On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 12:49:32PM -0800, Chris Berry wrote: >>From: "Patrick Tighe" <ptighe@detroit.faurecia.com> >>I can make a certain case for absolutely not. Myself, I'm considering >>strongly going back to Windows for work, I've run into too many >instances >>where OO has not given me the correct info. this is very >important when >>I'm looking at a quote from a supplier, and the fields >with >>multiplication are not multiplied. Also, checkboxes don't come >across, >>and I'm sure there are others. While I believe Linux to be >the superior >>OS, I don't believe Star Office, or Open Office are up to >the level of MS >>Office. > >We've been switching over to OO from MS and you're right, there are about >5% of documents that have some problems, but given the ROI, we think its >worth a few extra labor hours. Also, most of the time you can find a >slighty different way of the making the document and let your supplier know >how to change it, and you're both happy. The multiplication problem is >probably caused because someone got lazy and used a cell reference when >they should have used a variable. Checkboxes seem to work fine on mine >though. Personally, I think its worth a little hassle to be able to have >the same word processor on both platforms. Of course, if your company has >some heavy macro users, you may have to stick with M$ products. > The problem which hasn't been presented is that MS Office uses proprietary formats for their documents. While they have built great features into their packages, once you create a word document or an Excel spreadsheet, your really stuck in that format. In otherwords, you are trapped with no option but to use MS Office. OO, on the other hand, uses an open XML format that anyone can read and the specifications are available. -- Michael Herman
Attachment:
pgp00085.pgp
Description: PGP signature
