[plug] Linux Desktop Market

[Alex Polglaze]

Craig Ringer wrote:

> However, I find O.o 2.0 sufficiently functional - for a spreadsheet -
> that I can actually work with it. This wasn't true of 1.1, which
> required some horrifying hacks to get many simple things done. The fact
> that the kind OO.o folks fixed {SUM(IF(...))} alone makes such a
> difference that it's amazing.
> 
> If I had to choose between extensively using OO.o 1.1 Calc and buying a
> retail copy of MS Excel at a bit under $500, I would've taken Excel
> anyway. With OO.o 2.0, it's improved enough that that's no longer true.
> Being a dirty rotten student now, I still got Office, but I don't use it
> much since a somewhat fixed up early OO.o 2 build shipped in FC4.
> 
> I should note that I learned Excel /after/ OO.o, so what problems I have
> with the latter are certainly not due to greater familiarity with
> Office.
> 
Interesting comments.

Having suffered from MicroSoftphobia for over 20 years, I use Lotus 123. 
We are trying to use OO so that we can have everything running under 
Linux, but... OO has a long way to go before it is an good as Lotus.

Perhaps Excel users can't tell the difference between the two, but I 
much prefer 123 over OO.

(Hits control button and closes fire proof enclosure :-))

Alex