basic - continued
ubuntu-users at tpesonen.net
Sat Feb 6 16:40:42 UTC 2010
On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 16:20 +0000, Chris Jones wrote:
> > No, it isn't. It is the comparison I, for example, had to do at work:
> > WinXP with Office 2003 or Ubuntu 9.04 with which ever version of OOo I
> > prefer.
> Nothing is stopping you buying a newer version of MS office...
Yes, something is: The ICT administration.
> If the point you are trying to make is OO is free, so you can upgrade
> whenever you want,
Not necessarily. This depends on where one uses it and on whose
> whereas MS office isn't free, then great. A very
> fair and valid point. But on a purely technically level it is not fair
> to compare a 6 year old obsolete application to the latest and
> greatest of another, when an upgrade for the older package is
> available (free or otherwise).
In my case, as in many others, that was the only comparison possible.
The admin will either give me a laptop with WinXP and Office 2003, or
one with Ubuntu. So, how is this comparison unfair? Office 2003 is not
obsolete. It is supported by MS (though I do not know for how long
still). The last SP for it was released in 2007. Unlike home users,
enterprises do not upgrade Office every year.
GPG KeyID 315FD528
More information about the ubuntu-users