not exactly being a DOC type of layout. This looks like something intended for eventual printing, where PDF files are pretty much a standard.

Re:Office compatibility (2, Redundant)

rokzy (687636) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692019)

for those who didn't read this story the first time round, the PDF was also created on a Mac using QuarkExpress!

Unconvincing (5, Insightful)

brejc8 (223089) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691875)

OpenOffice does not have an e-mail client, so customers may incur a licensing cost associated with buying an e-mail application.
Why don't you use this 'free' software?
Because it doesn't come with an email client!
Why don't you use a 'free' email client?
Because it doesn't come with a web browser!
Why don't you use a 'free' web browser...

Ensure that their mission-critical information is adequately protected from virus attack.
Over the last month I have been sent over 20 virus infected MS office files. I hardly think this argument could possibly hold up.

OpenOffice does not have a dedicated development or support rteam. Consequently, if bugs go unresolved, users have the option to resolve problems by scouring through numerous community sites and chat rooms.
As opposed to what? Finding out you have a bug in your software and waiting till the next version or patch two years down the line? OOo is bad because thee is a community of people happy to help you.

All in all its pretty pathetic. I doubt the person who wrote it was convinced.

Seamless data exchange (5, Informative)

platipusrc (595850) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691877)

(4) Seamless Data Exchange: Microsoft claims seamless data exchange within Microsoft Office - but it's only between people using Microsoft products. OpenOffice allows people who use a variety of operating systems and data formats to interact with each other. Microsoft Office does not.

Often it's not even possible to use Office formats between versions. Try to edit an MS Office 2003 file on a system that's using MS Office '97.

Re:Seamless data exchange (1)

Alternate Interior (725192) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691927)

Only if you're using DRM with Word, Excel and/or Powerpoint. Just disable DRM in '03 and then they work back as far as '97.

Re:Seamless data exchange (1, Insightful)

Psiren (6145) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691939)

Often it's not even possible to use Office formats between versions. Try to edit an MS Office 2003 file on a system that's using MS Office '97.

I'm not a fan of Office, but that is just a dumb argument. How exactly do you expect any program to edit files from a later version without problems? Do you think the programmers know the additional features they need to support before they even write them?

Okay, with an XML based document format it's probably easier to ignore parts you don't understand, but that doesn't mean the problem goes away.

Re:Seamless data exchange (2, Informative)

platipusrc (595850) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691985)

I just mentioned that because, at least for MS Word, there don't appear to be many or any improvements to the file formats, just changes to break compatibility so that you will have to upgrade to keep up with people sending you documents from a newer version of MS's Office software.

Re:Seamless data exchange (4, Informative)

Hi_2k (567317) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691997)

... With an XML format, as OO.o uses, it's fairly easy to ignore features that your current version of the program cannot interpret. Just ignore the tags that appear to be meaningless. Set up a special "Errors" section that takes note of lines of XML that arent readable, and you're gold. As I remember, OO.o supports the former, though I'm not sure about the latter.

Re:Seamless data exchange (4, Informative)

CdBee (742846) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691960)

You can download the Office Resource Kit to install Office 2003 file formats on older versions of Office. It's my belief that Office 97 is included.

This is free software from Microsoft, available on the Office website.

Macros are a valid point (5, Interesting)

Jedi_Knyghte (763576) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691878)

I'm no fan of MS (I'm browsing from FireFox within Linux), but he gives short shrift to the problem of macro/VBA conversion. The fact of the matter is that the documentation on the OO API absolutely stinks, and any business with a substantial investment in its current automation would have to think not once, not twice, but long and hard about the costs of conversion.

Re:Macros are a valid point (2, Insightful)

Geek of Tech (678002) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691989)

This just a comment, no trolling. I promise.

It just seems that for an office suite people would want to edit documents. Write text, read text. I don't really see the benifit in creating macros. Or if one insists in creating macros, I don't see the point in giving the macro ability to get outside of its sandbox. Oh well. Granted, I've never worked in a Fortune 500 company, so I really don't have any idea what they might use macros for. Oh well.

it's a guide for sales people dammit (1)

js3 (319268) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691879)

yep, a guide for sales partners making the sales pitch which allows them to make counter points to questions about OOo when it comes up. It's not that special

rteam (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691885)

3. "OpenOffice 1.1 is an open source alternative."

OpenOffice does not have a dedicated development or
support rteam. Consequently, if bugs go unresolved, users
have the option to resolve problems by scouring through
numerous community sites and chat rooms.

I guess MS Word did not spot the typo.

While I'd love to be supportive... (1)

James A. M. Joyce (764379) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691887)

...merely releasing his article under the GNU FDL is going to make one jot of difference compared to the $80 billion annual marketing budget of M$. Sorry, guys.

Oh, Be Nice (1, Interesting)

illuminata (668963) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691888)

Well, when it comes from Microsoft, it always seems to be FUD, no matter what. Yet, anything from the open source movement has their FUD deemed as proof. At least according to michael...

I'm not trying to validate either side's claims. I'm also not trying to say that one side was or was not tossing around the FUD. But, for a change, how about you let me try to draw my own conclusions, rather than give me yours?

Hardware (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691892)

So this asshole claims Microsoft Office requires more hardware and more disk space, and therefore OO.org "holds its own." Well I'll tell you, when I load OO.org on my P4 it takes a fucking long time to load. When I load MSOffice it comes up very snappily. I can't imagine using OO.org on an older machine. It must be like using Mozilla on an older machine, where you wait 2 minutes for the cursor to even show in the URL box! I have 200GB of disk space, I don't care how much space an office suite takes up.

Re:Hardware (4, Informative)

Kyouryuu (685884) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691936)

It's pretty simple though. Microsoft Office "cheats" in the same way OpenOffice does. The difference is that MS Office is more discreet about it. OpenOffice generally comes up quickly if you have the quick launcher client running in the taskbar. Parts of the OO suite are preloaded and ready to launch at the press of that icon. MS Office is the same way, but its quick launcher is transparently running in the background with no fanfare.

Take that away and you'll see that the initial loading speeds are somewhat comparable.

Re:Hardware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691942)

Well I'll tell you, when I load OO.org on my P4 it takes a fucking long time to load. When I load MSOffice it comes up very snappily.

You mean [gasp] Microsoft's own application programs run faster on Microsoft's operating system than other application programs? Gee, I never would have seen that coming.

Why you should not read /. (1, Interesting)

Bishop, Martin (695163) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691896)

Here is an article on why you shouldn't read slashdot:
DUPE! [slashdot.org]

Re:Why you should not read /. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691996)

You're an idiot. That post is the exact opposite of what this is. Does it hurt to be so stupid?

OMG! This dupe was shown TWO days ago! (1)

fejikso (567395) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691897)

OMG! You're an illiterate retard! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691913)

This is not a dupe, it discusses a *rebuttal* to the Microsoft FUD, not the Microsoft FUD itself.

Re:OMG! You're an illiterate retard! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691999)

Why is this funny? The article is about a response to the initial article. It should be modded +1 informative.

Re:OMG! You're an illiterate retard! (2, Funny)

Aldric (642394) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692018)

We are seeing an evolution of comments. Rather than merely failing to RTFA, the poster failed to even read the slashdot headline!

PDF ! (2, Insightful)

clarkie.mg (216696) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691898)

The m$ document is in PDF format that is not supported by office ! OO can save document in PDF.

That makes 1-0 for OO.

Re:PDF ! (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691934)

the pdf was done on a mac anyways.. ..

Re:PDF ! (1)

dema (103780) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692001)

which, of course, makes it very much possible that it could've been saved from OOo (:

whats an "rteam"? (1, Interesting)

brejc8 (223089) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691901)

OpenOffice does not have a dedicated development or support rteam.

Obviously someone hasn't been using the MS spell checker.
And why are they distributing it in pdf format? I bet they didn't even use office to make this document.

Re:whats an "rteam"? (1)

noselasd (594905) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691970)

You are wrong, they DID use the MS spell checker ;-)

Re:whats an "rteam"? (1)

Llywelyn (531070) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692003)

And why are they distributing it in pdf format? I bet they didn't even use office to make this document.


Or they just used the Mac version of Office...

FUD Wars (-1)

0x54524F4C4C (712971) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691904)


I'm confused. It seems Mr. Taran Rampepersad is doing FUD against Microsoft. Maybe I forgot that if it's against Microsoft, it's ok.

You think it stops there ... (5, Informative)

nemaispuke (624303) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691905)

I don't know if any of you read SysAdmin or Dr. Dobbs Journal (I get both) and the Microsof tFUD machine doesn't stop at OpenOffice. In my latest issue of SysAdmin was a pack containing a 180 day time crippled copy of Windows Server 2003 and a "Learning Resource" CD.

I went through part of the CD before I raised the "bullshit flag" over the following:

1. Poor Plug and Play support based on Solaris 2.6 and an equally ancient version of Linux. Did not mention HP-UX, IRIX, or AIX.

2. The only way to have a remote desktop similar to Terminal Services was to use VNC, what about a remote X session?

Microsoft would not get in so much trouble over this stuff if they simply told the truth. Or are they expecting Linux and Unix admins and developers to "jump ship" for some crippleware (not including "Windows Services for Unix" which Microsoft had to Interix to develop!

I'm already doing my bit (1)

y2imm (700704) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691914)

I've plastered as many OpenOffice.org posters around campus as I can. I just found out last week this campus has a Microsoft software ambassador of some kind.

whoa man.... (1)

InaneDrivel (724205) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691915)

somethings definitely trippy. i just got the wierdest feeling. dunno what it is [slashdot.org] .

At what point in MS babel..... (1)

3seas (184403) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691925)

.... do you begin to realize linux and FOSS can make productive use of MS babel...

Who says Linux doesn't have the marketing muscle of MS?

Of course they do..... and the DOJ and EU guilty findings against MS help to clairify it.

A few bones to pick with the article author: (5, Insightful)

oldosadmin (759103) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691929)

First of all, it's OpenOffice.org, not Open Office (trademark issues).

Secondly, even though I am a participant on the Marketing list for OOo, I must say that the disk space comparison between OOo and MSO is unfair. MSO comes with fonts + clipart, which OOo lacks. Maybe SO vs. MSO would've been more fair. (we want our products to win through honesty, not FUD).

Both have thier value (4, Interesting)

Datasage (214357) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691931)

Im in the middle on this debate, But i have a preference for open office if it can be used. Which is not true in all cases.

If a buiness is already using MS Office, the is reason to switch is if the buiness grows and they would need more MS office licences while the cost for migrating is cheap.

Alot of people dont upgrade office. A place i used to work at was still using office 97. There is simply no reason to upgrade to office 2k or XP.

For my personal use, i see enough value in office to make it worth purchasing, but for the time being im only using windows. (Could change in the future)

Speed? (2, Insightful)

black mariah (654971) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691935)

Nice how the author completely sidestepped speed issues. I can have anything in Office opened up on my woeful K6-2/500MHz machine in 10-15 seconds. Firing up any portion of OO takes from 45 seconds to a full minute. No, I am not overstating the problem. OO has some great functionality, but it is horrendously slow to start, and runs slower than Office once it's open.

Also, the comparison of OO and Office system requirements is weak. "Wow, look! OO doesn't mention what processor to use! We win!" No, I don't think so. The Office guidelines are merely more specific. Who is going to be running Office XP on such a low-end (P133, 24MB RAM?) system? NOBODY! It sounds to me like OO and Office have the exact same system requirements... "A computer that doesn't completely suck."

Tools (2, Interesting)

Myolp (525784) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691943)

Its funny that the argument about which tool is better is almost completly unique for the IT-industry. You don't see car mechanics arguing over which brand of screwdriver is better or a carpenter defending his hammer against the people using a nailgun. Sure, people have their own preferences, but mostly they keep it to themselves. This is commercial gone bad. Hopefully the industry will get mature enough that we won't have to see this kind of marketing. But I guess its a long way there...

My mental monologue. (5, Interesting)

bagel2ooo (106312) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691946)

Reading some of the more key points with OO it reminded me of some of the reasons that I am such a big fan of OSS and the OS movement. With these open (or at least more open than MS and the like) standards it gives a good feeling that you are in control of your data and the documents, etc. you create. When I would use a tool such as MS Office I would feel that I'm making the document for it or as a kind of expansion of it rather than as a self-created work for me. This sent a tinge of concern through me for quite some time. I know it is probably silly for me to feel a sense of liberation and it's really not anything I can describe properly. I guess I just enjoy the freedom permissible by using a standard that is not owned and controlled by an entity that has little to no desire for openness. With quality suites like OO I feel that once users get this feeling that they are in control of their own works - or at least more-so then they were - they will make the migration which will only bring futher support to the OSS community.

Fp CUM (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691954)

Anythin/g can

Where have I heard this before? (1)

graveyhead (210996) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691961)

Oh yes, 2 days ago [slashdot.org] . I call repeat.

Support Groups (4, Funny)

paleck (10298) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691968)

*Support: Microsoft says that there is no dedicated team for the OpenOffice suite. What Microsoft fails to realize is that the 'dedicated team' are mainly the users; OpenOffice has a community whereas Microsoft users have support groups.

The first thing I thought when it mentioned the Microsoft users having support groups was group therapy such as AA or ones for Depression!

OMG MS FUD?!?!?! (5, Funny)

Eberlin (570874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691973)

FYI I FSCKed up my PC on RH9 (I take full responsibility, thus PEBKAC) but DLed MDK and installed OO.o and now I say STFU to MS FUD. YMMV though.

OO.o is better TCO and ROI. If you use MS (including IE), you'll need to visit NAI or get AVG ASAP or your machine will be DOA.

What does FUD mean? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691982)

Help!

Re:What does FUD mean? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692002)

Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt

Top 10 Microsoft FUD Tactics (4, Funny)

AtariAmarok (451306) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691983)

Top 10 Microsoft FUD tactics attacking Open Office:
10. "War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Open is Closed"
9. Chalk-drawn penguins all over New York sidewalks. It worked for IBM (?)
8. Fake COMDEX "OpenOffice" booth set up by Microsoft, featuring Tubgirl as the hostess.
7. Lobbying for "Star Trek 11" film featuring Gates as the leader of the Good Borg.
6. "If you use Open Office, none of the locks in your office building will work any more. Believe me"
5. "If you use Open Office, and if you maintain an erection
more than 4 hours, consult your physician immediately to avoid sponteneous genital implosion"
4. Spreading rumors of Michael Jackson about to sign promotial deal with Open Office folks.
3. Armies of Clippy's seem training with assault weapons in wilderness camps in Idaho.
2. Microsoft claims that OpenOffice smells funny.
1. Planned series of commercials featuring Goatse image with voice-over saying "Open Office, Open Orifice".

No mention of MSDE (1)

BigBuckHunter (722855) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691990)

The only criticism that I have is that the author did not mention the free (like beer, not like speech) MSDE when discussing the conversion of Access DBs. Nobody is going to purchase a SQL license for a single user app. I believe that MSDE is licensed (crippled) for up to 5 users. Aside from that, I didn't notice any other huge factual errors.

Thank you for your time,
BBH

You're stupid, remember? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8691992)

Nice article.

Reads something like this when I see it:

[1] "You guys are so stupid. You've already parted with thousands and thousands on Microsoft Office. We know you're too stupid to use anything else. You've trusted us one, trust us again!"

Thats just rude. Telling me I'm too stupid to install Open Office.

They should start sending out e-mails too:

"Your e-mail address recently came up in one of our Security Cleared A-Members lists - and you've won the Microsoft Lottery..."

[2] But wait, there is no e-mail client, and that would costs us money. (See [1] again).

[3] Wait. Oh. Hang on. This is by far the funniest bit. Apparently Microsoft Office *PROTECTS YOUR DATA FROM VIRUS ATTACKS*!! Oh come on. This isn't just FUD, this is down right *illegal*.

[4] I love the bit about support too. Has anyone ever tried to get support out of Microsoft? O.K, and for those of you that have, how much did that cost? Exactly.

To be honest, I hadn't really been too bothered about switching away from Microsoft Office - already spent the money, but now I've read that Microsoft article... heck, I'm going to switch to Open Office because I'm offended by their whole attitude.

"Seamless Information Exchange" (4, Insightful)

ejaw5 (570071) | more than 10 years ago | (#8691995)

"third party studies show that competitive office suites retain only 75% accuracy (data and formatting) when receiving documents from Office users..."

Well, who's fault is it for using proprietary file formats in attempt to lock everyone else out of the market?

I wonder if MS Office 2003 will correctly open a document created in OpenOffice.org.

What about size? (4, Insightful)

SinaSa (709393) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692005)

This might sound like flamebait, but I havn't read either article so I'd just like to post my own 1 point rebuttal.

You can't download MS Office legally.

I rest my case.

Costs (2, Interesting)

StupaflyD (729788) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692009)

I notice that their "cheaper" arguement does not include downtime / network bandwidth / admin overtime / etc due to Outlook propagated worms & virii.

Gotcha! (2, Redundant)

op00to (219949) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692013)

/CreationDate (D:20030911160553) /Producer (Acrobat Distiller 4.05 for Macintosh) /Author (Gravity) /Title (competitive OpenOffice.qxd) /Creator (QuarkXPress\(tm\) 4.11) /ModDate (D:20030911160603-07'00')


Hmm. Funny how the Microsoft PDF wasn't creaded using Microsoft sofware... or Windows ..

What are these things? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8692022)

I do my spreadsheets in emacs & TeX.

Made with... (2, Interesting)

krray (605395) | more than 10 years ago | (#8692025)

Microsoft's *PDF* (why wouldn't they put it out in .DOC virus format?) was made with QuarkXPress 4.11 with the Acrobat distiller 4.05 for *Macintosh*.

The sad thing is I can't even agree with Microsoft on THAT one. Acrobat didn't go OS.X until 5.05 I believe so this was created on a Mac using OS 9. At least they go HALF of it right.

I'll be keeping my Mac. Can't wait for the NATIVE version of OO to emerge. 2006 - bah. It'll beat Longhorn to market though. That's even sadder.

Microsoft: a rich pathetic company.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?