Ruling the world? I think not...
- they have such a monopoly through tough business
practices and also
There are "tough business practices" and there is breaking the law. (Also when a business uses the business practices of a gangster shouldn't it be treated the same way as a business set up bg gangsters?)
I dont think they use the practices of a gangster. Unfair competition...yes...mowing down people with guns and torturing your enemies...no.
Fraud and other economic crimes can do just as much damage. To keep it on thread :-) If money is diverted from the health service people do die. Not everyone gets the treatment they need and at the margins it is life or death, its just more anonymous.
(believe it or not) through some decent products.
Which products do you think are good, why do you think they are good? Also do you still think they are good for the environment of a school.
I think MS Office is a good suite. It is well designed, works fairly well and gets kids using computers at an early age with a simple interface.
Ever use a RISC OS machine 10 years ago :-). MS Office is only really special in that its widespread and has a lot of features, most of which most people don't actually use. Its comprehensive. Most people that think its wonderful have only really used similar products on Windows so they don't really know what it could have been like.
IMHO kids need something that is simple to use and works as they expect it,
Try Textease, its cross platform and at least as easy as MS Office.
and Office is pretty much this way.
But its nothing special, its just as it should be.
Also...most other office suites have pretty much replicated the interface (which is good IMHO).
Its convenient because it is established as a standard way of doing things. Its not particularly ergonomically brilliant so again I would say it was average reather than particularly good.
Yes it is expensive and yes it is closed and yes it is proprietary, but I am looking at the interface and the featureset here.
So we have an average everyday thing that is expensive and closed. Granted the featureset is comprehensive.
Lots of flaws does not necessarily imply "not viable". It's more a question of can the "flaws" be addressed, IME changing how open source software works is far easier than with closed source.
Lots of flaws for a Linux developer/advocate = viable Lots of flaws for a Linux newbie = not viable
We will not get Linux to be as widespread as Windows until people realise that it is not technical capability that really matters, its market perception. MS got a very big leg up because, ironically, industry was scared of proprietary systems and the IBM PC was open architecture. Unfortunately that was hardware but at the time, the OS was a much smaller proportion of the cost so it was conveniently ignored. Technically, much better office suites could be written but now they would have to be like MS office because its simply familiarity and branding. So best thing for Star Office is to be a clone until it gets a majority user base, then change and improve it. ie Star Office will not be established by being better but by being the same - identical even and cheaper.
Like anything in life, there are varying levels of positive and negative. Microsoft does have its good points, and it does its bad points. Also, it is not like they are the only comptetitor out there for us.
They are the most significant one and given that resources are limited focus and priorities are required. -- IanL Open Source - save money - employ more teachers Use Star Office the free replacement for Microsoft Office