On 27 Mar 2002 19:08:30 -0600
"Samir M. Nassar" <nassarsa at redconcepts.net> wrote:

> MS Office, is actually a pretty decent package. Bloated yes, resource
> heavy, yes, but it runs like it should, it is used world-wide and it is
> multilingual. For example,. the Health Work Committees in Palestine can
> switch from Spanish to Arabic to English to German fairly easily with MS
> Word.
> 
I can see where you're going.  However, like I was saying I would rather see a full product that is strictly Linux be developed.  If MS can do it in a "closed shop" environment, why can't thousands or millions of open source people come up with an app that does the same thing?

> Also, many administrators are 40+ and not exactly your most
> technologically savvy people so they learn one thing and stick with it.
> 
Not true.  I'll disagree with this, to a point.  Where I work, we have many people near or over 40 that know a great deal of many things and are constantly learning.  This is a software development company, so it might be that I see it more there.  However, I know other people who have worked/do work in other companies that aren't so tech savvy that know a great deal more over a vast array of things.  

The stopping point is that, depending upon one's job/company/career/focus/etc many are pushed into a specific area and are needed/wanted to stay in that area.

> Solution: Install Linux all over with multilingual capabilities and
> install the CrossOver Office plugin and run Word, Excel, Access, etc on
> top.
> 
Again, see my first paragraph.  Why is it that we can't have a Linux specific app that is compatible with MS that will save the additional costs or even be open/free software?  Again, costs of the Win OS license or the MS app plus having to buy a plugin for that capability.

> Hopefully the CrossOver plugin is more stable than Windows itself.
> 
The chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.

> Also, this way local software developers will be able to modify Windows
> programs to work better with the plugin and hopefully learn to port
> their apps to Linux as Linux gains a greater toehold in the Middle East.
> (Or Africa or Central Asia for that matter)
> 
Understandable here, but the argument still remains:  Why develop an app that runs on windows to be virtually run on Linux?  Or ported for that fact.  Why not take the time to create new apps that have the best of the different Win/Mac/other Os apps?  Time better spent IMO.  

As to Ben's statement of not being able to buy Win2k licenses, I haven't heard that previously.  I can't believe that MS would take XP and turn it into it's server line being that it's as unstable and crappy as it is.


Shawn