If I sounded a touch trite it's because what starts out as a reasonable discussion always seems to get taken over by a couple of people who think that they retain the right to stop contributing and start boring people.

seems that you two have taken over from what was a discussion about, let me think what was it ???, oh yes thats right, Massachuchu or something, now let me see is this a discussion on Open Office versa Micro$Loth or am I on the wrong page.
Did some one ask how the Italians will get on with there education system changing over to Linux ???? seems the whole world is getting a bit thingo with Meggadollar, opps sorry that was Microdollop

You kind of tip your hand that you aren't very fair or balanced when you start hurling insults (Micro$Loth, Meggadollar, Microdollop) before you try and make a point. What happened did Docer call for reinforcements?

Yes, this is a discussion about Open Office and Microsoft Office and how converting Microsoft Office documents and applications to OO may or may not be very easy.

One or two of the younger crowd here can’t seem to understand that some people use Microsoft Office for more than just plaintext editing and OO isn't quite compatible for complex documents or Microsoft Office based applications.

Do you have anything to contribute to the discussion?

Yes I am an open source supporter and yes I am pissed off with Microsoft.
I have had to update at great expence to myself to stay abreast of microDollop, and yes it will probably cost me a darn site more in the not so distant future, the end result being that I am vertually forced to use a system that I dislike because the world is run by shepherds and the majority are sheep.
If the world was a better place Microdollop would be put in a possition where they would accept there are other players on the field.
I wonder how you two would get on if there were only ONE choice of vehicle and the owner of the manufacturing auto dictated what and how much and when you could drive ??.
I have only "Discovered" in the last two years the alternative operating systems, and yes at first I was lead by the nose believing the rubbish published that all LINUX systems were too difficult and too hard to use.
Well excuse me but my minor research has uncovered a host of linux systems that are as equal if not better in many respects,but having said that I am still FORCED to use a system I dislike because of the SHEEP who haven't a clue that there are different systems available and much worse they {the sheep} believe that the alternative is chaos, rubbish and more rubbish.
Microsoft stands accused of acting like a corporate dictator,it runs on greed alone but there is a wiff of change in the air.
Many Countries are now statring to realise that Micro$loth is not really offering a well priced and usable product and are not only considering the change but are actually making that change.
I welcome the changes that are coming Windows is NOT, I'll repeat that Windows is NOT a stable platform to operate from and the cracks are begining to appear.
Do I support Linux and the open source community you betcha I do and I can't wait for the changes that are coming.
I would suggest, and no I have no relationship or finacial link with them [ thats before you read something that isn't there] I suggest that you visit "distrowatch.com" it totally ammazed me at the number of alternative distros.
Yes I have tried a couple the Two that are think are outstanding, Xandros and Ubunta.
Now why don't you both ask each other to swap info and stop haveing a dead conversation
Richard as 17oceans

“I have had to update at great expence to myself to stay abreast of microDollop”

Excuse the lack of compassion but so what? Over the last 20+ years I’ve changes platforms, operating systems and development languages more than I care to remember But newer and better things come out all the time and if you don’t want to be a dinosaur you have to go with the flow. Right now the flow is with Microsoft.

There is a large open source community and Apple is still in the game despite 20+ years of stupidity in not licensing their OS. The flow could change to open source, who knows?

What Docer couldn’t understand is that while you may hate Microsoft with all your heart the reality is that its products are the dominant player in the market today. I hated Microsoft quite deeply when I was an Apple developer. In retrospect I was more upset with Apple for its mistakes.

While you may dislike or treat Microsofts technologies with disdain – they are widely used and because the current OO project does not fully support those technologies you can’t convert a large number of Microsoft Office documents and applications to OO.

I work with the state of MA on a daily basis and if I couldn’t send them complex Word docs with macros and Access applications it would cost us all a lot of money to replace with OO components. That’s what this thread is about. Docer kept claiming that those files could be converted and as someone who has evaluated OO (all versions) – it can’t currently do what the state needs.

“Windows is NOT, I'll repeat that Windows is NOT a stable platform to operate from”

Compared to what? An OS that doesn’t have as many features or and many users so hackers and virus writers don’t bother with it as much? My business uses Windows 2000 and 2003 servers and XP Professional workstations in day-to-day critical operations and it is very stable compared with Windows 95 series computers.

We rarely (couple times a year) have to reboot outside of normal maintenance updates – and it’s usually related to tapes that jam. And we do quite involved application development on our systems. I’m sorry your experience with Windows wasn’t as good but I haven’t experienced those kind of stability problems since we coded on Windows 9x.

We’re doing primarily client/server development, perhaps folks doing Windows kernel or device driver work have to reboot more but Windows is a very stable platform for business as well as application development.

“Now why don't you both ask each other to swap info and stop haveing a dead conversation”

I’ve laid out everything on my end. The conversation is dead because Docer refused to let anyone know if he’s really working in IT but more importantly couldn’t tell anyone how he managed to convert complex Microsoft Office documents and applications to OO when OO doesn’t currently support the technologies required to handle it. He got caught in a lie and rather than look ever stupider he took his marbles and went home.

Your Business uses Microsoft da da and why is that?, you replied to that your self because of the financial commitment you have made as there are no REAL alternative at this point in time,but that seems to lack a real depth, you are stuck and make the best of what you have much the same as I have to do and many others also are Forced to do.
If and I say again IF there were an alternative you would most likely take a hard look at your financial commitment and make a reasoned disision based on what the alternative could do for you.
Mass what ever the reasons MAY have decided to make a change based on financial PROJECTIONS and a blind man could reason out that Microsoft will keep upping the costs with little improvements needed whilst they have the controlling share.
When the cost to benifits are weighted that also maybe the reason that others are already making the same change as Mass, IE China, Brazil,parts of the German, Italian and other europeans countries are now alo either making that change or seriousely considering that change.
It is interesting that Microsoft tried desperatly to hang on to the European Market and lost that Battle last year.
Like I said, "the cracks are starting to appear" personally I hope like heck that the improvments to the Linux systems even double over the next few MONTHS because I seriousely believe that Linux is near the point where they will become an even more seriouse threat to Microsoft and it's monoplistic and dictaorial hold on the market.
You'll get no prize for making a mad guess who will be watching that closely and changing his system asap when the time comes.
By the way, there is a developing cross platform system which improves daily, thanks mainly to the many hackers that enjoy the challenge, strange that Microakdollar hasn't spent a few dollars in also working on a cross platform system ???? wonder why.
Richard as 17oceans

“Your Business uses Microsoft da da and why is that?”

Um, because it is the defacto standard for the overwhelming majority of businesses in the world. And the variety and breadth of technologies and development tools available puts every other alternative to shame.

Those who prefer the open source world may not get or they do understand but shut it out of their mind but for all its faults Microsoft products are top rate.

In a previous post you denigrated Window for not being stable but provide nothing to backup the assertion. If Windows is such crap, why hasn’t Apple, Novell. Linux or even freaking Amiga taken over the world? Because Microsoft Windows and other Microsoft products do their job well – better than the alternatives.

If you aren’t just complaining for the sake of complaining - state what problems you have with a modern Windows OS (2000 or 2003/XP) and someone can probably assist you. But don’t throw out your previous argument about not liking Windows 98 because you can’t get support on it. As others have pointed out, go get a 7 year old distribution of any open source product and then b**** that something doesn’t work – you’ll be told to upgrade.

If you haven’t used a modern Windows OS then you don’t know what you are missing. Windows Pro 2000, Server 2003 and XP Pro (and even XP Home) are very stable operating systems that provide great value.

Who is holding a gun to your head? Docer complained about the same thing. If you don’t want Microsoft products – don’t buy or use them. Dell and most other tier 1 manufacturers allow you to purchase Windows free hardware. If you don’t like the fact that Microsoft has a great market share, buy/download your ‘open’ alternatives.

“Mass what ever the reasons MAY have decided to make a change based on financial PROJECTIONS”

If you don’t live in MA and haven’t followed the news carefully you may make that assumption – but it’s incorrect. Certain folks in the state bet their careers on the anti-trust suit that Microsoft won. They couldn’t get over it and now as a childish response are invalidating Microsoft as a potential supplier because no matter how much Microsoft bends it won’t be good enough. If Microsoft converted over to open source with free licenses the state would probably pass a law to cut off any vendor whose company name starts with “M” and ends in “T”.

The state CIO and others are being whiny childish pricks and have not thought through the financial ramifications for what they are proposing. The open source community may relish this slap in Microsoft’s face for now but when this free ‘open’ conversion begins and the true costs start coming out, the CIO will be out on his a** and the state will convert back to Microsoft Office.

I am not a betting man but that’s close to a 100% probability. Why – because like other areas of the country we don’t like paying taxes. And when it turns out that we are going to have to pay lots of real money to convert over thousands of ‘legacy’ Microsoft Office applications to open office our good old state legislators will A) not want to raise taxes to pay for it and/or B) not want to cut other programs to raise the tens of millions of dollars that is going to be needed.

“a blind man could reason out that Microsoft will keep upping the costs with little improvements needed whilst they have the controlling share.”

Every new Microsoft OS and application version for as long as I remember (and I go back over 20 years) has had many improvements and most of the prices have remained the same if not decreased. Of course the company has a desire to hold onto its market share but business 101 says they can’t do what you propose as ‘a given’. New versions of Internet Explorer and Windows have/are adding new features from the competition to stay competitive so they won’t lose their market share.

Docer complained that all those extra features are bloat and are not needed but your arguments seem to lead to the opposite conclusion – that a company must continue to add new features so the marketplace and consumers don’t pass them over for the new kid on the block.

“It is interesting that Microsoft tried desperatly to hang on to the European Market and lost that Battle last year.”

Um, they lost an anti-trust suit, paid a big fine and were required to provide a version of Windows that didn’t bundle the Windows Media Player so the competition could gain a toe hold. Well, from all the sales figures I’ve seen – essentially NONE of the stripped version of Windows has been sold and their market share hasn’t changed.

Perhaps regular consumers are smarter than the tight-assed EU anti-Microsoft bureaucrats as people WANT integrated solutions that work well together and not crap from 10 different vendors to get the job done. We had that in the 80’s and 90’s. The market shook out and the better products won out. You may hate the fact – but the winner was Microsoft.

“Microakdollar hasn't spent a few dollars in also working on a cross platform system ???? wonder why.”

What planet are you on? Why would Microsoft develop something that would cause it to lose money? Get real – companies exist not to server the public needs but to make money. Microsoft has made money and also inadvertently served the public needs by providing products that have standardized the flow of information and increased productivity around the world.

Hate them if you must but open your eyes wide enough to understand that Microsoft has done a pretty good job at making our lives easier. Perhaps the open source community will provide alternatives that some can use but for folks that use technologies that Microsoft Office provides that aren’t available on the open source side of things – they aren’t likely to switch anytime soon.

So, as I pointed out to Docer – if you want open source to take off create better and more compatible versions of OO. Add macros, VBS, ActiveX and provide utilities to convert Microsoft Office applications (not just documents) – and I will buy into OO. But don’t expect me to spend money to convert things just for the sake of converting them so you can slay big bad old Microsoft – the world doesn’t work that way.

Thanks for the comments - you are bit more coherent than Docer.

Just as a last word from me on the subject.
With no hint of sarcasitic note intended, your theory as to why Microsofty is so good is correct only in your statement that Microsofty pulled it all together and created a cohesion that wasn't there, I agree fully with that statement, the original was much needed and created a starting point for change.
Going to one of your points and I intend to go no further in discussion, your third last paragraph is in a way, I am sure unintentionally, emphisising what my point is, the paragraph starts "WHAT PLANET ARE YOU ON ....?" your defence of Microsoft are based upon them providing a platform that is affordable and easy to use with wide applications, am I right ?
then what in hecks name does Microsoft have to fear from opposition, the only real reason that it will lose what many, not just myself but many people around the world are begining to wake up to the truth that Microsoft is not the be all and end all that it would have us all believe,
I have no objections to a person or a company making money but somewhere there has to be a point where the balance sheet reaches a point where that person or company has to accept it also has a social responsibility to the greater community because by it's very nature it has become a thing greater than it's initial idea.
Microsoft reached that point years ago and regardless of your beliefs, Macrodollop ,instead of realising that the market WILL open up and becoming more competative has gone on the defence instead of welcoming the challenge that will be before it,and that means making ready to become a "Crossplatform" operating system.
MS would probably make greater benifits for all if it entered into closing the gap instead of constantly try to slam the door shut.
I get frustrated with Microsolth for many reasons, I experienced little differnce in operationg proceedures from 98 to XP except that I had to shell out more hard won cash for LITTLE improvements, why did I change ? because there was little choice which brings me back to Shepards and sheep mentality.
Improvements I will accept, to change just to increase profitability is both deviouse and crooked, call me old fashioned if you will but most companies today are top heavy with those who don't give a cr$p and are only interested in their selfish gains, perhapes I tend too much towards the Quakers in my bottom line beliefs.
no further do I intend to go
I wish you well along with that slowely fading star MS
Oh yes and for the record I have no idea who the heck Docer is\
Richard as 17oceans

“I have no objections to a person or a company making money but somewhere there has to be a point where the balance sheet reaches a point where that person or company has to accept it also has a social responsibility to the greater community because by it's very nature it has become a thing greater than it's initial idea.”

Companies exist to make money period. What you are asking is for Microsoft to essentially become a non-profit to ‘better’ the world by being socially responsible. That’s funny and is just not going to happen. If you don’t understand why, read up on free markets and the stock market.

“Macrodollop ,instead of realising that the market WILL open up and becoming more competative has gone on the defence instead of welcoming the challenge that will be before it,and that means making ready to become a "Crossplatform" operating system.”

All companies are defensive in terms of not wanting competition. Over the past 20 years Microsoft has been quite competitive in terms of adding features to its products to deal with Novell, Word Perfect and others.

It seems that competitive to you means give away the source code and design applications for a competitor. The free market doesn’t work that way. If you started a little store that became a publicly traded corporation that beat it’s competitors I have little doubt that you wouldn’t want to give away your technologies and secrets to the competition – especially when the competition is on a mission to drive you out of business.

“I experienced little differnce in operationg proceedures from 98 to XP except that I had to shell out more hard won cash for LITTLE improvements, why did I change ? because there was little choice”

Huh? Little differences between 98 and XP? Aside from the UI changes the new more stable kernel is worth the money. And all the new integrated multimedia features makes me think you probably aren’t using XP that much if you think there’s not much difference between it and Windows 98.

Again what is the problem here? Go back to a 7 year old Linix distribution and see how many people will care that you are pissed because some new application requires a new version of the operating system and you are pissing and moaning that it doesn’t work on kernel 0.1 or whatever. Get real, change is part of life.

Nobody forced you to upgrade to XP – go buy a Linux box or an Apple system. There is plenty of choice in the market – you just don’t seem to like Microsoft.

“Oh yes and for the record I have no idea who the heck Docer is”

I have a hard time believing that since you were complaining that we we were not contributing and boring people…

“…couple of people who think that they retain the right to stop contributing and start boring people”

Please if you want to lie, come up with something that nobody can check as it really undermines any point you’ve tried to make so far.

Please if you want to lie, come up with something that nobody can check as it really undermines any point you’ve tried to make so far.
You want to check, well do so. My real name is Riochard Christmas, I live in a small community on the outskirts of a town called Ipswich, thats Ipswich in Queensland Australia, I have lived here for several years.
Docer from the sounds of it lives in the jolly old USof A or Canada from what I have read.
Point Two I am not prone to telling untruths just to make a point, I have no reason to do so,
I am not asking anyone to change their way of life nor do I expect any person or company to become a non-profit item. I merely suggest that Micrtoft is in a possition where it could improve the item it has for sale with less profitablity and increase it's market share by becoming a LEADER rather than the Dictator that it is today.
Simplified, instead of selling at a profit of shall we say $50. they improve the item and sell at $25. whilst retaining their market possition, and dare I say it may even improve their sales, they would then possibly find they would be both increacing sales and improveing their customer relationship.
Call me silly but that is what I did when in business and stuff me full of apple pie but I actually almost doubled my business in twelve months.
I dare say that Microtoffee would have a real hard job convincing people of it's good intentions, right now it has managed to shoot its own foot.
I could lead on into my reasoning on the current so called FREE market [ which is a oxymoron if there ever was one ] and please don't start me on the AMERICAN vision of the Global market.
I will return to read but I would like to be able to read a retraction on my ability to say it the way I feel with no influence from a second [ read docer ] party.
As for your self boston, I would sugest you have greater knowledge on matters computer, in comparison I will accept my experience is limited, but I do retain the right to speak for my own feelings.
Have you noticed that Docer has remained quiet.?
He lacks the ability to voice an opinion without resorting to denegradoing personalities which is where I became involved, to that point I was enjoying the conversation you two were having,if it were a discussion and you were being awarded point, you BB were well in front.
I mean it this time Goodbye.
Richard as 17oceans

Well, we do have different views on market economics and we will have to leave it at that.

Take care.

Good discussion as well... unbiased.

http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/1705

http://www.openoffice.or...features/2.0/index.html

http://www.newsforge.com.../04/03/27/0134204.shtml (older, but holds)
http://www.techworld.com...ndex.cfm?featureid=1703

Loved those links. Particularly the comments like these. Real fair and balanced...

"Base unfortunately sucks a lot when compared to MS Access. Ever tried to create a form to update a many-to-many relation in OpenOffice Base? It is impossible. Apart from crashing every other minute there are tons of features still missing in order to make it even remotely useful. Bad for people like me who have clients who want a solution now. I have to tell them Windows+MS Access is the only way to go right now."

or

"the day when open office makes their documents 100% compatible (graphics, frames, macros, etc.) with word, i’ll say that open office is good for business. until that day, open office is not ready for business use. "

or

"What about the integration with the Microsoft Server System, such as Sharepoint, Live Communications Server, and the others? Does Open Office have this component? No, and until it does, or there is an open source equivilent, there is no reason for an enterprise to make the move from Microsoft to open source."

or

"So lets see:

- You have “used the product religiously for years”
- At home you used the Lotus suite
- You “rarely ever used” MS Office

so I guess that uniquely qualifies you to provide a balanced and unbiased point of view for an objective comparison, right?
Sheesh. "

or

"ALMOST compatible and “showed impressive compatibility” is not good enough when your job depends on your customers’ ability to use the information. "

or

"IMHO, OpenOffice does a good job opening simple formats, but for *anything* complicated - a spreadsheet, a thesis, or a web interface - you always have to wrestle with compatibility. That means you must have more than one version and type of software often. I made a calendar of class assignments for my students this morning, and used Outlook, Sunbird, and Yahoo calendars to make sure it was sufficiently compatible. Sucks but it is reality these days."

or

"I don’t miss the grammar checker, though I grant that many people would."

or

"OpenOffice is a great aplication however i have to stick with ms word until the autocorrect will be available for my language"

or

"What a probing review you have done here… you used the word processor some… you tried out the other applications… you don’t own a copy of MS office… and you declare Open Office kicks, and yourself some kind of expert. pretty lame. "

or

"What a pathetic review:

“OpenOffice has added a program to compete with Access called Base as well as a few others like Math which allows you to write out mathematical equations in a word processor-like environment and Draw which is a drawing program. I’ve personally never used these new programs seriously, but from the looks of it they could all be useful except for Draw. I haven’t yet been able to discern what exactly you’re supposed to be able to do with it that warrants its existence.”

I find myself using MS Access all the time and it’s the application I use the most in the MS Office suite. It’s a shame that the author dedicated just 55 letters to describe such an important component of an office suite, and passes off “Draw” as useless stating “I haven’t yet been able to discern what exactly you’re supposed to be able to do with it”.

Just because you don’t find a use for a program it doesn’t mean nobody else will. Same goes for the author saying Openoffice is better than MS Office because he thinks Writer is better than MS Word (Which is just one of the 9+ applications of the MS office suite)

I could go on about the blunders committed by the author but I’ve got more useful things to do."

or

"I forgot to mention that the author compared the Openoffice 2 beta (released August 2005) to MS Office XP (released more than 4 years ago). "

or

"Just read the article - I have to say I’m pretty disappointed. Not by the products reviewed, but by the reviewer. This really seemed like a poorly written and poorly thought-out article. What few points or information was provided was then repeated several times. I learned almost nothing from this article.
I ask that the author next time either spend his time covering the application he does have experience with (in this case, the word processing segment), or spend more time preparing for the article by actually using all of the components (of both products) that he intends to review. In short, much more detail and information should have been conveyed in an article of this length."

or

"I’ve been using OpenOffice for quite some time, and while I haven’t used the new beta, this appears to be one of the most biased, least reliable, worst reviews ever written. In the history of the universe (excluding aliens). I mean… was it just me or did you say that it doesn’t matter that it doesn’t have grammar check, because that means you learn English? ??!? Can you see microsoft putting on its ads for Longhorn “Now comes with no tech support! It’s a feature, because now you will have to learn to use windows.” ??!?? I don’t get it. If you had decided on the outcome before you tested the two competitors, why bother writing a review? "

or

"Reasons it sucks:

1) latest Linux release has no src rpm that I can find, sloppy and lame. Sloppy, and, lame.

2) the spreadsheet program could definitely use some more functions and a better interface for learning them.

3) That crashing on save bug in the spreadsheet program, why the fark hasnt that been fixed yet? for christs sakes people, it HANGS UP. Toss a pant load of debug log statements in and crash it a few times, find out whats hanging it, and fix it. Thats a MAJOR bug! (For the people about to say ‘never had that issue’, its something about an environmental variable getting memstomped that causes it to happen, its not an excessivly common bug, but it is a known issue and has been around for several versions)

4) It memory hogs like GIMP does on Linux."

or

"OO for science????

I cannot believe this review and all of you have not mentioned OpenOffice’s incompatability with refrencing software like EndNote. When writing scientific literature, as I do, where you have hundreds of references, EndNote is a MUST. The fact that OO does not work with EndNote is the reason I bought MS Office, and will continue to use it. EndNote offers the ability to look up what journal I’m submitting to, and automatically formats all my references for that journal. What a relief! Does anyone know of a Linux-based or OS version of a program like EndNote??? "

or

"Did my paper with OpenOffice Writer and I regret that choice. Had hard time to just keep it up and running for one hour. And somewhat hard to put pagenumbers in OO. I’m sticking with MS Office for now, but OO is getting better. "

or

"Got to love this sentence from the 4th paragraph:

“OpenOffice includes A ITS own equivalents to Powerpoint and Excel….”

If he used Word’s grammar checker it would have caught this problem. I saw it with my own eyes.

Too funny. "

-----------------

Look like the bottom line is that the state of MA will have a fun time with all the minor quirks and missing items in OO...that is if they can actually convert their existing documents and Office applications to OO.

"Intertesting" to read your s.a but its a free prog, conpared to "msoff",and if you are as good as you like to think you are, why not help in getting ooo better

"if you are as good as you like to think you are, why not help in getting ooo better "

Lets see, I have a wife and kids at home that like to see me away from the computer and I have a full time job that requires me to work of the tasks of the job and not steal from them to work on 'open' projects.

In my career (so far) I've designed and coded commercial compilers, operating systems and enterprise applications. I AM pretty good and I have a feeling that my left nut has more experience in IT/software development than just about everyone here.

If you have the free time to contribute to the open community more power to you. But the entire point of these threads is to show that contrary to what some folks here are saying - OO isn't as compatible with Microsoft Office and you just can't 'convert' a great deal of government documents and applications as some are saying.

Thus, it is likely to cost the state of MA money instead of saving it any money. And that pisses me off because I live, work and pay taxes in the state.

If the state CIO wants to change the world/Microsoft, let him start his own company and find non-taxpayer $$$ to do it.

lol... okay Mr. Lonesome Lush..

It's funny how most the material you snagged.. is all very old, and from the old article of pre 1.1 versions.

Like I said, check out the new article, and check out Open Office 2.0. That fixes most if not all of what you wrote as 'compatability' problems.

My whole purpose even posting here is the fact that I think it is ethical, moral, and plain good business to allow consumers a choice. Microsoft has always made it so we can't choose another suite that will suite our needs just fine. The only way to change that is to go with another application. It so happens that the best alternative is Open Office... by a long shot. And it comes with a lot of benefits.

Mentioned somewhere down the line, someone brought on some political rhetoric about communism, and it having anything to do with a state using open source software...

Well to use communism as an example, it best fits Microsoft. Not allowing any choices.. having strings atached to where we cant do things much the same, use the same documents with the little bells and whistles.. althought they would be just fine without the bloat... telling us basically what we can do, and not giving the consumer control over that aspect.

I would love to say that you are infact dead wrong on one major thing. Most MS documents are infact compatable with Open Office. Especially 2.0. Just as compatable as documents made in XP Office are with pre XP Office suites.

"I AM pretty good and I have a feeling that my left nut has more experience in IT/software development than just about everyone here."

Thats a very bold statement considering you don't know who the heck you are talking to. It's also very arrogant... and makes it easy to call you an asshat.

Most and many other countries have made the change to open source applications long ago. If you ask me, that makes the U.S. about 10 years behind.

I certainly don't, and I am sure many here reading this, don't feel they need to prove anything to an asshat such as yourself. The people that seek my experience and hard work are the ones that get to see it first hand. Not some asshat MS slut that insults people who are not even arguing things like "Oh, open source is so much better", or "MS is big and evil".. that's your assumption.

And anybody that calls anybody an "Open-Source punk"... has obviously got a few screws loose, and is already biased because he writes crappy code for a software manufacturer that charges an arm and a leg for their unused garbage and bloat with an ugly UI attached. You probably aren't even an actual engineer either with the same education i'm sure many reading this, and typing this have... you are just an asshat stuck in your ways, and can't even budge for something better that comes along.

Again, starting out with an insult. Okay, I’ll respond in kind. Yo dimwit – I drink about a glass of wine every few month so I don’t think that qualifies me as a lush.

Now lets get back and try to have a coherent discourse.

I’m just posting the real-world comments of people in a link you provided. The fact that people have problems with even the current version of OO shows me that you are completely divorced from reality.

So how is OO 2.0 compatible with any office app with a macro? So how do you convert the most rudimentary Access application in OO? You may think that these things are ‘garbage’ (your word) but the real world uses them.

So Microsoft has held a gun to your head when you tried to buy Word Perfect? Call the police moron. The fact that YOU chose to use OO products obliterates your claim that Microsoft is preventing you from choosing another office suite.

You claim that Microsoft limits choice and prevents the user from controlling their software. But all that ‘bloat’ that you complain about (because OO doesn’t support it) was based on years of requests from users. So if real world users ask bad old Microsoft to make their product more robust somehow this limits the users?

Don’t you see the logical fallacy of your own half-assed attempts at an argument? I guess not.

“Thats a very bold statement considering you don't know who the heck you are talking to. It's also very arrogant... and makes it easy to call you an asshat.”

Wow, nasty words again. Well, I guess if you don’t have a leg to stand on you resort to name calling. I’m trying to teach my 4 year old son to not do that when he gets angry. Maybe you should ask your parents for some help with your problem.

Oh and by the way, I’ve laid out my 20+ year career in IT and all you do is call me names. Why don’t you lay out how many days/weeks/months/years/decades that you’ve been working in IT (if you have a paying job as that seems to be an open item). Then we can let others here decide who is the ‘asshat’.

Oh year, that’s a good one – the US is 10 years behind. You’re a funny man/boy/whatever.

That’s pretty good, I almost didn’t notice you edited your original comment, you’re sneaky.

“I certainly don't, and I am sure many have reading this, don't feel they need to prove anything to an asshat such as yourself.”

Yet again I assume you have some brain disorder because you began spouting off that I have no credibility so I gave you a run down of my 20+ years in IT. Why can’t you do the same? It’s painfully obvious that you either have no experience or are afraid to put your credentials up against mine.

My most recent degree is a masters from Harvard. What community college do you hope to attend one day? Have you ever held a paying job in IT or has all your ‘IT’ work been to help out the open-source community after you finish your grade school homework?

I’ve called you an open source punk because you can’t form an argument let alone provide supporting material for your convictions. You change positions in every other post

“Microsoft is a fine software company. I wont slam them like so many do. “

“MS Office is a huge load of unneeded crap”
“ditch Micro$loth.”
“Micro$loth doesn't provide great value...”
“charges an arm and a leg for their unused garbage and bloat with an ugly UI attached.”

Arguing with you is like shooting fish in a barrel. If you are the best the open source community has to offer it will forever be delegated to 3rd class status.

“you are just an asshat stuck in your ways, and can't even budge for something better that comes along.”

Let’s see, over the years I’ve switched from these OS’s and processors as better things came along. Apple ][ DOS, ProDOS, SOS, GS/OS, Various versions of MacOS, IBM/MS DOS, FAT, FAT32, NTFS, 65xx, 65xxx, 68xxx, PowerPC, 386, 486, Pentium/AMD etc. I don’t think it’s ME that has had a hard time identifying and switching gears when something better has come along – it’s the reason why I’ve survived so long in IT.

FWIW, again – I manage several teams of engineers and still put a good 20 hours a week in architecting and actual coding.

“Not some asshat MS slut that insults people who are not even arguing things like "Oh, open source is so much better", or "MS is big and evil".. that's your assumption.”

Those are your words not mine. If the open source community comes up with something that works as well as or better than equivalent Microsoft products and costs less or is free – then people would be fools to not look into it.

But post after post has shown that this isn’t the case. This entire thread is about the faulty arguments being given by the state in wanting to kick Microsoft out. OO will not save the state money because it is not as powerful as Microsoft Office. You have no valid argument against this central issue.

As to insulting people I’ve called you a punk and a moron after being hit with lovely notes such as “lush”, “asshat”, “You must be what... 14 yrs old?”, “what a complete jackass”, “you lazy a*s”, “I could be your boss jackass”, “You are full of the brown stuff” and my favorite - “You are a tard”. Classy words from a classy kid.

You have been asked repeatedly to back up your assertions that it’s a piece of cake to convert Microsoft Office documents/applications to OO. But you’ve refused to do so because aside from simple text and graphic conversions OO doesn’t support the technologies and features in Microsoft Office so it can’t convert moderately complex documents or anything with macros/VBS/ActiveX.

So how is the state of MA going to save money when thousands of critical applications that are used day in and day out will have to be trashed and rewritten in OO? The answer is obvious – it won’t save money and you are going to have one mighty pissed of workforce when they have to change everything and learn something new.

Again – it’s a boneheaded move by the state CIO to hit back at Microsoft for the state losing the anti-trust lawsuit. Stupid tactic that is going to cost me money since I live, work and pay taxes in MA.

You’ve been asked repeatedly to backup your claims that it will be a piece of cake (your words) to convert Microsoft Office documents and applications to OO. After all the insults and diversions I think it’s time to put up or shut up.

Have you created the OO equivalent to Microsoft Office macros/VBS/ActiveX and can seamlessly convert all Office documents and applications that require Microsoft Office to OO? If not – you can’t put up so I expect you to shut up.

Actually I expect you to do some more name calling, ranting and generally diverting attention from your inability to answer questions you said were a piece of cake. I would much rather see you shut up but I seem to have wounded your pride and I doubt you will just stop while you are WAY behind.

Please do keep it coming so the rest of the folks here can see how pathetic your reasoning ability is. You’ve probably done more to keep the world safe for Microsoft in the last few days than Microsoft could hope to do with millions of $$$ in advertising. Thanks!

It will cost ms a penny to support OpenDocument. I think all they have to do is obtain a copy of OpenDocument, and include an option to save as OpenDocument format. It just runs the text through the OpenDocument filter is all. It's like a plug-in... Who has to pay for explorer and firefox to support macromedia flash/shockwave?

An interesting note on Open Source being public's best interest: http://www.xiph.org/about/

Wow, it will only cost a penny to provide conversion facilities in Office to the OpenDocument format! You should call Microsoft and let them know which alternate reality you come from so they can go buy that converter.

Seriously, the OpenDocument format does not support everything that Office does and hence you can't write a converter that converts everything in an Office document.

Simple stuff like plain text will convert and you can do this now.

However if you have moderately complex linked documents with macros there is no chance of writing a converter.

Everyone is slamming Microsoft for being the bad guy but it was their hundreds of millions of dollars of development that came up with Office and now the open source community wants Microsoft to give them for free what it would cost them quite a bit to replicate.

Open-source punks go screw yourselves. We don't live in a communist state and one group can't steal the hard work of another.

You want to read and write Microsoft file formats perfectly? Go replicate macros, VBS, COM, ActiveX etc completely and stop whining that Microsoft isn't playing fair.

If I spend my hard earned money on developing something no spike-haired punk is going to force me to give it to them because they want it to be free. Go change countries and see how well that works elsewhere.

Moronic punks, go get a real job.

You must be what... 14 yrs old? Do you know how to carry on a conversation like an adult?

Open source punks... morons... what next? I know what would be next... "You were right all along".

Those things in MS you speak of are not even needed. And open source developers don't steal, they create. Its for a common ideal. If you don't understand that, then stick with shelling out the bucks and supporting a monopoly. A monopoly in which wont stand for competition. I wouldn't mind paying for good software. But I do mind having only one choice. So I choose (keyword:choose), to use open source. As it suits my needs perfectly. ActiveX is old school, and simply isn't needed.

Lets look at what an Office Suite does... the crap you mention is just fluff and bloat.

Get a real job? What makes you think people who simply 'use' open source applications don't have a job?

I have to agree with you.

You can only carry out an intelligent conversation with someone if they have some intelligence. You have shown no small measure of intelligence during these discussions.

When idiot punks like yourself want to spout off about things they have no clue about there will be people like myself to set you straight and then help put you to bed.

"Those things in MS you speak of are not even needed."

That's one of your amazing quotes that shows you have no real world knowledge or experience and makes it crystal clear you are some snot nosed punk-ass brat who needs to go to bed a little earlier every day.

Sure maybe nobody 'needs' the various features that Microsoft products provide. But the real world already uses those features.

The purpose of this thread was to comment on why or why not the decision that the state that MA has made to adopt an 'open' standard will be good for the state or bad.

So far a couple of morons like you have spouted off about how such a good thing it will be and how much money will be saved.

I and a few others with working brains you have commented that you idiots have forgotten about all the costs associated with converting and maintaining 'open' applications.

Those such as myself who contract with the state have tried to educate those in the under-18 crowd that converting Office documents and applications is not as easy as you have been led to believe because the 'open' products are years behind Microsoft in features.

It will cost the state a lot of money to convert and what they end up with won't work nearly as well as what they had.

That's the gist of the matter - that this is a boneheaded move by folks who are acting out of spite for losing the anti-trust lawsuit.

It seems to me that those pulling the strings in the open source community are surely trying to steal a hell of a lot from Microsoft.

Did you think that all the Microsoft technologies that are used by businesses, contractors and government entities just magically appeared somewhere?

You and others want Microsoft to give away what it cost them hundreds of millions if not billions to develop. And threaten big contract losses if they don't comply.

That's extortion and theft in my book buddy. Maybe you feel differently about things. Go live on a commune for a few years and let us know how it works out for you.

By get a real job I mean get out of your parents’ basement or wait until you are 16 and find something meaningful to do with your life.

Until then good luck with things. With your lack of brains you are going to need lots of luck in life.

lol what a complete jackass.

For your information, all these "features" you speak of... don't need to be used, and are hardly used. It's called bloat, excess, garbage. Thats what software makers use to push their product. They use big words, and pay out the a*s to make something so dumb and unneeded... seem just the opposite.

Coming from someone with experience, and who has done Office conversions... it's a piece of cake. And you can eat it too.

Obviously all you feel you can do is mouth off to adults and try to belittle them when you haven't a clue. You sound like a lost old fart who doesn't want to lift a finger and change anything. You probably make a person at a gas station change your wiper blades too you lazy a*s.

Im done even trying to discuss this with your empty headed self. You are the one who turned the subject into something very different if you havent noticed.

MS Office is a huge load of unneeded crap, when all that is needed is something small and simple that gets the job done better, faster, and cheaper.... without all the extra bloat and strings attached.

Get a life.

If people read the totality of your comments they will see who the moronic jackass is.

Wow, so you've done conversions of linked Excel and Word docs with embedded macros and lots of VBS code.

These are the kinds of files I see in use in the state all the time.

I'm so happy that you've come up with a way to do these conversions painlessly and I assume free.

To educate the rest of us what kind of magic wand did you use because you must be in fantasyland or high on dope.

The stuff that is 'hardly used' like embedded ActiveX controls, VBS and macros may not be used by everyone but is used in thousands of critical applications that the state uses.

Go ahead open-source prick, have some cake and convert them all. And I assume that you will do it for free since it's so easy.

I ask again, how do you convert all those applications that require things that aren't in open office? Do you rewrite everything? That will take time and money but didn't you say it's a piece of cake?

Could your true lack of experience and inability to comprehend that others use what you call 'garbage' color your understanding of how long and how costly it will be to convert all those applications.

Yeah, I'm an old fart at 44 and you're a dip-s*** at age 13 (if you're that old). I've gone through more conversions than I care to remember but here are some of the system only changes I've been through in my career: Apple II to Apple ///, Apple /// to Apple IIGS, Apple IIGS to Mac, various Mac to Mac conversions, Mac to DOS, DOS to Windows and various Win to Win upgrades. I survived Novell, Word Perfect, Lotus and a variety of other companies that shook out until we have the defacto standard of Microsoft today.

What has the experience of those changes taught me? That it's never as easy as you know-nothing whining pricks say it will be.

From your last note you say you are done spouting off on things you know nothing about. I’m glad to hear it and I’m sure that the others here will likewise be glad to see you head back to your room and get some much needed sleep. Remember to say your prayers when your parents tuck you in.

When your mommy wakes you up in the morning, if you care to discuss things again please state what your experience level is and folks can get a better picture of which one of us has blinders on and their head up their ass.

And if you do, please explain again how you can do something “better, faster, and cheaper…” with open source products when they aren’t as powerful and can’t replace Office products without a huge investment in reworking the existing applications.

Doubt you’ll be back but if you do, answer these specific questions instead of just attacking Microsoft, myself or anyone else that doesn’t share your naïve world view.

lol... im surprised you even have a job with your level of maturity.

As I said, read up on Open Office 2.0, knowing anything about it, which you obviously don't, will answer all your questions.

Sorry doing a simple application conversion is so hard for you. Maybe you should think about a career change.

For your information, I could be your boss jackass.

With your level of intelligence, it’s amazing you can read or write. If you’re done with the insults why don’t we talk substance?

So, if it’s such a piece of cake, why can’t you explain how it’s done? Could it be that you actually know that even moderately complicated ‘conversions’ like anything with macros or any VBS code can’t be converted to any version of OO? Or are you so out of touch with reality that you refuse to believe or understand that in the real world people use things that you feel are garbage? That’s a rhetorical question – look up the definition if you don’t understand.

FWIW, the state knows how hard this is going to be:

"Given the majority of Executive Department agencies currently use office applications such as MS Office, Lotus Notes and WordPerfect that produce documents in proprietary formats, the magnitude of the migration effort to this new open standard is considerable," the specification reads.

Could it be that you haven’t shared the wealth of your experience with the state yet? If you truly believe in ‘open’ source why don’t you share with us how you are going to convert complex applications that use technology you call ‘garbage’ into a format that lacks that ‘bloated garbage’?

Since the only person above me is the company CEO and he wouldn’t know open-source from a hole in the ground I doubt you lead me or the 16 people I manage on a day to day basis. But maybe you can lead all the other boys when you do laps in your PE class...run fast sonny-boy.

But I digress from the topic which is how easy or hard the state of MA will find to replace Microsoft Office 2003 with OO. Again, I and others have pointed out that there are serious holes in the argument that this can be done for less cost.

Rather than rely on the ‘go look it up yourself’ excuse – educate all of us how to quickly and FREELY convert moderately complex office documents or ANY Microsoft Office based applications that use macros, VBS or ActiveX controls.

Since you’ve been given ample opportunity to do so it is becoming painfully apparent to those reading this thread that you can’t because OO doesn’t support those pieces of ‘garbage’ technologies that you hold in such disdain.

Give it up punk, you lost. Dropping Office is going to cost the state a ton of money converting all those ‘garbage’ technologies into OO. My company will probably end up having to having to hire a couple of new developers to deal with this BS and we will bill the state big $$’s to assist them off of Microsoft Office. We will probably make a lot of money on this. And gosh – maybe I’ll hire you – now wouldn’t that be funny.

But as a taxpayer in MA, I know there is no free ride and they are either going to cut budgets elsewhere to pay for this or raise taxes. That is the bottom line – this will cost the state money and is a direct subsidy to the open-source community/companies.

Again – this is a boneheaded move that appears to be nothing more than a slap back at Microsoft for the state losing the anti-trust suit.

Once more, if you respond back – please answer the questions posed to you.

This move reminds me of Martin Luther nailing his statement to the cathedral door.

I can't wait to watch this one unfold.

At last, at last! This is the dawn of a new era, and the secret key to keep users enslaved has been found. The key has two marks that cannot be sacrificed:
a) The office suite file format has to be open and in the public domain
b) It has to be controlled by a public body.

You let go of either, and you will be forced to face it once more when it is used to edge out the comptetion.

This is truly a landmark decision.

Jacques

Maybe if enough state governments required open standard document formats Microsoft might be forced to use the OASIS Open Document format. This would enable competition in the office suite market. Wordperfect, if it also adopted OASIS formats, could get back into market, as could other wordprocessing apps/office suites. Microsoft wouldn't do this voluntarily for this very reason - they don't want ANY competition - even their "open" XML formats are really just a wrapper for the proprietary code contained within. Microsoft wants to maintain it's monopoly, but if nudged by the needs of government we would all benefit by being able to use the office app of our choice, be it free/open source or proprietary. It wouldn't matter what you use because the formats would be open and interchangable between suites.

Good explanation.

I hope people read this and illuminate that little light bulb above their heads.

The folks in state government in MA are insane. They are pissed that they lost the anti-trust lawsuits and can't get over it. This is just a bad attempt to get back at Microsoft.

Far from saving money, the state will soon find that the costs for 'migrating' thousands of custom applications that the State uses (that require Office) will far exceed any cost savings from this move.

Microsoft may be a big bad monopoly but all the costs associated with contractors and vendors moving to an 'open' standard will be ultimately paid by us taxpayers in the form of higher costs.

What will probably happen is as the state does audits and realizes the huge number of critical business applications that won't work if they turn off Office - things will change.

Or users in various departments will just ignore the mandate and continue to use Office to get their work done.

The state CIO should be fired because this is a 'fix' in search of a problem. Want interoperability, use PDF. Oh wait, that's what the state does now.

This is absolutely boneheaded.

You are full of the brown stuff.

All documents in MS Office work hand in hand with Open Office. It is a very simple install. And the application is free.

It can only SAVE money.

But it cost money to retrain people to use the new product, it cost money to install this new product, it cost money to fix all the new bugs. They should stay with what they have. People are already paying too much on taxes

It doesn't cost money to fix the bugs... it;s open source... reports of bugs get sent to the OO site, and they get fixed. There are not many bugs to speak of. Any person with Average intelligence would be able to figure out the application on their own... especially if they are good with Office.

Taxes too high? Taxes are not that high all across the U.S. They are quite low actually. If anyone else tells you otherwise, they are full of the brown stuff. You obviously are not american, and don't know what you are talking about.

Bottom line is... going the Open Source route is always an advantage. Why pay for something that you can get for free?

Microsoft is a fine software company. I wont slam them like so many do. But when I see tons of applications that are even better sometimes, and free... common sense tells me to ditch Micro$loth.

"It doesn't cost money to fix the bugs... it;s open source... "

I take it you're not aware that Sun funds a LOT of OO development then?

Thought not.

Yes, they DONATE a lot of money and time.

http://www.google.com/se...ore&q=define:donate

Ok, You have to have someone install this program. That means they have to pay someone to install it on the workstations. Then they need to hire someone to show their workers how to use this product. (I showed a friend of mine which uses their computer to type documents, and openoffice was not that easy for them.) Which cost money and time. So it will cost money and cost alot of time. Then they have to make sure the product does not break any of the other products that they have. etc. etc. etc. which all equals to more more money. If they stay with office all of this would not be needed.

Is Docer an acronym for moron? Read what I wrote next time before spouting off. This was supposedly intended to 'save' money but it's just a reaction to the state losing the antitrust suit.

As other have pointed out this will cost the state money in retraining but that's not where the big cost comes in.

The big cost comes in when all the applications that the state uses for day-to-day critical operations that require office (VBS/VB and various activeX controls) no longer work and have to be re-written.

Various contractors over the years have standardized on the features that office provides and it's going to cost a ton of money for the state to replace these with apps that work with an 'open' system.

Again, this is a stupid reaction by the state CIO to hit back at Microsoft for the state losing the antitrust suit.

As a MA taxpayer I'm not looking forward to paying for all of this.

At least there are some people out there that understand this. I thankyou for explaining it so well, even though there will be some that still can not comprehend this problem, or see what is really happening.

Once again Thank You!

Time will prove you wrong. ActiveX is old news, and is getting tosse dout the window on most things anyway. Get used to it.. it's junk.

Everything else will remain the same! I don't see why you thing open platforms are so different when they are not.

What alternate reality do you live in? Lots of technology isn't perfect but it's in widespread use.

My company works with the MA government and just last year we got our last group off of a DOS application. Gov agencies use whatever they use and the idiot state CIO will find huge resistance to getting rid of Office because of the huge number of applications that require it.

I never said open platforms are so different - they are just several years behind Microsoft. The world has moved past Windows and Office 95 and that's the state of the open office apps from my view.

Again, read what I say before you spew your narrow minded statements. Do you think that the thousand of office specific macros and applications will magically be updated overnight?

If so, that's a nice dream. Call back when you wake up in the real world.

This is all supposed to be about saving the state money but it doesn't, it will cost the state and taxpayers like me a ton of cash.

Stupid decision. And don't tell me the state should be promoting open source crap - the government should be doing things in an efficient manner and if that means lining the pockets of 'evil' Microsoft with licensing fees so be it.

Nicely said.

So you are agreeing that your original statement was in error.

It does cost money to fix bugs in OO.

Thanks for clarifying this.

Granted that MS office is a reasonable product but the MS route will always be to generate income by upgrades/new versions. This is easy when you have the market majority. The long term advantage of an open standard system will be the competition that drives down prices. Mass. may have problems in their approach but the effort will aid everyone who wants to save money. Thumbs up!

The long team disavantage of standards is that firms will not be able to quickly adopt new technology, other word innovation could not be quickly reach to market. Apple iPod success is clear example -- quick sucess with no open standards.

We use IT to make money not to save money, that what Mass. have missed. They think IT is cost center and try to save money, while in fact, II is profit center, and they should try to use IT to impove their productivity.

Everyone seems to be missing the point here. They want an open format. This means if they decide to take there documents and say parse them or build a search system or turn them all into html docs they can. Moving to an opne format gives them the future ability to convert to whatever they wish using tools that are widely available. This solves a ton of issues from the programmers side of things as well. This does not seem to be an issue of what everyone else is using but more of an option of future usage.

Wrong, they want to punish Microsoft for losing the antitrust suit. They say they will save money thru open source but it's a lie. They will cost the state money.

This solves no problems. It is a fix in search of a problem to justify things. Very boneheaded.

A you can build search systems and convert to HTML now with office, why switch formats? The idiot state CIO is just trying to punish Microsoft and we taxpayers will foot the bill for this conversion and the one in 2008 when the CIO gets fired and we have to switch back to Office.

Read MS point here

http://blogs.msdn.com/br.../2005/08/31/458879.aspx

and here about format

http://blogs.msdn.com/br.../2005/06/13/428655.aspx

I read Beta news daily, along with /. and several other tech news sites. I find it amazing that when MS does something everyone screams and yells about how M$ is a monopoly and they are evil and everyone should migrate to linux and open-source software to put the hammer down. Then when a state decides that they will take these suggestions everyone flames the state for making a bold move because "MS is SO deeply embedded and you are setting yourself out on an island and failure is eminent and GO MICROSOFT!!!!...." You can't have your cake and eat it too....

They could always standardize on PDF. The viewer is free. It's cross-platform, and the format isn't locked.

Besides Adobe Acrobat, OpenOffice.org supports it. Apple supports it. There's an extension for MS Word to export it. And there are numerous small software houses that support the translation to, production of, and extensions for PDF.

So PDF is open and supported by many profitable software houses. Its longevity and advancement are assured.

For the record, OOo doesn't really "support" PDF. The PDFs generated by OOo are really just massive embedded images, whereas Adobe PDFs actually contain the text - that's why you can't "Save As... PDF," but rather you must "Export to PDF."

PDF does what it does so well, it's hard for a normal user to know the difference, but you could edit an Acrobat PDF in Acrobat, but you could not edit an OOo PDF in Acrobat. Once it's generated, to get another copy you'd have to regenerate the PDF in OOo from the original ODT/SXW file.

I have no reason to doubt you but if that's true it makes the decision even more boneheaded. The state will move from a much more robust system (Office) to something that isn't as compatible with other standards (OOo).

Brilliant move by the state CIO.

Micro$oft has for years brain washed people into believing that they were the way, truth and light, in reality it is not, it is an overpriced third rate system which need constant attention and updating,now try and update windows 98, Oh thats right Micro$oft decided that it didn't want to support that any more, try to relate that to an auto manufacturer who after a couple of years decides not to supply further spare parts.
Brazil is one of many countries that are moving away from Micro to the more flexible user friendly system, the reason being that they wanted a system that met their needs rather than the other way around, meeting the needs of the system.
There are several real alternatives available right now in the Linux operating system, some , if you want, you can purchase, others can be abtain almost at no cost.
Open Office has improved out of sight these last couple of years, sure there is still a way to go, but it is flexible and there in is it's beauty. I can alter it to suit me.
I say three cheers for the Commonwealt and hello little penguin.

You're whining about windows 98 not having suport any more go get a copy of a linux from way back from 98 and go support me on thier sites and they will tell you the same thing TIME TO UPGRADE BUDDY.

Microsoft is a good company as far as paid software goes support for years and adds new features other paid for programs you might get support for a couple years and new features you have to buy the next version.

I agree. What if someone comes and ask for support for 3.1. This is technology world, you have to upgrade.

A very good move.

Also i think an entire operating system switch would be fantastic. Think how much money entire governments would save then.

Fedora Core 4 comes with Open Office 2.0.

All Windows is needed for are entertainment things... games... and that's about it.

Linux can do the rest just fine. And it's free. I use Windows... and have been using Open Office for ages, and like it quite well thank you.

As for the Open Source Outlook competition... watch out for Mozilla. They will have something sure enough. Thunderbird is already an excellent email client. I use it as well.

Firefox browser is still a bit buggy but I use it also as my default browser.

I also save all my music in OGG vorbis format, not the rip off mp3 8)

Mozila ThunderBird competes with Outlook2003? Ha ha, you must be very funny man.

I do not think that Docer wrote about TB. I think he meant Lightning = Thunderbird + Sunbird http://www.mozilla.org/p...s/calendar/sunbird.html

I used Sunbird too and quickly dropped it. Sunbird and ThunderBird are software of the stone age. Do you want to pay 50$ to get productivity of Outlook2003 or to get free but useless software?

If you need simplified, low productivity mail, contact, calendar ==> use Hotmail, YahooMail, ThunderBird, SunderBird, or some others application. But if you want high productivity, go for Outlook2003.

My experience show that when you know that your product is supperior, and customer dont want to buy it, dont wasted time trying to sell it to them. They will become a case of failure for not using your product. And latter we can use this case for marketing. So I think that MS should not try to sell office to Mass, let's Massachuset become a symbol of failure.

Yes, you are correct, and the Lightning I am talking about isn't even released yet. They are working on a better package to compete with outlook.

I for one don't even use it, or need it. So I just use Thunderbird as my email client.

All this talk of Microsoft being a good company, with good software is fine....

But Linux, and opensource appz can do all the same things in a business world, and it is free. I think the better choice is obvious.

It's hard to talk about reality with fanatics such as yourself but lets try.

So we get rid of all the Microsoft folks that keep the Microsoft servers up and running and train and maintain all the users on Microsoft products.

Great, that will save tons of money....

But 'open source' servers and applications don't maintain themselves. You have to hire engineers, dbas and trainers to work on the new systems.

So no cost savings there. To the contrary, independent studies have shown that these folks cost more than equivalent Microsoft experts so it costs the state more money.

It's going to cost the state money to convert their critical office applications that don't quite work under the open alternatives. So no savings their either.

You like talking about the 'brown stuff' and you are quite full of it yourself.

If you had a clue about the power and integration of Windows and Office applicatations you wouldn't spout off on Thunderbird or other open source code that is crap compared to the Office suite.

You are probably in your mid teens and weren't around in the 80's and 90's when various incompatible systems made IT a very difficult place to be.

Like or hate Microsoft it doesn't matter but you can't deny that Microsoft programs work quite well. You are kiding yourself if you think that open alternatives can do better for lower cost.

Don't close your eyes to the fact that no matter what the BS from the open source community, you can't just throw a switch and have everything free.

If you don't live in MA you are just monday morning quarterbacking it as you aren't the one who is going to have to pay higher taxes to cover these 'free' conversions - that is if you are old enough to pay taxes yet. My guess is you have a few years to go before you start shaving or paying taxes.

You are really unbelievable. You are trying to compare current office software with some open crap that isn't released yet?

Why? Could it be that contrary to your posts the current open stuff is well...crap compared to Office?

If you want to play that game then the entire state of MA issues are moot because Microsoft is going to support the open standard the state wants in Office 12.

But you will probably complain and say that Microsoft may not have the 'correct' open licensing model in the next version of Office.

Give it up, you can't have it both ways. Compare apples to apples (pun intended) and you will see that Microsoft products provide great value for the money and beat everything that is out there today.

Sure the open source community will try and play catch up and try and match the feature set of Office but they will always be several years behind as after Office 12, Microsoft is no doubt going to be working on Office 13 etc.

You are a tard. Nobody compaired any unreleased software to MS Office.

Have you ever even used the Open Office Suite? You must not have. It holds up quite well to Micro$loths.

Micro$loth doesn't provide great value... great value is allowing competition and choice. Great value is an open platform(s).

The open source community doesn't need to play catch up. Over half of the software on my computer is open source. Why? Because I found that it worked better, looks better, and isn't full of worthless pointless bloat.

Hey moron, do you have a brain disorder? Here's your post on the subject.

"Yes, you are correct, and the Lightning I am talking about isn't even released yet. They are working on a better package to compete with outlook."

YOU compared an unreleased software to MS Office. I can only assume you are even younger and stupider than your other posts lead everyone to believe.

I have used OO and it's crap. It couldn't read/convert relatively simple docs that I send to the state every day.

If you work with the state of MA then your words would have more bearing, but that isn't the case is it?

As much as you may hate Microsoft with your childish comments (Micro$loths) - great value has nothing to do with allowing competition and choice.

When you are old enough to drive and get a job you will realize that companies and government agencies rarely move to the bleeding edge of technology - particularly when it doesn't work as well as what they have now.

The open source community is several years behind Microsoft and they will stay that way for the forseable future.

OO products may fine when you send notes to your 13 year old friends about big bad Microsoft but in the real world, businesses and governments require software that does a little more.

The worthless bloat that you don't like in Microsoft products is what decades of user requests have pressured Microsoft into adding into their products because people like software to do more than just be ordinary.

Sonny, please go put on some acne cream and go to bed, it's probably past your bedtime.

Open Office 2.0 is pretty damn good but it's not quite Office 2003 quality yet. For home and small office users it's great and saves you about $400.

Most new computers come with a trial edition, which you can upgrade to a full. $400 is only if you don't have a version already. Why not get Student and Teacher Edition can't beat that.

Microsoft® Office 2003 Student and Teacher Edition $119.94

Microsoft® Office 2003 Professional Edition - Upgrade Version $259.99

Microsoft® Office 2003 Standard Edition $219.99

Corel Wordperfect Office 12 316.99

It's not a bad idea, as long as you are a student or teacher. Otherwise it's a violation of the EULA, and considered piracy to use it.

Dumb move by the Socialist State of Massachusetts. This is a political decision, not a common sense decision.

This is like isolating yourself from the rest of the world, which happens to use Microsoft Office. If they used OpenOffice with the MS Office file formats, it would be perfectly fine, but as MS Office does not support OO, they are basically just creating a headache for themselves.

I fully support OpenSource, but this really doesn't work. The only way it will is if it convinces MS to open up its format, and then uses it (even that is not that smart as many people use older version of Office).

MS Office is the standard, that is the reality, and MS Office is currently better than OO. I am hoping that OpenOffice builds an Outlook competitor and improves a lot, and then it will be a more viable realistic solution; however currently it has a long ways to go.

Office is something Microsoft made popular without taking advantage of its Windows monopoly to do it. Office was before Windows, and originally for the Mac. Office is just a product that works.

"This is like isolating yourself from the rest of the world"

Which is exactly why monopolies are bad for the economy as a whole.

MSFT is making an open standard, from what i hear xdoc. Which is XML format which anyone can read. They will also make an update available for older verison of office, i think XP and 2003

Microsoft isolates itself trom the rest of the world, almost each case is a fact accompli. So there we have (or had) "standard standards" and "Microsoft standards", like Microsoft Java (not compatible to this made by Sun, and only the decision of the Dept. of Justice prevented this ill situation), the Microsoft way of displaying HTML, and the Microsoft way of displaying foreign characters (different from the ISO standard).
Frankly, doc files are widespread (due to the monopoly of Ms) but not standard. Moreover, docs is, in fact, a group of different files what one can check in the options of Microsoft Word (like "make it Office 97 compliant" in Office 2000/XP).
I live in Europe. I remember that Bill Gates accused the European Union that the policy of the union is against the company. Someone explained that it is not. In fact it is prostandard and Microsoft breaks almost every rule, if only possible. The best case is IE and W3C standards. Microsoft is a member of W3C (actually, it is one of the co-founders of W3C!), but IE is not W3C compliant, however, Ms is obliged to make it W3C compliant.

Hey dumby wake up, Micro$oft has been a communist state for years

Microsoft Office formats ARE a standard on the information landscaope. You have to be pretty myopic to miss that.

The wonderful thing about "standards" is that there are so many to choose from (tongue squarely in cheek). The ones championing so-called "open standards" usually miss that salient point.

Nothing like that. Any company which monopolised any market and uses own proprietary solutions will always shout that any young company which is not possible to be aquired is breaking business rules. Monopolists always want to stop any competition and they go to any lengths. It does not apply to Microsoft only. It also applies to e.g. Creative Labs which paid some shops in Europe not to sell the sound cards made by Yamaha. The Japanese company won lawsuits in many courts but the market position of the company was so weak that it stopped to make sound cards.
It is obvious that Microsoft wants buy any company which potentially endangers its business. The problem is that it does not work open source foundations/companies. Otherwise, Mozilla, OpenOffice and some others would be history. Not because they make bad products. Just the opposite.

PS What stops Microsoft to use OASIS? It is open for everybody, incl. Microsoft.

My main gripe about office has always been that it is rediculously overpriced, as are most Microsoft products.

OpenOffice not only proves that, but is emerging as a very serious alternative. If an Outlook type component as added, I think Microsoft may have some serious thinking to do.

I will definately agree MS Office is over-priced, but I still think this was a bad move in the long run. Hey, anything can happen in 2 years--they might change their mind, or MS may fold (ok THAT won't happen)

Someone has to force Microsoft to adopt an open format. This is the most effective anti-monopoly move any state has made. Punitive fines? MS will pay those all day, since they get the money back in licensing. Fines don't work. Make them compete against something less expensive by removing their exclusivity, and you have COMPETITION! That's an American concept if I ever heard one.

MS isn't evil. They use all the rules to their advantage. At the same time, fighting them on their level is much more effective. Hats off to the lefties in Mass.

As for ed setups, you might be surprised that they give some pretty smoking deals. Education use drives dependency.

"Someone has to force Microsoft to adopt an open format."

Why?

"I run my business any damned way I see fit and since most people adopt my formats, they're universal and information flows anyway."

THAT is using the rules to one's advantage.

I live in Massachusetts and my town just migrated the majority of the school system's computers from mac os X to windows. I really think they are STUPID for this I didn't even see that they had antivirus software running. However they are using the open browser firefox and hopefully they will also move to an open operating system and open office software.

Best case scenario:

1. Microsoft customizes Office for Mass so that it employs an OASIS import/export filter and can read and write to OpenDocument files (which are VERY similar to MS Office 12 "docx" files).

2. Inevitably, it leaks out.

3. Some smart coder pulls out the filter and releases a patch for Office XP/Office 2003 that adds an ODT filter.

4. It makes its rounds on Slashdot and OSNews.

5. Presto - ODTs for Office.

THAT would be great.

Or people could just migrate to OOo...

Yeah, but they may not. There *are* cases where people have migrated back. What will probably happen is that Microsoft will want to retain the licensing that goes with MA. MA isn't complaining about the costs, only the closed nature of the binary format.

We know that Office 12 fixes this, but the format is still undocumented and may or may not require a license to read and write to. So I think it's a possibility that Microsoft releases a customized version for Massachusettes.

Fantastic! I hope more do this. I cant stand MS Office.

why? MS office is a pretty decent office suite. the only thing i hate about it is the damn paperclip

You've got to provide some evidence, man!!!

Right-click on it the next time you see it and turn it off.

Brilliant! Another State administration demonstrating how and why anything being done or managed by the State is a constant mix of errors and failure!

My thumb down! Are you people stupid. Office is a standard, every business I have worked for or with, every school I have gone to, and All of my customers all and some verison of office. All my customers that had wordperfect, or open office, I had them switch to MS Office.

You do realize that OOo can read MS format nearly perfectly right? RIGHT? You must have stupid customers, any contractor/vendor of mine that attempted to dictate what application i MUST use to work with them would no longer be my contractor/vendor. Either your customers are stupid or your full of s***. Given your lack of tact and knowledge my money is on the later.

I'll second that!!!

I third that!

My lack of tact don't make me laugh. You just prove that you don't live in the real world, or don't have a grasp of reality. One of the business I work for, before I started, was using OpenOffice. But most of the employees had a hardtime using it, and had a hard time getting the data to work at home. They switch back to Office 2003, and have not looked back. If you think I am lying about this, that is your problem. But I like to inform people about my experiences, so they can make better decision.

In addition to being able to READ MS format, you can save files as .doc or .rtf from OOo which is readable by MS Office! OMG, a word processing program that is flexible and FREE???? What the f#$% is up with that? We should definately abuse the state a Mass for trying to save their taxpayers money by migrating to a readily accessable and functional product. DAMN YOU MASSACHUSETTS, YOU bas****S!....

This is the problem... Office is A standard in and of itself. It is not THE standard. I applaud Massachusetts for taking steps to migrate to an open standard.

Here is one scenario. MS decides that they want to change Office. They EOL Office 2000 and stop supporting/releasing patches and updates for it. Now all the customers YOU forced to go with office who have thousands of files created in Office 2000 have no viable software to open said documents in.... Why is using Microsoft products the ONLY way that business can be done? Wouldn't it be advantageous to train your customers to use the products that they have rather than telling them that they have to pay inflated prices for MS Bloatware??? Just a thought, and a damn good business model.

"You do realize that OOo can read MS format nearly perfectly right?"

The easy stuff, yes. The more complex stuff NO.

It's a nice checkbox to add to a superflous conversion "plan" but the realities of life are rather different.

"Here is one scenario."

...and it's a ludicrous one. There's a little thing called backwards compatibility, which is why there are still filters around for MUCH earlier versions of Word, etc.

A logical and reasoned argument is one thing, religion and FUD quite another.

In the shortsighted fashion so typical of many armchair IT pundits, you harbour the misconception that "free" software is actually free in a corporate environment.

You forget support - where does it come from? A chat room?

You forget installation costs. You think the software gets to desktops by itself?

You forget re-training.

You forget document conversion (yes, OO falls flat on its a** when it comes to complex Office documents like almost everything else).

You forget macro conversion. What - OpenOffice doesn't have a REAL macro language and no conversion facilities? Gee - that might just present a problem.

You forget interoperability with other organizations, the majority of which use MS Office. The same caveat from above to the jingle that "OO reads Office documents seamlessly" applies here.

You forget and forget and forget...

You can build an entire EIS with Excel and Word using the macro language - the possibility of that isn't even a bad joke with OO.

Those of us who have *real* IT shop experience and aren't armchair IT pundits yelling "open source - rah rah!" at every opportunity don't forget. We have to make it work and it has to be cost effective and serve line-of-business needs.

That's why most shops don't do what the State of Mass. did and if they do change, it's usually to a product that guarantees a lot more interoperability and business payoffs.

Like the ones you get from MS Office.

Can the religious zealotry - people have a business to run.

LiLWiP is correct. Office is A standard not THE standard.

If Microsoft doesn't wish to adopt OASIS, they don't have to. All they MUST do, imo, is ensure that whatever format(s) they do use are made available so they can be supported by the other packages.

Forcing them to adopt an open standard will add to development costs and give them an excuse to keep the price of Office high.

Did you hear? Docer has done Microsoft Office -> OO conversions and he says it's a piece of cake!

I'm waiting to hear back from him how to convert things with Macros/VBS/ActiveX/any Access apps but as soon as he let's the cat out of the bag I'm going to start a company and help the state put bad old Microsoft out of business.

Man I hope more states do this.

I hate the fact that so many things are tied down to MS formats.

Great job Massachusetts!

"I hate the fact that so many things are tied down to MS formats."

Why, other than the usual obvious rah rah religious nonsense that the anti-MS zealots spout? The whole idea behind information in business is interoperability and the MS formats are ubiquitous.

Nothing else is.

My thumb up! Right move, Massachusetts!

Bad Job Mass. Am pretty sure its like shooting yourself in the foot, agreed that MS is monopoly..but why ? because they are widely accepted by people - its understandable that there are differences of opinion, but this is sheer ignorance, being a database administrator - seeing all the products touted by others ..compared with MS - I still think MS is high up there, professionalism, support, SP's, fixes and So much more that is not considered as an " Upgrade " -- they do all they can and after all...everyone is human - computers don't rule the world, people do - common sense drives us....Goodluck Mass. I hope MS CAN think of migrating back, by the time you realize..

If Rome can fall, then I'm convinced any change is possible. MS Office is a good product. It doesn't suck, and offers more than enough functionality for the average user. But given the economic pinch that many local governments are in, cost cutting measures are a reality. I support MS products, but admit to disliking the licensing fees when I know very well that other open source products would get the job done just as well. The problem though is convincing the boss...change is a scary thing to some people. I'll sit back, like many people, and see how this pans out in MASS. If it's a success, then MS has some serious rethinking to do.

I have been using OpenOffice (and StarOffice) since September 2001. Before that I had owned MSOffice 95 professional.
The only major difference I can find that affects my normal use is the ease in which I could search for and replace the paragraph break in MSWord.
Otherwise, I think that the Mass. office workers will find that OpenOffice will allow them to access more than just open documents, and so, more than MSOffice allows. That alone, in my mind, makes software such as OpenOffice better!

What are you talking about when you say that:

"OpenOffice will allow them to access more than just open documents"

You compare a current OO suite to Microsoft Office 95?!?

Get a current (2003) copy of Office Pro and see what it can do and then your comparisons may have some validity.

With pleasure! But only if you will pay.

Haha...you want open stuff, give it to me because I don't want to pay anything.

You have not got the point. If I want to meet my representive I do not have to buy a Volkswagen (because this car brand is the most popular in Germany and I live there). If I want to submit him a petition I should be able without paying any fees for private business that make office suites. It is as easy as ABC. Got it?
If you work in a private company you can communicate in any way you want, you can use telegraph, or send all your handwritten stuff by messengers or pigeons. The owner of the company is responsible only. Do not demand from citizens to support private companies with their money. Clear?

BTW, I read in a German newspaper that California will follow Mass. because Schwarzenegger shares the same opinion. Clever dude!

That's funny. The free market decides how you will submit a petition. Do they require using a pen or a pencil? Well, that's someone’s standard and you better not try to write with chalk. I hope your English is good enough to understand the analogy.

Give me a break, taxes go to pay private companies all over the world. You just don’t like Microsoft.

Schwarzenegger is history and he will either be recalled or voted out in the next election cycle.

Feel free to create your own standard and then use it but don’t tell me I have to pay higher taxes to make a switch because you don’t want to ‘pay’ Microsoft.