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!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

SuSE Linux will run Microsoft Office

Hemos posted more than 11 years ago | from the lizard-meet-the-paperclip dept.

SuSE 382

PizzaFace writes "SuSE Linux is developing a desktop Linux distribution that will allow Windows users to continue using (some of) their Windows applications, including Microsoft Office. The SuSE Linux Office Desktop will be available for $129 in January, and will include Acronis OS Selector for disk partitioning during installation and Codeweavers CrossOver Office for Windows API emulation."

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

WINE (-1, Redundant)

Purzel (207497) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563350)

Wine Is Not an Emulator.


Re:WINE (0)

Branc0 (580914) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563365)

What has WINE got to do with it? Wine does not run various Win32-based applications.

WineX on the other hand let's you run WarCraft, I don't know about M$ Office, I didn't find the time to test it, I had more, erm... interesting things to do?

Re:WINE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563469)

Yes it is. The cool acronym says otherwise, but that is nowadays just to have a cool acronym.

Since it does more than just reimplement the API, it is by definition an emulator. Get over it.

Conversion in process (5, Interesting)

Deton8 (522248) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563359)

Half of my engineers just switched to Linux plus StarOffice for their day-to-day communications. So far, so good. If these emulators get good enough to run OrCAD, Modelsim, and the FPGA development packages, then we can lose Windows completely from our R&D operation.

Re:Conversion in process (-1)

cyborg_monkey (150790) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563412)

You are a fucking moron.

"I sure hate MS, but I hope Linux can run MS and other Windows apps!"

Re:Conversion in process (2)

e8johan (605347) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563413)

Modelsim is already available in a Unix version, I suppose that you can get it for Linux. I have, however, only used it on Solaris.

Re:Conversion in process (3, Informative)

PSargent (188923) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563525)

Using Modelsim for Linux now. You can't get the PE (Personal Edition) though. That's only on Windows.

Re:Conversion in process (5, Interesting)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563493)

Why OrCAD? Have you looked at Eagle CAD? It's pretty darn close to ORCAD and is a helluva lot cheaper.. (an a large number of companies are using it now) plus it run's under linux as they sell a Linux version along with their windows version. I gave a copy (free student version that allows only 2 layer boards) to one of our design engineers, he was tickled after a couple of months and asked if we could purchase it for here. I guess the scriptable backend to automate many processes makes his job easier. I'm betting that Modelsim and the FPGA stuff will run under wine.... have you tried?

Re:Conversion in process (2)

Deton8 (522248) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563612)

Well, no I haven't actually tried these tools on wine -- I just assumed with all the security dongle stuff it wouldn't work. We'll give it a try and see what kind of damage it causes. Obviously, we have to be careful as these packages are very expensive and it wouldn't do to have the suppliers flag us as using pirate software. We would also need to do extensive tests as you can imagine an undetected flaw in an inner layer of a board, or worse, in an ASIC, would be a disaster.

Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563363)

Fuck, Fuck, Fuck, Fuck, Mother, Motherufck, Mother, Motherfuck, Motherfuck, Motherfuck,Mother, Mother, Fuck, Fuck, Noige, Noige, Noige, 1.2.3.. Smoking Weed, Smoking Weed, Smoking Weed Weed Weed, Doing Coke, Drinking Beers, Rolling Fatties, Smoking Blunts, Who smokes the blunts? We smoke the Blunts. Rolling Blunts and Smoking Blunts, Hey can I have a Dime Bag.... 15 bucks little man, put that shit in my hand. If the money doesn't show, then you'll owe me owe me owe. JUNGLE LOOOOVEE! OWWEEOWWEEOOHHH. I wanta wanta know ya know ya!!!

Re:Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563554)

That's the most intelligent thing I've read all day.

Crossover (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563366)

Why wouldn't one just get crossover, which they could use with any version of linux, instead of giving Suse $130 to give you crossover.

Re:Crossover (5, Insightful)

Angry White Guy (521337) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563381)

How many geeks are going to buy a desktop OS? None. How many people want to try Linux but can't give up their Office(tm)? Suse apparently is banking on lots.

This is not for geeks. Maybe for geeks-in-training, but not for geeks!

Re:Crossover (2, Informative)

AyeRoxor! (471669) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563444)

"How many geeks are going to buy a desktop OS? None."

I have. I started learning POs when I got my first IBM, a PCjr, at age 7. It booted up into rom (or cartridge) basic, and I started programming. Now, at almost 25, I'm a paid programmer. But I never learned linux and of my friends, the only one who knows linux even moderately well lives about an hour and a half away. So I grabbed Lycoris [] . Since all a GUI is is a front-end for a command interpreter, I'm doing things in the GUI and finding out what they do in the CI. My intent, of course, is to wean myself from the GUI like many people did from Win3x and 9x. Shouldn't take me long. But when I forget something in a pinch, the gui's there. Now I see the things the gui does, and look up how it does it. It's been pretty constructive.

Re:Crossover (1)

Angry White Guy (521337) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563472)

Ergo, you're a geek in training.
I have no doubts about your general geekieness, but as for your linux geekiness, it's only building. Pretty soon you'll drop the training wheels and use the gui to have 30 terminal windows open at a time.
You prove my point exactly.

Typical geek comment with zero business sense. (2, Insightful)

1000101 (584896) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563633)

How many geeks are going to buy a desktop OS?

If nobody ever paid for the OS how do you think all of these linux distros would still be in business?? My God, it doesn't take a genius to figure out you need income to pay your employees and stay alive. These free-for-all linux times we're living in will come to a screeching halt within the next few years. Why you ask? Because most of the distros are made by companies that are publicly held and their share holders will demand more revenue. If the OS is so much better than OS X or Windows, why is it such a bad thing to pay for it anyway?

Re:Crossover (5, Insightful)

rseuhs (322520) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563399)

Because SuSE will offer a complete solution without hassles. (no downloads, no extra installs, no extra budgets)

That said, no it's not for everybody. But a lot of users (especially corporations) will find it useful if it is preconfigured so that installing and using Win32 apps is easily and fast done.

Re:Crossover (3, Insightful)

e8johan (605347) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563449)

I'd say that it is for most users. Not many users want to have to fiddle with the OS, install extra packages etc. just to get it working properly. I'd say that the vast majority wants computers to be easier and force less choices (thus reducing complexity). I'm not saying that the choice should be removed, simply intelligently set from the start and easy to modify and well documented.

Re:Crossover (2)

mpsmps (178373) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563605)

Speaking from experience, it can take way more fiddling than the average computer user is capable of to get the Windows fonts (or acceptable substitutes) commonly used by Office installed and displaying well under Linux. If Suse has preconfigured this, it could make the difference between only geeks being able to use Crossover Office and anyone being able to use it.


Umm (5, Insightful)

Mr_Silver (213637) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563368)

I don't want to be the miserable sod but this is just Suse including Crossover Office in their distribution rather than getting you to download it seperately.

It's not exactly earth shattering news. Whats next? Slashdot reporting that that distibution Blah is going to come with WINE already pre-installed?

Or am I missing something major entirely?

Re:Umm (5, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563390)

I think the point is that a typically "easy to use" distribution is going to come w/Office working out of the box.

It's just one step closer to what SOME of the Linux community want, easy to use desktop, easy transition from Windows, full Office support.

Downloading a product, installing said product, and getting it to work, are not the easiest things for most to do. This is what you are missing.

Ease of installation is what counts (5, Insightful)

ites (600337) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563400)

The 'just download package X' syndrome is one of the main barriers for simple folk using Linux.
Actually, even for experienced users, it's a relief when we get something like Debian's apt.
What SuSE are doing here is to provide a distro that will run MS-Office with no tuning or tweaking or HOWTOs.
This is at once banal, and important. Seamless compatability with Microsoft products is a key tool in the fight to move users off Windows.
And this news is a sign that SuSE have understood this. That's worth saying.
(Just to give another example, we spent several days trying to make Oracle 9i work with Debian, and RedHat, and finally tried SuSE... it came with the necessary (trivial) user accounts preconfigured, and Oracle 9i installed and ran almost at once.

SuSE v.s. Lindows? (3, Insightful)

thenextpresident (559469) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563372)

It should be interesting to see how Lindows handles a vetran like SuSE entering this turf. However, should be good for the end user.

IMO, SuSE should do well. They have been much more OS than Lindows, and so they don't have to worry about all the bad press.

so does this mean.. (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563373)

... no freely downloaded SuSE ISOs?

Re:so does this mean.. (1)

srpatterson (515721) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563408)

they stopped doing that by version 8.0

Re:so does this mean.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563520)

Maybe, but not having any freely downloadable ISOs, even a free edition without the parts like Crossover, will probably do more to harm them than its worth... experience has shown that distros without a freely downloaded version actually end up with poorer sales due to the lesser publicity.

Re:so does this mean.. (1)

daniel23 (605413) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563503)

> ... no freely downloaded SuSE ISOs?

The announced product is not the SuSE linux distro, but another product (at least thats my understanding)

And have there ever been freely downloadable SuSE ISOs? Free network install, but definitely no ISOs at least since 6.3


Great news! (2)

rseuhs (322520) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563376)

If Crossover is able to run most Win32-mainstream apps by next year (as promised) and SuSE preconfigures and preinstalls it intelligently, the result can be *the* Windows-killer in the corporate space.

Re:Great news! (2)

lovebyte (81275) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563404)

the result can be *the* Windows-killer in the corporate space.
Windows won't be killed since, AFAIK, it must be installed for Suse/Crossover to work.

Re:Great news! (3, Informative)

unapersson (38207) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563421)

No it doesn't need Windows, otherwise there wouldn't be much point. The whole purpose of Wine and its derivatives is that you can run Windows applications without having the OS installed.

Re:Great news! (3, Informative)

Geert-Jan (101165) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563428)

> Windows won't be killed since, AFAIK, it must be installed for Suse/Crossover to work.

No, it doesn't. Crossover Office works just fine without a real Windows installation.

Re:Great news! (3, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563521)

no it wont... as you are still tied to the damned micorsoft EULAS and how much you want to bet that the next eula down the pipe will say "you are not allowed to run this on any operating system other than one made by microsoft" thus making you instantly a free target for the BSA Blackmail squad.

The only way out is linux+evolution+Open

a combination that doesn't tie your companies head to a boulder like microsoft does.

It will kill nothign at that price (2)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563620)

At that price per desktop, corporate users might as well go for the 'real' thing. No way to justify it.

Personally, I dont like Microsoft's applications/OS, but from a business standpoint, there isn't any real advantage to go an *alternative* route, when its at this cost level. ( not even touching on TCO issues here )

And *many* reasons to stay with MS, in this case.

True there are other reasons to switch, but you wont get it done this way.

Reality (5, Insightful)

e8johan (605347) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563379)

It is sad, but this is probably the best way to get into the desktop business. The ability to run Office is often a requirement when companies aquire OSs.

It seems that they have realized that the transition has to be smooth "SuSE Linux Office Desktop combines the technology and user-friendliness of SuSE Linux 8.1 with proven tools that facilitate the migration from Windows operating systems and applications".

And the biggest advantage of this solution is also brought up the the press release: "SuSE Linux Office Desktop seamlessly enables the continued use of existing data".

The Linux distros must realize (and seems to have realized) that the average desktop user does not care for open source or extra choices. The average user simply wants a productive desktop that is easy to use and works they way they expect it to.

Re:Reality (1)

ycv (323823) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563457)

I personnally think that the best way to get into desktop business would be to have a decent office suite (openoffice is still really unstable) and a real powerful tool to translate all those ugly .doc documents. And then we could get rid of at least one proprietary format !

Introducing MS application into Linux is not the way to go ! But I am not surprised that it comes from SuSE.

Re:Reality (2)

e8johan (605347) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563489)

But we don't have that yet.

Isn't it then better to allow the users to get a smooth transition. It is more likely that a Linux user will try free alternatives than a Windows user, isn't it?

just like xandros (2)

leuk_he (194174) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563462)

It's just like xandros [] that includes the crossover pluging for the xandros 1.0 $99 product.

If you want a debian clone instead of a suse clone.

Re:Reality (1)

SilverSun (114725) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563465)

I think a secretary or any other corporate desktop user must comply with corporate directives. The corporation (as some governments seem to have done already) must realize, that a closed data format will always be insecure. I cannot understand how any company can publish word documents on the web, or sne dthem to customers/partnres, where sensitive information might be hidden in the .doc which is not easily visible for the user.

That said, I think a smooth migration path is a GoodThing. Good Luck Linux.


re:Reality (2, Interesting)

EzInKy (115248) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563500)

The Linux distros must realize (and seems to have realized) that the average desktop user does not care for open source or extra choices. The average user simply wants a productive desktop that is easy to use and works they way they expect it to.

In others words, easy migration. Nothing wrong with people wanting that especially since they have time and money invested in apps and training.

Once they get used to the idea of not having to pay for a license to use the operating system it won't take too that much more to get them to bulk at constantly shelling out for licenses to use the apps, either.

If you keep building it...they will keep coming.

Linux Alternatives? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563383)

There are enough Linux based Office-equivalent alternatives, what's wrong with these? I'm sure they work much better than the Office and are much more stable!

Support Linux, not m$crosoft!

Re:Linux Alternatives? (2)

Angry White Guy (521337) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563445)

Yeah, but they don't work with office.
I've tried them all, and the formatting doesn't work out.
Interestingly enough, will remove the passwords from a locked Excel Spreadsheet , so the incompatibility isn't all that bad.

Re:Linux Alternatives? (3, Insightful)

Tinfoil (109794) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563447)

The office alternatives are good for many uses but not always 100% compatable. Then there is the retraining costs as well. Lastly, when it comes right down to it, Office is not a terrible program at all. It does what it was designed to do (insert your pun about virii here if you must) and it does it well. Nor have I had any stability issues with it in a good long time.

Re:Linux Alternatives? (1)

CaptnMArk (9003) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563622)

The fact that any .VBS scripts embeded in office files allow execution of almost anything on the system is no small flaw.

This capability should be removed (except maybe for signed scripts, like in javascript)

Re:Linux Alternatives? (2, Insightful)

Unkle (586324) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563502)

There are enough Linux based Office-equivalent alternatives, what's wrong with these? I'm sure they work much better than the Office and are much more stable!

Unfortunately, for most people the problem is that they are not named Microsoft Office or Microsoft Word. People like to stick with what's familiar, and the basic office apps (Word, Excel) have remained pretty much the same for a majority of users at least since version 6 (the earliest one I can remember using). Most of what has been added is fluff and feature creep. Also, a lot of people like to use the same program for the same task no matter where they are. My wife, for example, will only write her papers for school in Word because that's what they have at her school, and if she happens to need to make some last minute changes while on campus, she needs to be able to use the camups computer labs. I've tried to get her to switch to OpenOffice, but she won't-because it's not Word.

Re:Linux Alternatives? (1)

KevinGale (537574) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563529)

It doesn't matter if the Office-equivalents are as good or even better than Office. People want to run the software they already have and know. Companies have standardized on Office and they don't want to switch overnight. When Microsoft created Windows they made damn sure it ran all the DOS apps people already owned. Then as now the best way to get people to try new software is if they don't have to give up the old software they know and use every day.

Open Office (3, Interesting)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563385)

I've been using Open Office for at least a Year with no problems, but then again I don't use.

Visio, Outlook or Access.

Visio is just painfull, so I suppose it's a good thing that there isn't a Free Visio-a-like.

Outlook is fairly intergrated and complete, all Linux equivelents I've tried so far fall short.

Access is handy for small DB needs, it's crap but still quite widley used because it's easy. I have a Free port of Access for Linux underway and expect to have a Open-Office Db driver shortly.

Anything anyone else would 'miss' from the Office Suite?

Re:Open Office (2)

frleong (241095) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563440)

Anything anyone else would 'miss' from the Office Suite?
OLE Automation and Macros. Yeah, Open Office is surely a good candidate for replacing Office at home (but most of MS office@home is pirated anyway - so not much income for MS in this segment). But corporations usually have one or two apps that make use of OLE interfaces and macros for office automation.

Visio Whore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563441)

Perhaps I'm just too much of a Visio whore but I actually _like_ allows me to do spiffy flow-charts very quickly. Database modelling is OK (for showing to clients I guess, the Create Table statements tell enough of the story for most). I haven't ventured into the UML/code generation aspects of visio for ages, don't intend to. I can type much faster than I can click about 20 times to create a single property.....What is it about Visio that you think sucks? What is better? You mention there are no good open-source alternatives, but what are the closed source ones?

Re:Open Office (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563533)

> Visio is just painfull

What's so painful about it? It's a great tool; powerful, simple and reliable.

I'd be lost without it for doing network diagrams, rack configurations and such.

Can you name an alternative?

Free Port of MSAccess?? (2, Interesting)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563552)

What/where is this beast?

Interresting problem for Microsoft... (5, Interesting)

Max Romantschuk (132276) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563391)

I wonder how Microsoft is going to respond to this one... Earlier today I learned that Microsoft is trying to force users to upgrade their OS with Office 11 [] ... This is an option they obviously would not like their users to have.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563513)

Holy shit! Users of Windows 3.11 aren't able to use the latest version of Office! Holy fuck, Microsoft is forcing upgrades!!

That's Hilarious (2, Funny)

EzInKy (115248) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563593)

"The posting attributed to Microsoft said: "We understand that this decision won't be popular among all of our customers, but it allows us to create a better and more stable product..."

and new and improved EULA's, too.

More information/commentary at (0)

elodan (601886) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563397)

the Register []

Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563401)

"Even Microsoft CEO, Steve Ballmer can no longer deny that Linux has established a place in the server room of enterprises."

We'll see about that.

Great... (4, Funny)

Calomnious Awkward (459373) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563403) I can finally run NortonAV on my Linux box too. (or was that 'have too')

LINUX (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563411)

Linux is not useful xcept running windows software

As if Slapper weren't enough... (2, Funny)

jaredcoleman (616268) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563415)

I hope this can run .vbs scripts!!!

very good business model... (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563417)

1 - embrace and extend
4 ?????
5 - profit!!

it did work for M$....

Re:very good business model... (1, Flamebait)

Theodore Logan (139352) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563452)

Yeah, foor legs good two legs bad!

Why not? It works for Slashdot trolls.

Btw, There's usually a 2 and a 3 in there.

A drawback of sorts.. (5, Insightful)

LT4Ryan (178006) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563418) using Linux. Personally, one of the draws of using Linux was the security standpoint. It wasn't so much that I could shut my brain off, but I was fairly certain I could ease my fears about losing work due to nutty macros, worms, and what-have-you. Sure, I still have to be careful, but I am also able to breeze through the half million security bulletins for these products :)

It just seems that now Suse and other distros are following this path, this is going to open up a new world of breaches and backdoors that will eventually make it a PITA to use Office on Linux, much like it is on Windows now.

If its just convieience, then why use Linux in the first place? :)

Re:A drawback of sorts.. (2)

halftrack (454203) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563568)

This is an issue for crossover, who and what get to read and write what. It can be stopped without user interaction. (Don't know how secure crossover is today though.)

All this scares me a bit. (5, Interesting)

XTerm89D (609102) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563420)

Although it's a good thing that comapnies like SuSE are trying to push GNU/Linux to the corporate/Common Joe's desktop, all this 'Integrate non Free software to run more non Free software' does concerns me.

After all, the one thing that pushes GNU and BSD is the Freedom that comes with it. If we start mangling Free and non Free software too much together people will even further lose understanding the value of Freedom.

Re:All this scares me a bit. (2)

e8johan (605347) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563480)

Is it really dangerous? If common Joe would migrate to GNU/Linux while using non-free software that he is used to it is more likely that he will try some free alternatives (as they are easier to install on a GNU/Linux platform).

Unfortunately the free Office alternatives cannot compete with Office just yet. Office has huge integration, group working and scripting capabilities still missing from all OSS alternatives. I recently tried Abiword, until I failed to create a table. KWord couldn't (at least easily since I failed) add an extra column to an existing table, etc. I'm not saying that it is wrong to try to compete, but one must realize why Office is so widely spread.

Re:All this scares me a bit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563483)

So what you're basically saying, is, if you don't want to use our applications then fuck off.

That type of mentality will really hurt the OSS/FS "movements". Lets say I'm some company and I just purchased MS Office for all my employees last year and spent $5000. I want and need to use MS Office. Now I don't mind using Linux as long I can use MS Office. I don't give a hoot about this "software freedom". So you tell me well, you should ditch MS Office and just use Star Office. Star Office is so much slower and more ugly and I just like my comfortable Star Office. Is this going to make me switch? Probably not.

Sure the "freedom" is nice, but its easier to migrate slowly than just go cold turkey.

Re:All this scares me a bit. (3, Interesting)

fsmunoz (267297) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563504)

Exactly. It seems that the whole concept of Freedom got lost somewhere between "I wan't to run Office" and "I must play XYZ". I don't really see the joy of saying that this is going to be a Windows killer when in fact it just turns a once free OS into a WIndows look-alike in terms of licensing. If this is the future of Linux then it's really no better than Windows.

What's next? Maybe a kernel driver to emulate WinXP serial key? Step by step the pressure from ppl that don't give a flying fuck about software freedom is turning the Linux desktop into a licensing nightmare. Nothing wrong with it if that's what ppl seem to want, maybe there is room for another closed OS after all, and this new Linux trend seems to be it.

I understand fully that ppl need to 'get work done'. Once upon a time I would actually understand this kind of stuff, but after seing release after release more closed stuff being shoved into distributions I don't really have the time or the inclination to debate it. Need to get the work done? It involves using MS Office (not a free clone, the real one), IE, etc? USE WINDOWS. Ppl just laugh when I talk about the concept of having to sometimes make do with an inferior or different tool in order to maintain the free software spirit, something that was common and even a established point some years ago.

Nevermind, just venting out a bit :)



please moderate +1 ascii art (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563425)

awesome /| __
bunny / | ,-~ /
man Y :| // /
i'll | jj /( .^
bet >-"~"-v"
this / Y
thing jo o |
smokes ( ~T~ j
some >._-' _./
serious / "~" |
crack Y _, |
on /| ;-"~ _ l
the / l/ ,-"~ \
weekends \//\/ .- \
huh? Y / Y
l I !
]\ _\ /"\
(" ~----( ~ Y. ) (by Rowan)

Re:please moderate +1 ascii art (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563591)

Is that bunny playing with itself? Disgusting.

This is GOOD doh! (1)

av909 (621735) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563451)

Most people will not care to much for the OS if they get the office stuff they are used to. If office works, youll be able to get many more people useing X without the normal hassel. I think more crossovers like this would help X alot.

Windows 98 won't run MS Office (5, Informative)

delphi125 (544730) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563453)

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office (2, Interesting)

strmcrw (621623) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563563) says than MS Office 11 will need Windows Installer 2.0, which only WinXP and Win2k+SP3 have anyone knows if this Installer runs under Wine ?

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office (0)

Krilomir (29904) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563596)

So what? Use the new office with the new windows. Windows XP and 2000 has been out for quite a while, and Office 11 isn't even released yet.

oh great (1, Flamebait)

Tom (822) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563454)

The death of office productivity finally available for Linux users, too.
Will the paperclip work, too, or will we just have to put up with virus-prone macros, proprietary and bloated document formats, the crappy user-interface and memory-hogging sluggishness?

Oh, wait. Now Linux users can pay Microsoft money so they can continue fighting Linux wherever they can.
Go left, everyone just one crucifix.

Re:oh great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563546)

> crappy user-interface

Jeezuz! You must be kidding!

I suppose emacs is your idea of a great user interface, you fucking retard.

always a first.. yes but.. (3, Interesting)

SystematicPsycho (456042) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563463)

Probably nothing new other than it's a major announcement, and I bet redhat are closely watching this one. Seriously now, isn't this a big kick in the face? What about OpenOffice, AbiWord etc? The only reason I've ever needed WORD is because some moron wrote something and sent it over in a .doc file or .ppt. I think the real answer is for the justice dept to force m$ to open up there document formats.

Way to go SuSE! (2, Funny)

croftj (2359) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563497)

Being a big fan of SuSE, this is great news. Now all I have to do is convince my boss to fire a co-worker to free up the $129.00 for me to buy a copy and get rid of my 2nd PC!

The next version sounds interesting, too. (2)

Observer (91365) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563508)

Note that they're scheduling an Enterprise Desktop version for Q1 2003, too, for the larger scale companies. (And already have 2 German commercial organisations on board, with 3K and 1K desktops respectively, to smooth out the rough edges in deploying and supporting on that scale.) Sounds as though this might turn out to be a serious injection of business realities into the task of getting Linux et al established at desktop level.

Too expensive for non-geeks (5, Interesting)

TheLinuxWarrior (240496) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563511)

Why bother with SuSE for $129, when you can get Xandros [] (which has the same office functionality) for $99.

And of course Xandros is based on Debian, which I hear has a package management system that is the cats ass.

...besides Office ? (2)

mirko (198274) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563518)

This sure sounds interesting (despite my reluctancy towards SuSe stuff). Now the real good thing would be if I could use it for more :
I am a Win/Cubase guy and I would like to know whether this API would allow me to use my souncards drivers, their own utilities, Cubase... etc.
BTW, could I play DVDs using PowerDVD ?
My realpoint is : how deep does it "simulates" windows ?

Re:...besides Office ? (2)

(H)elix1 (231155) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563617)

As far as playing DVD's... take a look at They have windows, solaris, bsd, linux, and a few other platforms covered. Try it, and if you like what you see in windows it will be the same deal with SuSe.

why? (2, Troll)

tps12 (105590) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563523)

I guess I'm glad that something like this is available (rather than it not being available), but I have to wonder what the point of it is. The Open Source development model results in software that is provably superior to proprietary solutions (see Edgar Raymond's excellent essay, The Cathedral and the Bizarre [] for more info). This is why KOffice and GNOME Office are so great, despite their small development teams and short development cycles. So why would anyone even want to run M$ Office on a Linux workstation? No thanks, I'll stick to what works: AbiWord, Gnumeric, and Tux Racer!!

Re:why? - Access that's why (1)

Mantrid (250133) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563559)

I can replace Word easy. I may even be able to pry Excel out of Accounting's cold dead fingers. I am unaware of any open source application that is a good replacement for MS Access. I'm not a programmer but I can make useful tools in MS Access (with some light scripting - I can do some code, but not a whole app from scratch).

If there is something out there that is a match for Access XP, I'd sure like to know about it - it should be able to connect to anything ODBC can connect to etc...

Come to think of it use of Outlook XP is taken for granted - it integrates with our Exchange server for appointments etc, there a OS replacment with the range and features for the Outlook/Exchange combo?

Having replacements for these things would continue to drive cracks into our dependance of M$.

(not trolling here, I seriously would like to know about this! To start if I could get a linux box running that could report off of P.SQL and MSSQL that would let me get started...)

I bet it won't run Office 11 (2, Informative)

microbob (29155) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563528)

Seems the new Office 11 will only run on XP and W2K SP3.

Get the scoop from ZeeDee Net....

I mean, it was just a matter of time....

Split MS! (1, Offtopic)

JanMark (547992) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563538)

Let's face it, MS Office is important to many people. Infact it is one (or the) killer-app for MS Windows. They know this in Redmond. I would vote for splitting MS in two (or more) parts, one would do MS Office and the other MS Windows. I think the Office people would port Office to Linux in no-time. It would make business sence, but it would not be good for the Windows company.

Think of all the unnecessary programming effort that SuSE and other are putting in getting MS Office to work under Linux!

MS is a monopolist and it fighting hard (and dirty) to keep it that way.

I vote for breaking up MS or at least decoupeling MS Windows and MS Office.

You may think I am a dreamer, but I am not the only one!

Re:Split MS! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563577)

> I vote for breaking up MS or at least decoupeling MS Windows and MS Office.

Who gives a god damn what you'd vote for ?

'Open' Wine? (3, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563543)

Are codeweavers still going to fold back in their work for getting this to work into the orginal wine code?

Or have they changed their minds and decided to keep all this cool stuff to themselves, much as others have been doing lately..

MSOffice ablity isnt worth that sort of cost to me personally ( startoffice/Koffice does fine for what i need ), but if its folded back into the open code, then its worthwhile.

It does not have Outlook so it is not worth it. (2, Funny)

sh0gun (85858) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563545)

With the functionality and appearance of the mail client Evolution, users will not miss Microsoft Outlook.

With all the available office like components for Linux the only in my opinion that Linux is missing is a good email client and it looks like they will just let you use Evolution instead of trying to have Outlook work on Linux. Quite a shame, I could go without any of the others but I need Outlook.

ROWAN ownZ j00 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563548)

awesome /| __
bunny / | ,-~ /
man Y :| // /
i'll | jj /( .^
bet >-"~"-v"
this / Y
thing j* * |
smokes ( ~T~ j
some >._-' _./
serious / "~" |
crack Y _, |
on /| ;-"~ _ l
the / l/ ,-"~ \
weekends \//\/ .- \
huh? Y / Y
l I !
]\ _\ /"\
(" ~----( ~ Y. ) (by Rowan)

I made the buny llook like he stoned!!! I am funnir than jeff K hahahaha

Pffft (4, Funny)

bogie (31020) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563558)

Just keep piling on that proprietary code into the core of your distro. We all know thats the key to making the linux desktop successful. Just keep adding more and more proprietary code until you've created another windows.

Hell the GPL just exists so that companies can pay lip service anyway. Right? I mean that's the trend now. Make your distro mostly GPL and then tack on some proprietary stuff?

Everyones doing it, so it MUST be the right thing to do.

I can't wait until every linux distro is in some small way proprietary! Won't that be great! After all it IS how linux made its name.

Ever hear of private property? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563595)

As long as SuSE abides by the GPL when distributing GPL code, it doesn't fucking matter if they tack on some proprietary shit. For Hell's sake, what the fuck did you think StarOffice 5.2 , or IBM's ViaVoice, or Sun's Java tools were fucking Free Software?

If you don't like what SuSE's doing, then don't buy SuSE. Is it that hard to use Debian or Slackware or *gasp!* Gentoo?

hahaha (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563569)

who gives a crap, SuSE sucks the big one, a total POS Linux distro...

the only decent *.rpm based distro i ever seen is Redhat, and that means both SuSE and Mandrake sucks...

and Slackware is better than ANY other Linux distro I EVER used...

so it boils down to either Redhat or Slackware...

Slackware #1

Redhat #2

the rest sucks

Competition Brewing (2, Interesting)

orcaaa (573643) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563571)

There are so many companies focussing on the desktop these days. Redhat, Mandrake(it always did :)), Xandros, Lycoris, Lindows and now SUSE. This makes for a very interesting year coming up to see which one, if any, gains supremacy in the Desktop arena.
BTW, Whats next, Slackware and Gentoo based desktop solutions ;) ?

This is bad (0, Flamebait)

henrikhansen (599151) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563575)

Microsoft Word, Excel etc. are proprietary formats. Why would anyone who knows about these things use MS Office anyway?

Open Office gets better and better, and I think Suse ought to support the ideas behind open formats instead of being selfish and thinking in the short term.

Market differentiation and $$s (3, Interesting)

jonathanjg (547268) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563580)

I'm just your average slashdot reader, and I am getting confused myself about which product does what. I don't think your average joe at company X stands a chance of deciding upon which linux/office/ combination to go for, especially since we will see this market expanding even further. Also, am I the first one to see this, but what price advantage is $139 compared to a an XP licence in the business world? (After all you don't get fired for buying M$). There just needs to be something more to make a company go for the KILLER LINUX DESKTOP and this is MARKET DIFFERENTIATION

Crossover on RedHat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563582)

Well it seems I have the tech support from CrossOver confused as they can't come up with a reason why CrossOver office won't install on a RedHat 7.3 box... anyone have similar problems?

Office 11 EULA (5, Insightful)

earthforce_1 (454968) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563588)

So what is to stop microsoft from slipping something into the EULA prohibiting Office 11 from being used on a "potentially viral" GPLed OS?

Mac Office on Linux? (5, Insightful)

alistair (31390) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563592)

If running Microsoft Office on Linux is such a requirement, why is there no effort to run Mac OS X applications on Linux?

Microsoft Office X is far nicer then office 2000/XP and can read all these file formats. Microsoft make good money out of this port so aren't going to stop producing it any time soon. Because Microsoft don't own the underlying OS they are restricted in the number of changes they can make to Office X to break emulator compatability, unlike with WINE.

Yet OS X is based on Free BSD, so a binary compatability layer should be far easier than emulating Microsoft Windows. I realise this wouldn't give us Visio and possibly not Access, but I would take this option up long before running a heavyweight WINE install on my box, plus we would get the nice Mac plugins which ae generally every bit as good as their Windows versions.

I'm a little tired... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4563630)

of all the effort that is going into porting Windows programs to run under Linux. The entire idea of the open source/free software movement is to free yourself from proprietary software reliance. I moved to Linux in '98 to avoid using closed-source, stifling software that really gave me no real choices and freedom. It is time that the Linux advocates put their money where their mouth is. If you are an open source developer, you should write for the open source movement, not assist Bill Gates with embrace ans extend. Microsoft talks the talk when it comes to hating Linux and open source in general, but if you pay for Office and other programs, then you are doing nothing to help the open source movement. Face it, people... you DO NOT NEED ANY Microsoft programs anymore. Unless you are a hard core gamer, you don't even need Windows. One of the things that keeps open source from really taking off in the general population is the continued reliance of Windows-based software. Linux could dominate the dekstop in 5 years if people would develop alternative and quit the BS of interop programming. Linux is supposed to be an alternative to M$, not a partner, willing or unwilling. It's time we got off the M$ horse and walked on our own.

Um, and how do I win here? (5, Insightful)

occamboy (583175) | more than 11 years ago | (#4563644)

OK, so here's the selling proposition:

For $129 I can get an OS that runs Office (but doesn't include it, as far as I can see) and which possibly runs other Windows apps, and which definitely runs Linux apps.

Or, for much less than $129 I can get an OS (Windows XP), that absolutely runs MS Office and which definitely runs vrtually all other Windows apps.

Linux is useful and fun for us nerds, but is a bit of a sell to non-nerds, and I don't see the above selling proposition as favoring SUSE for desktop applications -- Linux has no inherent appeal to non-nerds.

If one really wants or needs to run MS Office, XP makes sense. If one wants Linux on the desktop, I'd go with Redhat 8.0 (with its out-of-the-box non-sucking fonts, except in Mozilla) along with Open Office (excellent free replacement for MS Office) and other software that is designed for Linux use.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?