[plug] anyone here work for a public company?

[Bradley Woodward]

On Sat, 09 Sep 2000, Leon Brooks wrote:
> http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2000-09-08-004-04-OP-LF-MS
>
> Text follows:
>
> MS Office costs businesses about $6 billion each year; with free
> alternatives like StarOffice that are now available, continuing to pay for
> MS Office constitutes fiscal irresponsibility -- shareholders and employees
> should be demanding an end to this colossal waste of corporate funds.

There is a difference between the cost of purchace and the cost of owning.  
Office costs a lot to buy, but doesn't cost much to own, because everybody 
coming out of receptionist school and business collage knows how to use the 
damn things.  The training costs are way down, because everybody mimics the 
MS style of applicaton, so everybody basically knows how to navigate the 
menus and toolbars of most new applications.

And from listening to the bean counters at work, $1000 for software is a zero 
consideration.  The main cost for any business is salary, and that's the same 
no matter what operating system is used.

Star Office may cost less to buy, but will cost more to own, because of 
retraining costs, the cost of converting documents and spreadsheets, etc.

There is also the cost of making sure all your business partners can read in 
SO formats when you email them spreadsheets or documents.

I've had this arguement with the people at work, and even with my parents.  
When I organised their new computer, I installed SO on it.  2 weeks later, my 
father had put Office 2000 over the top of it.  He prefered to spend $300 on 
something he knew well, than spend $0.00 on something he'd never seen before. 
The consertative pragmatist in action.