Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on June 24, 2005 03:32 AM
Yes, this is how I feel too. I'm a adjunct at a state college testing out OO to see if we are intrested in teaching it. To test rather or not OO will meet our accreditation needs I'm taking it through it's paces using a MS Word book.
So far there has only been a few handful of things that have not stacked up to Word. But Word has OO beat in one catagory that the article did not cover...convience. Craig is right. OO is full featured, but it's not very intuitive for the average user. I've been using Word Processors for years and I'm having problems getting simple features to work or even understand the basic process (headers/footers is one of them - it's the whole page style thing).
OO needs to work on it's convience factor...those little things that polish it up to where the user feels like the program is working with him not fighting ever step of the way to do basic processes.
Don't get me wrong, OO is a great program...but Word offers a lot of convience to basic users. If I was deciding between OO and Word my biggest question would be "how much moeny is convience worth?". You get what you pay for. OO might be free, but it's not polished. If I had the money to spend, I might just decide that convience wins over Open source. I spend lots more time cursing at OO then I do Word.