Posted by: Anonymous
on November 23, 2008 06:09 AM
Too many opinions are presented as facts in this article. Far too many.
"the leading alternative" (even though it is well behind in market share)
_alternative_, and OpenOffice is the same as StarOffice, just without the assured support.
"Is new always better?"
This is a question everyone's asking given Vista's poor record. So again, what's wrong?
Red Hat, Suse, Ubuntu, Jasper, JBoss, MySQL (before SUN acquired it), Mandriva
all do the same thing - free opensource and paid support.
"you have to drill down into separate folders for them"
that's a valid point. agreed. Next-Next is always better.
"StarOffice 9 sells for $60, or $25-90 for enterprise users, depending on the number of seats."
Enterprises are willing to pay, and willing to save on license costs. FOSS has real credibility now - Google, OpenOffice, cloud computing and all - and most importantly, the product OO 3 is much better than earlier versions. I have heard a few stories of corporates switching to OO and falling behind deadlines - with the diminishing difference between OpenOffice and StarOffice that will not repeat so often - so what's wrong with that?
People with money _do_ pay companies who give support.
Lastly, you dont get geeks in every office out there and those geeks aren't always allowed to suggest OpenOffice as an alternative by managers.
SUN has a problem, but it's not the one you are pointing out - it is one of advertising - people simply dont know SUN exists and has a decent/competitive set of desktop products. That is the problem. Not the one you are referring to.