[ubuntu-uk] Example of difficulty to Convert MS users

Sarah Chard sarah at streetentertainers.co.uk
Thu Jun 9 19:27:40 UTC 2011

n Thu, 2011-06-09 at 14:44 +0100, Avi Greenbury wrote:
> And here's the problem. odf is the better format, MS Office is the 
> better office suite.
> I'm not at all convinced that the traction against OOo/LO is entirely 
> (or even mostly) down to people being used to MS Office and, much as
> it 
> might well be getting better in LO, MS Office has long been the more 
> complete, polished, stable and predictable of the two.

For the majority of people doing mundane office tasks as I do whilst
running my business I doubt there would be a substantial difference
using Libre/Open Office or MS Office

MS Office may be better - I can't comment as I genuinely have never used
it - I started with Lotus (because that was on the first machine I had)
then switched to open source programs and finally made the move over to
Ubuntu as an OS - my business has been running on Ubuntu for several
years now.
And that is the point - people use MS office because it's what is on
their machines when they buy them and get used to using it.  Most people
don't want to change - I was interested in open source for a range of
reasons and enjoy experimenting with programs but I know most people
find it very boring.

Because M$ have a monopoly the open source office programs are ham
strung as they have to play catch-up trying to get their programs
working easily with the closed M$ formats - which their users will need
the programs to do as they will daily deal with others using MS office.
If the open doc formats were enforced by govt - it would help to level
the playing field and it would be easier for larger organisations to
start a switch to open source in front offices.

I'm sure you all know the arguments 

That's why getting schools to teach about Open Source and explore the
alternatives is very important - then we may not need to 'convert'


More information about the ubuntu-uk mailing list