replacing m$ (was Re: anti-word)

[Kirk Wood]

On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Thomas Ward wrote:
> Well, I am seeing a trend. Linux is becoming slightly more popular, and my
> Uncle's company is looking at Star Office to replace MS Office. The hold up?
> Well, the company wants to be able to move all there Office 2000 files to
> and from Star Office.

Actually, this is a good time to point out what the new "features" of
office 2000 are. The only real one noticed by most is that the documents
when placed on a m$ server easily become web pages and improved look of
exported docs to web pages when not using m$ servers. This is the only
"improvement" for the suite.

Now to look at the cost: All office 2000 programs take longer to
load. They take more disk space on the drive. Their documents take more
disk space (as much as 40% more). 

The solution is simply to back pedal to office 97. Then they can start the
process of leaving office all together if they choose. They can use Star
Office in a winblows environment seamlessly. They can also seemlessly use
WordPerfect across the platforms. Actually, they can use even most office
2000 docs without trouble. Outside of stuffing extra stuff into the docs
for web translation office 2000 is supposed to be backward compatible. The
database program is not however. 

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk at 1tree.net

Nowlan's Theory:
        He who hesitates is not only lost, but several miles from
        the next freeway exit.