Ho Hum. Another City Switches To LibreOffice

“The experiments taught the IT department that when installing LibreOffice, the proprietary predecessor should be removed. “If a workstation had both, users would revert to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”…
 
In Nantes, 75 percent of the users switched without reporting significant difficulties.”
 
See Nantes: ‘Surveys support switch to open source’
It’s not surprising that cities should choose LibreOffice. It works. It costs much less than M$’s offering. I knew that 15 years ago when OpenOffice.org came out with version 1.0. It’s still true today. Further, LibreOffice also works on GNU/Linux so another barrier to FLOSS (Free/Libre Open Source Software) has been broken.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in politics, technology and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

70 Responses to Ho Hum. Another City Switches To LibreOffice

  1. oiaohm says:

    https://negativevacuum.wordpress.com/duck-n-cover/hate-the-ribbon/
    DrLoser please go and read this link. Wake up that users who like ribbon there are just as many who don’t like ribbon. Even worse there have been many UX tests that have found productivity is lower on average with Ribbon than with MS Office 2003/Libreoffice 5.2 style interface in most cases.

    This is the big problem with saying MS Office is productive. The reality is not on average. But the thing that is interesting about the numbers about 10 percent of users get a productivity boost with ribbon but those are also the ones who use the least percentage of features that the Office suite provides.

    The Libreoffice current UX path is designed to work in the direction studies say that we need more than 1 interface type due to the variation in users. Round peg square hole has be used in training to define this problem for a very long time.

  2. oiaohm says:

    dougman I have backed you 4 times in the last 12 months. You rate of error this year is the highest it ever been.

    (Inelegantly, and the results look horrid, but hey, that’s FLOSS. Inelegant and visually unappealing, but just about does what commercial software did ten years ago.)
    DrLoser read what you said here and think. Companies have to keep records depend on what they are to conform to countries laws from 7 to 50 years. So at a min a Office suite need to be able to-do what it did 7 years ago. The reality is MS Office 2013 and 2016 cannot do that.

    This is one of the separators from Libreoffice Writer or Apache OpenOffice Writer. Libreoffice has the fixed importers for what people were using 7+ years go and Apache OpenOffice does not.

    If only LO were at least 50% like Excel.
    What version of Excel this is kind important. If you put MS Excel 2003 interface next to current day Libreoffice Calc it is a lot closer than 50% to MS Excel 2003.

    Of course please remember in 2007 the uproar when people were having to change from the 2003 way to ribbon. So DrLoser you are on the side the like ribbon and you have forgot the side that hates ribbon style and does not mind the visual clutter of toolbars as having a icon of a feature on screen remind them of it existence so they use it.

    Now if you were comparing to 2007 and newer you will need the 5.3 that is not release yet to have an interface something like it.
    https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/NotebookBar

    Due to the fact percentage of the Libreoffice user base comes from 2007 MS Office change to ribbion to avoid it. Libreoffice is going to have Notebook bar(its version of ribbion) next to the old interface. This is about keeping the most number of users happy. OpenOffice run a UX review before the Libreoffice split and it was found to be impossible to get everyone to agree on 1 interface but it is possible to get users to agree at least one of 3 in all cases. Please note I said 3.
    1) Menu and toolbars like MS Office 2003 and current Libreoffice.
    2) Tab toolbar like Ribbon MS Office 2007-2016 or Notebook bar Libreoffice 5.3+.
    3) Minimalistic “Standard (Single Mode) toolbar” Libreoffice 5.3+ and people use to make Minimalistic in 2003 and before by customisation.

    Of course this was done with the presume that everyone is using a keyboard and mouse. So the current Libreoffice UX guys are looking at if Libreoffice should have a interface purely designed for touch as well.

    Remember not everyone brain works the same way. Really one user interface is really like saying everyone has the same body and trying to sell 1 size of t-shirt. So productivity requires more than 1 interface to suit different people using the application.

    The reality is that the user interface development of Libreoffice has been delayed by about 10 years. This means if Microsoft had kept up on compatibility it would be a very hard sell to deploy Libreoffice instead.

    6 of those 10 years was lost to code base repair and then 4 of those 10 years was lost to Contribute Agreement rules that kept many of the good paid user interface designers and security auditors of the open source world from taking part. So things were not going right with OpenOffice and the reason why Libreoffice forked off and Libreoffice has taken time to turn that around.

    There is a lot of arguement that 2007-2013 MS Office interface is not in fact right. If Libreoffice was only attempting to copy MS Office it could ignore these complaints. The fact Libreoffice is not attempting to copy MS Office but support their current user-base means the legacy interface will remain with other alternatives.

    This is the thing Libreoffice has legacy support and will keep legacy support even in the user interface.

  3. DrLoser says:

    One could present factual evidence, and the peon will write paragraph after paragraph against known facts and copy/paste from Wikipedia.

    Yup.

    That is a fair and universally accurate summary, Dougie.

    We might disagree on various aspects of FLOSS (or tractors, or the load capacity of European Swallows, or whatever), but we are both clear-sighted to have spotted this.

    Fifi contributes nothing to any conversation he wiggles his way into. He’s not even a contrarian. He’s just a misinformed ignorant dag.

  4. DrLoser says:

    Sigh, I guess the haters will now complain that LO is too much like Excel…

    Have you actually used Calc, let alone compared it to Excel, Robert? It’s the weakest part of the suite. It’s so weak that it’s practically unusable.

    And I say that as a basically fair-minded person who can understand why one would choose LO Writer (or the Apache Org equivalent) over MS Word. I can struggle along with either one of those, and they only annoy me — they rarely prevent me from doing what I want to do. (Inelegantly, and the results look horrid, but hey, that’s FLOSS. Inelegant and visually unappealing, but just about does what commercial software did ten years ago.)

    If only LO were at least 50% like Excel.

    Frankly, right now, I would rather code up my spread-sheet app in something elegant (and incidentally free) like a bunch of Python programs, with an optional WxWidget or HTML front end attached. Using Calc feels like repeatedly stabbing my thigh with an Exacto knife, just to remind me that Pain Is An Inevitable Part of Life.

  5. dougman says:

    “The only thing that I can’t fully explain is why would Robert consider Fifi competent in any area whatsoever. There are two options. The first is that Robert is totally desperate in his attempts to find support for his dubious, to put it mildly, ideas and claims. The second, is, well, hm, not very nice for Robert.”

    No matter the argument, Fifi’s position is always 100% counter of mine. It never fails. One could present factual evidence, and the peon will write paragraph after paragraph against known facts and copy/paste from Wikipedia. On top of that, most of the time, his argument is without merit and just ramblings of an uneducated dolt.

  6. Deaf Spy says:

    Fifi, pollutes other blogs too with his unintelligent writing style

    The only thing that I can’t fully explain is why would Robert consider Fifi competent in any area whatsoever. There are two options. The first is that Robert is totally desperate in his attempts to find support for his dubious, to put it mildly, ideas and claims. The second, is, well, hm, not very nice for Robert.

  7. oiaohm says:

    What you know, Fifi, is how to lean on a lamp-post with a fishnet stockings at night. You are a self-admitted liar and total ignoramus, Fifi.

    See resorting to personal attacks. There are a lot of studies on what business do when they change software and the outcomes are.

    Deafspy where are you cites for the research documents backing your points of view. That right you don’t have any because you are a liar and total ignoramus on this topic and thought you could win it.

    Fifi, pollutes other blogs too with his unintelligent writing style.
    The other places don’t complain about my writing style. Only the idiots like you dougman do.

    Top-Down watering here is not performed above the plant leaves where ever possible here if it performed at all. Top-Down watering is required as part of maintaining wicking systems as salt flushing every so often.
    dougman do read what I wrote. When you have a person ignoring this basic stuff you have problems.

    The person watched the video then failed to notice the video never did watering above leaves of plants. Farmbot design is above leaves of plants.

  8. dougman says:

    Fifi, pollutes other blogs too with his unintelligent writing style.

    http://forum.farmbot.org/t/why-overheading-watering/718/17

  9. Deaf Spy says:

    “I know of businesses who put there staff through a 5 day training course every time they change versions of MS Office.”

    What you know, Fifi, is how to lean on a lamp-post with a fishnet stockings at night. You are a self-admitted liar and total ignoramus, Fifi.

  10. oiaohm says:

    “encountering a difficulty” == “stop doing what you are doing and choose a better-suited approach.” == “reverting to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”
    Deaf Spy this is not true if staff did take the better suited approach on their own restricting them to 1 office suite would not be as required. Idiots attempting to defend MS Office say this without understanding how staff operate.

    Deaf Spy you are ignoring that this happens when user attempts to open old documents under MS Office 2013 and 2016. So now you have users demanding 2010 Office installed or you deploy Libreoffice and end up with users staying in Libreoffice or MS Office 2010. So now you have new documents coming out of 2 office suites and creating future trouble.

    Better suited approach is sometimes the cases but not always.

    Lets take doing a very large complex document Libreoffice has supported and working master documents. So for large complex documents libreoffice writer is more suited to it than MS Office Word yet a person could be using MS Office or not using Libreoffice effectively because they don’t trust Master documents because under MS Office master documents have been unstable and a way to lose your work. Instead of fixing master documents Microsoft has deprecated the feature.

    So claiming better suited approach all the time is basically saying Libreoffice does not have any unique functional features. The reality is Libreoffice does have unique functional features. So the method to solve a few document production processes is different because of Libreoffice features. There are quite a few cases where Libreoffice has the better suited approach to the long term maintenance of the document than what MS Office is.

    So you are over reaching and wrong. So the correct equals path users follow.

    “encountering a difficulty” == “Return to what method they knew” == “reverting to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”

    So the staff does not do the research to see if there is a better suite path or not without being forced because doing research to learn what the office suite in front of them can do costs them some time. This is why you have to remove the old office suite be it MS Office or Libreoffice Migration. This encountering difficulty problem effects users moving from MS Office 2010 to MS Office 2013/2016 just as much as MS Office 2010 to Libreoffice. Microsoft does alter interface stuff around between office versions.

    Office suites in business are no where near used in the best possible ways. Laziest hack up methods are used with no consistency from staff member to staff member.

    The reality of how Office suite are used disagrees totally with your statement. I know of businesses who put there staff through a 5 day training course every time they change versions of MS Office. Why it increases productivity and gets some consistency in methods used to produce documents. This is also why saying Libreoffice has a higher training cost does not fly because if you want users to use either Libreoffice or new version of MS Office to the best you will need to run training in fact the exact same amount of training.

    Training is a universal cost when ever you change office suites right? The answer is no if you don’t care about perfection and perfect productivity. This is part of the problem most businesses are not functioning at perfect productivity with MS Office so swapping to Libreoffice does not really alter much.

  11. Deaf Spy says:

    Sigh, I guess the haters will now complain that LO is too much like Excel…

    Rather pathetic, Robert. Relying on Fifi who pulls random pages from Wikipedia to support totally irrelevant claims… You can’t give any serious argument to support your own claim:
    “They[OO or LO] just work for people. It’s a GUI, silly.”

    Let’s better focus on the problem at hand:
    “encountering a difficulty” == “stop doing what you are doing and choose a better-suited approach.” == “reverting to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”

    They [OO and LO] obviously don’t. As proven by your own very source.

  12. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson those numbers look worse when MS Office has to open and process an ODS document. Microsoft office 2016 is 46 functions short from the 500 required to be sure to open an ODS document correctly and process the formulas. If it keeps on going this way it going to come 1/10 functions short very soon.

    Libreoffice has perfect ODF support and very good Legacy MS Office support. Few gaps with newer edition documents from MS Office mostly not with features people are using in large volumes.

    MS Office very poor ODF support. Questionable OOXML support particularly when it comes to legacy OOXML. Forget opening with 2016 legacy Office 95 documents. Fairly much any document over 5 years old with MS Office 2016 many not open and any document over 20 years old for sure will not open. Forget opening up old MS Office competitors documents any more as well with MS Office 2013 and newer because Microsoft removed the filters. Remember this complete list of stuff MS Office 2016 cannot open Libreoffice can open.

    You cannot have productivity if people cannot open the documents they need in the first place.

    I am not surprised by number of governments going Libreoffice particularly when you remember they have 50+ years of electronic documents they want to open at times. 5 years to unstable 20 years to impossible just does not meet government operating requirements. Even business most tax requirements is between 7 to 10 years and you would want document stability for that long.

    There are many places MS Office 2016 and 2013 are just pure wrong.

  13. oiaohm wrote, “21 functions that Excel use to include are missing from MS Office 2016 that Libreoffice has”.

    Sigh, I guess the haters will now complain that LO is too much like Excel…

  14. oiaohm says:

    https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Feature_Comparison:_LibreOffice_-_Microsoft_Office

    There is a point that shows a issue here.
    500 functions (25 functions unique to Calc) that gives a number of 475 that are not unique and are based off of what was in Excel at some point of history.
    468 functions (14 functions unique to Excel)
    So subtract 14. 454 Ok what the hell 21 functions that Excel use to include are missing from MS Office 2016 that Libreoffice has.

    So MS Office is missing more functions out Excel than what Libreoffice Calc is. This is when you start saying hey MS Office gives more more features and you are now straight up wrong. Libreoffice is weak in some areas but some areas its more feature complete than MS Office is.

    There are a lot more things like inserted picture formats old MS Office use to support that 2013 and 2016 don’t support of course Libreoffice supports those.

    I am not saying Libreoffice is perfect but Microsoft is serous-ally dropping the ball all over the place.

  15. oiaohm says:

    Deaf Spy “The City of Sydney (Australia)” if you look into this one you will find Libreoffice was not deployed for political reasons but compatibility reasons. Why they upgraded to MS Office 2013 then historic documents would not open and still do not open in MS Office 2016. Due to some of these being legal documents modification is not an option.

    I mean, at least you could have quoted his backup statistics. Not some nonsensical personal viewpoint article from a Linux Evangelist.
    Deaf Spy is only quoting a personal point of view and you are backing it DrLoser so where are your statistics. Basically if you are not providing statistics why should I.

    Deaf Spy you have no right to be asking for cites until you hand over the cites backing your 4 points. Or will you admit you made those up without evidence.

    So I have evidence to how Microsoft stuffed things big time with MS Office 2013 this has caused accelerated Libreoffice deployment due to the fact it opens OOXML documents MS Office 2013 and 2016 refuses to what does MS Office 2013 and 2016 call those documents corrupted when there is not a single bit different to what would have opened in 2010 and before .

    Its the screw up of MS Office 2013 that causes the following
    https://delimiter.com.au/2013/05/29/reversal-australian-govt-picks-odf-doc-standard/
    Yes Microsoft proved they could not maintain OOXML backwards compatibility so forcing Australian federal government to change from OOXML to ODF as government standard because at the time Libreoffice did not support OOXML well enough to cover for MS Office failure. If you look around 2013 a lot of governments that were supporting OOXML change to supporting ODF.

    Basically 2013 is a stuff up by Microsoft of a scale past a joke. This is now the sad reality if OOXML standard lives as a long term format of governments its now major depending on Libreoffice because Microsoft Office does not have its act together on backwards compatibility. Yes the stuff up has seen Libreoffice get serous funding for OOXML support.

    Exactly what is the point of having extra features if the next update deployed you find you cannot open documents and if security update comes after the update that broke the documents with MS Office you are truly left between rock and hardplace with only secure solution if Libreoffice opens the documents deploy Libreoffice.

    Compatibility issues is not giving companies and government departments an option to choose MS Office on it own in a lot of cases. Also out of all the office suites in existence the numbers with major OOXML implementation are very few the choice is between something MS Office and Libreoffice with the current on with the most complete implementations being Libreoffice.

    It had to happen at some point that Microsoft Office suite in compatibility is running number 2. Writing the standard and being number 2 in compatibility just shows pure incompetence or attempting to be a idiot breaking compatibility intentionally to force people to upgrade office suites while completely ignoring the fact you have a competitor implementing the same standard.

    Yes the idea that Libreoffice is not a threat that people keep on spreading was believed at Microsoft and its now dug them into a hole. If they don’t change point of view soon its going to be a hole they cannot get out of.

    The ballpark has changed a lot in the last 3 years and it will keep on changing in Libreoffice favour as long as Microsoft keeps on releasing Office suites with broken backwards compatibility and broken standards conformance.

    Yes it took political will before 2013 but after 2013 its not political will any more for the migrations to Libreoffice.

    Worst nightmare is if someone starts funding Libreoffice on mobile in a big way then Microsoft will not have that arguement.

    Microsoft at this stage could turn things around with Microsoft Office. But there will come a point where there will be no turning around.

  16. DrLoser says:

    There was not a cost different to using Libreoffice or MS Office in training back in 2014. Productivity and IT support issue had nothing todo with using the application.

    You’re citing Jack Wallen on this, Fifi? Jack Wallen?

    I mean, at least you could have quoted his backup statistics. Not some nonsensical personal viewpoint article from a Linux Evangelist.

    How’s the Saturday night lamp-post trade in Downtown Nowhere going these days, incidentally?

  17. DrLoser says:

    Not relevant to the argument that “encounters difficulty”≠”needs retraining”.

    Indeed not, Robert. But very relevant to your obvious lack of domain expertise in the area, which was the only point that Dougie was making with this sentence.

    If you care to read his following sentence, you will find a perfectly coherent argument which entirely demolishes your bizarre attitude to “encountering difficulties.” Your simplistic inequality does not hold. Quite often, and in particular in the case you cite (as Dougie was at pains to explain to you), “encountering a difficulty” == “stop doing what you are doing and choose a better-suited approach.”

    If you are a Municipality using LO to communicate with other governmental organisations … I would suggest that this is well worth bearing in mind.

  18. Deaf Spy says:

    Lots (SMEs) have switched and laughed all the way to the bank/accounting department.

    Citation, please?

    No, a piece of news of a municipality that switched for political reasons and users are grudging all day long at the office, “reverting to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”, doesn’t count.

  19. oiaohm says:

    1. Increased costs for IT support
    3. Increased costs due to reduced productivity
    4. Increased costs due to annoying users and further lowering productivity.

    To which I would add:

    5. Increased costs due to lack of seamless interoperability with other organizations.
    Drloser the 5 you added you don’t have seamless interoperability between organisations using MS Office to MS Office.

    http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/10-things/10-ways-to-help-users-move-from-microsoft-office-to-libreoffice/
    If you read all the documentation on doing a MS Office to MS Office or a MS Office to Libreoffice the training provide is exactly the same. IT support has been higher but that has traced to document compatibility not to users in fact using the program.

    There was not a cost different to using Libreoffice or MS Office in training back in 2014. Productivity and IT support issue had nothing todo with using the application.

    Something to remember Openoffice implemented ECMA-376 exactly to standard. MS Office refuses to open ECMA-376 exactly to standard so Libreoffice does ECMA-376 how MS Office expects. Even what ECMA-376 xs:schema xmlns:xs defined value results in MS Office not opening the document so ECMA-376 standard is broken at very basic levels.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_supports_Office_Open_XML

    Office suites that implement current and prior editions of ECMA-376 in a single edition is extremely limited. There is only one office suite that implements current and old editions of ECMA-376 in single version that is Libreoffice. So ECMA-376 mess is in fact grounds to install Libreoffice to have the most support for OOXML/ECMA-376 documents on a system with the least amount of work.

    DrLoser so what you asked for over ECMA-376 is current day reality.

    The reality is, you got away with a lot in the far north Robert Pogson. the reality is that your notion of just installing LO, deinstalling Office and leaving people who had to get work done to “figure it out” would have been a non starter almost anywhere else, and might even have gotten you fired if you persisted in your non support of your users.
    Wizard Emeritus if you read the different reports from end of 2015-2016 that exactly what is being done and it working. Before 2015 it did not work. So the difficulty of figuring out Libreoffice turns out not to be that high of a bar. The bar was document compatibility. Problem is 2015 the bar of document compatibility has moved in Libreoffice direction. Not only does Libreoffice have one of the best ODF compadiblity it now also has the best overall OOXML/ECMA-376 compatibility. Basically Microsoft has fumbled the ball being the one writing the OOXML standard it should have been an easy win but Microsoft stuffed it up.

    http://billbennett.co.nz/2016/08/06/review-libreoffice-5-2-solid-unpolished-alternative/
    Fairly much is reviews like this. The three most common applications of MS Office used in business Email client, Word/writer, Excel/calc. This is why swapping to Libreoffice is not exactly that harmful it is solid in the two key applications required these days.

    Zero costs of LO +
    (
    1. Increased costs for IT support.
    +
    2. Increased costs for training.
    +
    3. Increased costs due to reduced productivity.
    +
    4. Increased costs due to annoying users and further lowering productivity.
    )

    Deafspy it put up or shut up time on this. The reality is there is no 2015 study that support any of those points on Libreoffice current but there are many studies of MS Office 2013 and 2016 listing those exact problems.

    Remember less than 10 percent in business use anything other than email client, word-processor and spreadsheet. Today the person making a presentation is most likely to send it to other people as a PDF. So only very limited volumes of MS Office are required for features. This is why a lot of places are going with lets strip MS Office out less than 1/10 of staff are going to have any problem due to lack of features. There is the 2 6 2 rule what is 20 percent of staff of advance users 60 percent is advantage and 20 percent are poor. In fact when it comes to computers is a 1 6 3 rule so 10 percent advanced 60 percent average and 30 percent poorly skilled. The 30 percent poorly skilled is why any change is going to raise hell be it Libreoffice or a new version of MS Office.

  20. DrLoser wrote, “the result of that is that all three/four of these costs will continue to discourage any SME or similar organisation from switching”.

    Obviously, not. Lots have switched and laughed all the way to the bank/accounting department.

  21. dougman wrote, “pilots express wind speed in knots”.

    Not relevant to the argument that “encounters difficulty”≠”needs retraining”.

  22. DrLoser wrote, “if the organisation in question acquires said semi-competent monkey — the Windows boxen keep running”.

    That’s a big “if”. There were no installation media. The best anti-virus software we had would not keep the damned stuff out. There were no licences that I could find anywhere and not even proof of purchase…

    So, no magician without a ton of money could have fixed that. There was no magician and no money. I was it. A few teachers were putting PCs on planes to Winnipeg to repair at their own expense, about $400 just for freight and this was for XP a deprecated OS. GNU/Linux on the other hand just worked and worked day in and day out with few problems.

  23. DrLoser says:

    Are you getting stupid? If a pilot has difficulty landing in a 30 mph crosswind, is retraining necessary? No. People learn from their experiences and move on. “Has difficulty” ≠ “needs retraining”.

    Dougie is a little picky about the wind-speed thing (correct, but picky), though he’s absolutely correct about the thorough-going evidence-based testing that completely refutes your use of this nonsensical metaphor.

    Presumably, having decided that the Ace in this particular Hole is the cost of training, you are accepting the other three points made by Deaf Spy. Which are, I shall remind you:

    1. Increased costs for IT support
    3. Increased costs due to reduced productivity
    4. Increased costs due to annoying users and further lowering productivity.

    Definitely not zero. Are you sure you can do simple algebra?

    To which I would add:

    5. Increased costs due to lack of seamless interoperability with other organizations.

    I agree, we are not in the perfect world here. In the perfect world, everybody would have access to a reference standard quality implementation of ECMA-376. (The non MS-Blob-contaminated version, in case Kurks pops up with his usual whine.)

    But we are not. And until useless freeloaders like you get off your flossy little backsides and start coding up ECMA-376 into a suitable FLOSS container — we are not going to be.

    And the result of that is that all three/four of these costs will continue to discourage any SME or similar organisation from switching.

  24. DrLoser says:

    Running LO beats the Hell out of non-running PCs any day.

    Many things do, Robert. Many things do. Acquiring a semi-competent monkey to administer your Windows NT boxen is one of them, for example, although clearly not an easy thing to do for a school in Northern Manitoba.

    However, this is surely the most brittle possible reason you have yet come up with for preferring Open Office — oops, I’m sorry, that one is now over on the Dark Side too, isn’t it? — to MS Office.

    Because, see, if the organisation in question acquires said semi-competent monkey — the Windows boxen keep running. With or without Libre Office, I should point out. Funny how it’s almost always without.

  25. dougman says:

    “If a pilot has difficulty landing in a 30 mph crosswind, is retraining necessary? No.”

    LOL..pilots express wind speed in knots. DERP

    In fact, most light aircraft do not fly in such weather.

    Under FAR Part 25 aircraft are tested to a”demonstrated” maximum crosswind as part of their certification. In essence this is the highest crosswinds the aircraft flew in during testing.

    The manufacturers and the FAA are very careful with this rating. It means that the aircraft can conceivably operate in higher crosswinds, but there is no data to say how safe it is one way or the other.

  26. Wizard Emeritus wrote, “the reality is that your notion of just installing LO, deinstalling Office and leaving people who had to get work done to “figure it out” would have been a non starter almost anywhere elsethe reality is that your notion of just installing LO, deinstalling Office and leaving people who had to get work done to “figure it out” would have been a non starter almost anywhere else”

    The reality was M$ could not keep That Other OS running, let alone its office suite. Running LO beats the Hell out of non-running PCs any day. On my last job, I found half the PCs were not working at all and I could not keep TOOS running on them. OTOH GNU/Linux and LO were faster, more reliable and available on more seats. It was no contest. We did some side by side tests and GNU/Linux kicked butt. The only documents in the whole school that LO could not handle were written in RTF and were replaced by a little typing. Not one teacher complained about LO.

  27. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “but most users I’ve seen don’t use any of them. ”

    And therein lies the rub. From your own descriptions of where you worked and who you worked with it is safe to say your experience was of a very small niche of users with at best limited needs and sometimes even more limited means. At the same time it is also clear that you rarely if even had to deal with the kind of users who did not want their work disrupted by having to change their office suite and who had the clout to make sure that you could not just shove the likes of an inferior toolset like libre office down the throats of those who were fluent in using microsoft office to get their work done.

    The reality is, you got away with a lot in the far north Robert Pogson. the reality is that your notion of just installing LO, deinstalling Office and leaving people who had to get work done to “figure it out” would have been a non starter almost anywhere else, and might even have gotten you fired if you persisted in your non support of your users.

  28. Deaf Spy wrote, “Are you sure you can do simple algebra?”

    Yes, calculus and linear algebra too. Most of the costs of moving to LO are smaller than most expect and in my experience were zero. e.g. I put 500 users onto OpenOffice.org and only one, the vice-principal, needed his hand held. He needed his hand held even with That Other OS and its applications. There are some “high maintenance” users out there no matter what software is involved. There are a lot of tools of lock-in listed as features in TOOS and M$’s applications but most users I’ve seen don’t use any of them. They point, click and gawk, and LO suits them perfectly with no loss of productivity. The fact that it’s zero cost also means even an impoverished organization can afford a copy on each machine, actually raising productivity as some machines are inaccessible at certain times of the day according to schedules etc.

  29. Deaf Spy wrote, “are you getting senile?”

    Are you getting stupid? If a pilot has difficulty landing in a 30 mph crosswind, is retraining necessary? No. People learn from their experiences and move on. “Has difficulty” ≠ “needs retraining”.

  30. Deaf Spy says:

    Zero costs of LO +
    (
    1. Increased costs for IT support.
    +
    2. Increased costs for training.
    +
    3. Increased costs due to reduced productivity.
    +
    4. Increased costs due to annoying users and further lowering productivity.
    )

    Definitely not zero. Are you sure you can do simple algebra?

  31. Deaf Spy says:

    I’ve never had to retrain a user to use OO or LO. They just work for people. It’s a GUI, silly.

    versus
    “If a workstation had both, users would revert to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”

    Robert, are you getting senile?

  32. dougman wrote, “narcissistic”.

    You meant, “loving efficient IT”, no doubt. I did not create GNU/Linux so loving it is not narcissistic.

  33. dougman says:

    “Had, past tense, and attest, present tense, are in conflict. When Wintel was at its height, M$ and Intel did encourage folks to buy new/bigger/more expensive computers every few years by means of several inefficient practices. When I switched to GNU/Linux the need to update hardware frequently disappeared simply because the software no longer wasted resources of my system. X also helped as I could share the performance of one new machine over many older machines. Intel, of course, helped by making ever more powerful CPUs whether they were needed or not but M$ and its EULA did most of the damage to common sense.”

    ..and yet, with ALL that, my point still stands. You start off with Wintel, which is a unused term and then go off on some narcissistic tangent as if people care.

  34. dougman says:

    “4.12 in 2015 4.26 in 2016 4.33 in 2017 Notice something here. Its sneeking up at about 0.1 a year and it been doing that for a fair while. So 2024-2030 if trend remains the same it will hit 5 years from purchase.

    I think its actually closer to:

    3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749445923078164062862089986280348253421170679821480865132823066470938446095505822317253594081284811174502841027019385211055596446229489549303819644288109756659334461284756482337867831652712019091456485669234603486104543266482133936072602491412737245870066063155881748815209209628292540917153643678925903600113305305488204665213841469519415116094330572703657595919530921861173819326117931051185480744623799627495673518857527248912279381830119491298336733624406566430860213949463952247371907021798609437027705392171762931767523846748184676694051320005681271452635608277857713427577896091736371787214684409012249534301465495853710507922796892589235420199561121290219608640344181598136297747713099605187072113499999983729780499510597317328160963185950244594553469083026425223082533446850352619311881710100031378387528865875332083814206171776691473035982534904287554687311595628638823537875937519577818577805321712268066130019278766111959092164201989380952572010654858632788659361533818279682303019520353018529689957736225994138912497217752834791315155748572424541506959508295331168617278558890750983817546374649393192550604009277016711390098488240128583616035637076601047101819429555961989467678374494482553797747268471040475346462080466842590694912933136770289891521047521620569660240580381501935112533824300355876402474964732639141992726042699227967823547816360093417216412199245863150302861829745557067498385054945885869269956909272107975093029553211653449872027559602364806654991198818347977535663698074265425278625518184175746728909777727938000816470600161452491921732172147723501414419735685481613611573525521334757418494684385233239073941433345477624168625189835694855620992192221842725502542568876717904946016534668049886272327917860857843838279679766814541009538837863609506800642251252051173929848960841284886269456

  35. oiaohm says:

    DUH.. they get re-purposed and/or cannibalized. Often times or not, they goto the dump.
    Re-purposed requires an operating system. That is the problem with a Chromebook at 5 years old lot more work to Re-purpose than some other items. 4.33 number I quoted is from time of purchase. Not time the production was manufactured.

    So the number I quoted at 4.33 when you add in how old a device is before it gets to shelf where person can by it is on the wrong side of 5 years operational life dougman. There is on average a 8 month delay between a new chrome-book release and it being commonly acquirable in shops. So really Chromebooks OS support cycle being 5 years is short. Need to be at-least 6 years.

    4.12 in 2015 4.26 in 2016 4.33 in 2017 Notice something here. Its sneeking up at about 0.1 a year and it been doing that for a fair while. So 2024-2030 if trend remains the same it will hit 5 years from purchase.

    So people are keeping their computers for longer and longer.

    This is the problem so a chromebook you buy today in 4 years time could be expected to have a 4.7 year lifespan so it better not be more than 3 months from date of release to have enough OS support for forecast lifespan requirement.

  36. Deaf Spy wrote, “the costs of MSO for businesses are $8,25 per month per user”.

    The cost of LO for businesses are $0 per month per user. Kaching! I’ve never had to retrain a user to use OO or LO. They just work for people. It’s a GUI, silly.

  37. dougman wrote, “I had my own computer business, and I can attest to that 3-5 years is the NORM”.

    Had, past tense, and attest, present tense, are in conflict. When Wintel was at its height, M$ and Intel did encourage folks to buy new/bigger/more expensive computers every few years by means of several inefficient practices. When I switched to GNU/Linux the need to update hardware frequently disappeared simply because the software no longer wasted resources of my system. X also helped as I could share the performance of one new machine over many older machines. Intel, of course, helped by making ever more powerful CPUs whether they were needed or not but M$ and its EULA did most of the damage to common sense.

  38. dougman says:

    “True USA stats is 4.33 Years old.”

    Just confirmed what I have obviously stated earlier. DERP

    “People don’t have the computers crushed when they get 5 years old. ”

    DUH.. they get re-purposed and/or cannibalized. Often times or not, they goto the dump.

  39. oiaohm says:

    The average life expectancy of any computer is 3-5 years anyways.
    dougman
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/267465/average-desktop-pc-lifespan/
    True USA stats is 4.33 Years old. Remember that is from time of purchase and a PC model is sold for at least 12 months before being replaced. This means you really need 5.33 years of support to cover the average. Chromebooks are 1/3 of a year short to cover the average case. This is where the 5 year support idea is wrong. Statistics say you need 6 year really min.

    8-10 years? Are you serious?? LMAO!..YOU many be keeping computers for that long, but you are failing to realize that I had my own computer business, and I can attest to that 3-5 years is the NORM.
    People don’t have the computers crushed when they get 5 years old. The norm is close to 55 percent keeping computers longer than 5 years from first product release. If you go from product release dates and people keeping them you would say 3-7 years. People do buy 2 year old models of stuff because it discounted.

    Chromebook is not like a machine you build and it purchased then has 3-5 years before it given away to someone else to use. Chromebook 5 year support starts ticking from the day the Chromebook is first released. So person buy a 2 year old version keeps it for the average 4.33 years they are little short on support. The 5 year number has been wrong for quite a while. Reality you need 7.5 years of OS support to cover the average person most of the time. Remember the average person sees dollar signs and does not think of year of product release and how the reason why a 2 year old new chrome-book is cheaper is that is has 2 years less support.

    https://www.collaboraoffice.com/community-news/android-editor-prototype/
    Deaf Spy you need to correct a statement.
    This fee includes Exchange, 1TB cloud storage and SharePoint in addition to licenses for all desktop and mobile products. The latter simply don’t exist in the LO world.
    Mobile products for Libreoffice do exist just not production ready so saying don’t exist is wrong. Being on mobile devices may or may not be a wanted feature.

    Uk Government paid Collabora to make Libreoffice online work ahead of doing mobile because being able to run Office suite on private server was more important than being able to run Office suite on Mobile device.

    Deaf Spy I can list a few productive advantages. Libreoffice online allows you to run Libreoffice integrated into a private servers so that everyone working on a document is 1 using the same thing 2 you have version update control. One of the down sides of operating in Microsoft cloud is if you have documents that hit a version bug you are kinda stuck unable to provide on-line editing to them any more. Not true with Libreoffice on private servers were you do in fact have version control.

    http://www.cio.com/article/2940418/open-source-development/can-libreoffice-successfully-compete-with-microsoft-office.html
    These are good read with old versions of Libreoffice to current day in 2015. There have not been the productivity advantages being found when people go attempting to use them.

    $12.50/$8.25 per user per month does not sound bad until you start running numbers and considering other hosting of services.

    AWS Marketplace for Desktop Apps is without the plus pack is $5 per user per month and that includes Libreoffice. So Microsoft offerings are not in the cheep end of the scale. Now if you are wanting to run AWS solutions instead of Microsoft for some reason and use MS Office it $15 extra a month above the $5 a month for the default pack that includes Libreoffice. So $20 a month per user instead of $5 a month per user.

    Now you might be wondering why you would want Office suite on AWS you are wanting to use custom business only extensions in cloud provided service. So version control and extensions you will be looking outside Microsoft. Then when you are outside Microsoft paying $15 extra per month to have MS Office becomes questionable. Does MS Office really give $15 of extra productivity per month compared to users with Libreoffice none of the current compares says it does. Also remember the AWS charge you have to add on the Microsoft per month changes as well if you are wanting local instances as well. At this point MS Office starts not looking as cheep.

    So MS Office is $8.25 to about $30 dollars per user per month depending on configuration/hosting. Libreoffice is from $0 to $10 per user per month depending on configuration/hosting. Next something goes wrong in business and you cannot pay your monthly fees. Nightmares do happen in business at times Libreoffice $0 option does allow you to get going as long as you do have your backups.

    There are many cases where businesses can find themselves having a hard time paying bills not by their own actions.

    single productivity advantage of LO over MSO.
    Most important productive advantage with LO is if the worst happens to a business that is a court order freezing accounts the business still has a office suite they can legally use. Zero cost OS and Zero cost Office suite is really a required feature if you end up on the wrong side of many things in legal system. Does it matter what features MSO offers if due to legal actions you cannot pay the bills to use them. Winning a court case not having your staff skilled with the Office suite they will be forced to use in that case has undermined your chances of winning so increasing the odds business will no longer exist.

    One of the biggest things with businesses using cloud services a lot of businesses don’t consider is how screwed they will be if someone gets a court case against them freezing bank accounts when the bills are due and having to legally fight to pay every bill. Legally fighting to get bills paid having access to your documents is important.

    Zero cost location is a very important productivity feature to keep businesses alive if legal worst happens. Also when your are being in a court case and you are being watched illegally acquiring software is not a sane move either. Yes the other side will be looking for anything to make your location worse.

    The old legal one was in discovery bury your staff in documents as worse nightmare. Current legal worst nightmare is bury your staff in documents and take away by restricting bank accounts the software your staff is use to if possible to decrease your staff ability to find the smoking gun in the documents. Yes so they are in the wrong yet you lose because you did not have a zero cost position that your staff was use to. Old sayings “All fair in love and war” and “Business is War”.

  40. dougman says:

    “Nope. Folks are selling just ~300 million legacy PCs per annum on an installed base of ~1500 million PCs. So, the average replacement period is 5 years. That means lots are lasting 8-10 years. A not-so-grand daughter just removed the keycaps from a notebook that is 8 years old. I doubt it will be replaced with another notebook when Odroid-C2 is <$100."

    8-10 years? Are you serious?? LMAO!..YOU many be keeping computers for that long, but you are failing to realize that I had my own computer business, and I can attest to that 3-5 years is the NORM.

    When a hard-drive goes, the majority of people just buy another computer, instead of replacing the drive. Same with businesses mostly, they just want the data off and moved to a new machine.

  41. Deaf Spy says:

    Sorry, the services I described cost $12.50. Still less than the monthly costs for water and coffee per user.

    For 8.25, you get all MSO, but without Exchange.

  42. Deaf Spy says:

    Thank you, Robert, for proving you can’t tell even a single productivity advantage of LO over MSO.

    You’re your worst enemy, Robert. 🙂

    Btw, the costs of MSO for businesses are $8,25 per month per user. This fee includes Exchange, 1TB cloud storage and SharePoint in addition to licenses for all desktop and mobile products. The latter simply don’t exist in the LO world.

    I can tell you, any business will gladly pay $8,25 per user per month, less than the costs for water and coffee, to have users productive, and happy, and avoid costs for training.

  43. Deaf Spy wrote, “someone who has never deployed anything but a single classroom”.
    Chuckle. I’ve deployed hundreds of desktops in a dozen schools.

    Deaf Spy also wrote, “please explain what great benefits to end users does LO have over MSO”.

    Cost does matter. Further, M$ offers no great advantage over LO. LO works for people.

  44. Deaf Spy says:

    users could also ask for help or give it a little thought or do some trial-and-error.

    This, Robert, in real world, translates to:
    1. Increased costs for IT support.
    2. Increased costs for training.
    3. Increased costs due to reduced productivity.
    4. Increased costs due to annoying users and further lowering productivity.

    As someone who has a rather large experience in deploying software solutions at SMEs to someone who has never deployed anything but a single classroom, I can tell you. Users hate change, unless it comes with great benefits, unavailable before.

    Now, please, please, please explain what great benefits to end users does LO have over MSO. No, being open and free, doesn’t count. Productivity, Robert, productivity. Name at least three features in LO that MSO lack and that will directly increase users’ productivity.

  45. Deaf Spy says:

    Odroid-C2 + storage + WiFi + display + keyboard + mouse > low-end notebook

  46. dougman wrote, “The average life expectancy of any computer is 3-5 years anyways.”

    Nope. Folks are selling just ~300 million legacy PCs per annum on an installed base of ~1500 million PCs. So, the average replacement period is 5 years. That means lots are lasting 8-10 years. A not-so-grand daughter just removed the keycaps from a notebook that is 8 years old. I doubt it will be replaced with another notebook when Odroid-C2 is <$100.

  47. dougman says:

    “Chromebooks have a 5 year life as a Chromebook enforced by the end of life policy.”

    So?

    The average life expectancy of any computer is 3-5 years anyways.

  48. oiaohm says:

    dougman that is the thing.
    https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/6220366?hl=en
    Do read chromebooks end of life policy. Then rethink what you typed.

    The issue with web browser not being up-datable and not working with web sites already happens to the first editions of Chromebooks. Chromebooks have a 5 year life as a Chromebook enforced by the end of life policy. If you want to run them longer than that is unlocking the system and installing third party Linux on them. Some ways it simpler to start with Debian/Ubuntu.

    Funny that most general Debian GNU/Linux installs update fine for over 10 years.

    Chromebooks save you on one hand and cost you on the other.

    “If a workstation had both, users would revert to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”
    Deafspy. This is normal human behaviour. And this is not the most scary behaviour or the most problematic.
    https://support.microsoft.com/en-au/kb/2770432
    and
    https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Install-and-use-different-versions-of-Office-on-the-same-PC-6ebb44ce-18a3-43f9-a187-b78c513788bf
    So when you do it in MS Office to MS Office not only can you end up in the case where you cannot install the old and new version side by side you also end up in the case were due to different software and other things using MS Office. Yes most people don’t know there are multi versions of MS Office 2013 and 2016 that link to what patches are applied. Yes you cannot custom remove a single patch in MS Office 2013 and new only stop it from updating at a particular version.

    Most people are not aware that you cannot install MS Office 2013 and 2016 on a system at the same time using a Microsoft approved install method.

    Now lets look at Libreoffice in the same pit of hell.
    https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Installing_in_parallel

    Is the process to install multi versions of Libreoffice fairly complex yes. Can you do it with what every combination of Libreoffice you need again yes.

    Yes you can have Libreoffice custom built with a single patch causing a issue removed yet keep on building with all new security updates. It is painful building from source to have this but at least Libreoffice still has the option. MS Office 2010 and before Microsoft was in a way better position. MS Office 2013 and latter Microsoft has killed off a lot of key system administration features.

    So MS Office users migrating from 2013 to 2016 don’t get the choice to revert to prior version. So yes you have 2013 you are migrating to libreoffice you can provide user with access to both applications and have some trouble with users not migrating because of it. Yet 2013 to 2016 you cannot put MS Office versions side by side with each other effectively leading to worse problems.

  49. dougman says:

    “TLW does not differentiate between an application on the web and an application on her desktop or our server.”

    Perfect user for a Chromebook.

  50. Deaf Spy thought it was important to remind us, “users would revert to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”.

    Of course, if the old tool weren’t there, users could also ask for help or give it a little thought or do some trial-and-error. Problem solved. About half the time TLW asks me for help, the problem is solved by the time I reach her keyboard. I’ve changed her user interface a few times in the change to ARM because the software is not as mature. The last issue she had turned out to be with the GMail application/site, not the desktop at all. Even for me, GMail is a pain as it keeps complaining I’m using an old version of FireFox even though I’m using the latest version…
    “This version of Firefox is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser. Dismiss”
    TLW does not differentiate between an application on the web and an application on her desktop or our server. All that matters is that it doesn’t work the way she wants. I imagine she’d be pulling her hair out if she had to use M$’s “Our Way or the Highway” approach.

  51. Deaf Spy says:

    Reminder:
    “If a workstation had both, users would revert to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”

  52. oiaohm says:

    Pikolo you missed an including any of the interesting.
    https://github.com/sabotage-linux/sabotage
    Sabotage Linux GTK3/Xorg/Musl-busybox/Linux/LXDE/Butch.
    So a GNU less distributions do exist not very common other than Android but they do exist.

    Also https://www.debian.org/ports/ this is why Debian users use GNU/Linux.

    There is Debian GNU/Linux and Debian GNU/Hurd and Debian GNU/Freebsd as port titles. Ubuntu easy because Ubuntu is only for something Linux. Debian rules don’t say that a Debian thing has to contain a Linux kernel or that it even has to include glibc. GNU by debian is referencing the Libc in usage that the environment was built on. Of course this is the theory if an application/library only depends on the libc it will build not matter the kernel under it.

    So for a user downloading something Debian and if they are wanting general Linux downloading GNU/Linux is the right one. Could there be a Debian Musl/Linux some point in future by debian rules yes. Why does it not exist now is that no one has invested resources to create a debian port based around Musl instead of GNU.

    They have blocks, most of which can be substituted.
    Debian and other show that really all the blocks can be substituted making up an Unix Like open source operating system. Just some blocks are more feature complete and stable than using the alternative blocks.

  53. ram says:

    The City of Sydney (Australia) also uses LibreOffice.

  54. Pikolo says:

    Ubuntu 16.04 Gtk3/Xorg/GNU/Linux/Unity/deb
    Debian 8 Gtk3/Xorg/GNU/Linux/XFCE/deb
    Fedora 25 Gtk3/Wayland/GNU/Linux/Gnome3/rpm
    openSuse 14.2 Qt5/Xorg/GNU/Linux/KDE5/rpm
    Windows 10 AU ?/?/?/NT10.0.14393.222/Modern/exe
    Windows10 ?/?/?/NT10.0/Modern/exe
    Windows 8.1 ?/?/?/NT 6.4/Metro/exe
    Windows Vista ?/?/?/NT6.0/Aero/exe
    macOS 10.12 Sierra ?/?/?/XNU16.2.0/?/bundle

    Sure you can, and if you deal with software, should, pick it apart, but for the average user it’s largely irrelevant.
    Some people are overwhelmed by choice, at first. In most distributions, you just choose the desktop environment. And I’ve heard quite a few people wanting to use Windows 7 interface on Windows 8, or being used to OSX menus integrating with the top bar, so that isn’t a downside.

    Linux distributions are like lego structures. They have blocks, most of which can be substituted. But they form a consistent structure from day 1

  55. oiaohm says:

    And why be so paranoid when only 25% of users report significant difficulties?
    DrLoser change MS Office version like from MS Office 2010 to MS Office 2013 and you will also have between 20-30% report significant difficulties. I know the number seams high but is about normal by all the statistics collected to calculation cost of migrations.

    If you are able to install 2 copies of MS Office next to each other you have the same problem of users going back to the old version when ever they cannot find something that is now in a different place.

    True, Robert. The only way to have users use LO is to shove it down their throats, by force.
    So no Deaf Spy. The only way to effectively change Office Suite versions is shove it down their throats and it does not matter if its MS Office to MS Office or Microsoft to Libreoffice or Libreoffice to MS Office.

    Indeed. Why offer the users a way back?
    DrLoser it use to be required. Libreoffices document compatibility is to the point that Libreoffice more likely to open the document correctly than MS Office is. In the past it was required because Libreoffice/OpenOffice import was not where near as good as it is now. So installing Libreoffice and MS Office side by side was about compatibility not about user being able to retreat to MS Office.

    Now Libreoffice is to this point MS Office market share is in serous threat as it now can be force installed like MS Office to MS Office.

  56. dougman says:

    “In the old days people walked or floated.”

    Illegal immigrants do that now, along with stowing away on vehicles.

  57. DrLoser says:

    The experiments taught the IT department that when installing LibreOffice, the proprietary predecessor should be removed. “If a workstation had both, users would revert to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”, he says.

    In Nantes, 75 percent of the users switched without reporting significant difficulties.

    Indeed. Why offer the users a way back?

    And why be so paranoid when only 25% of users report significant difficulties?

    Le Sigh.

  58. dougman wrote, “that could be said of EVERY SINGLE NATION ON THE PLANET”.

    Nope. You can’t compare migrations over millenia with migrations over a few hundred years. Also, the world is global now. Folks can make the move from the farthest corner of Earth in a few hours, after a couple of years of red tape. In the old days people walked or floated.

    What’s your point?

  59. dougman says:

    “Nonsense. Canada is a nation of immigrants.”

    Come now, that is cliché!… and is untrue…Why? Because fully 79% of you Canadians were born in Canada. DERP

    Ah yes, you say. But if we were born here, our parents, our grandparents or even our great-grandparents were not. “So we are all immigrants”. Well, that could be said of EVERY SINGLE NATION ON THE PLANET because ultimately all of humanity issued out of the Olduvai Gorge.

    We are all then “Africans”. So what is your point?

  60. dougman wrote, “I see what troubles you”.

    “The new levels will seek to offset projected demographic challenges in Canada, including an aging population and growing labour gaps. In 2016, the target was to permit 300,000 newcomers to the country.”

    Nonsense. Canada is a nation of immigrants. They keep the nation young and vigorous. We need to boost immigration just to maintain our population.

  61. dougman says:

    I see what troubles you, “http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-immigration-levels-2016-1.3825548”

  62. dougman wrote, “Whats wrong?”

    You need an OS to do those things. Linux is just a kernel. It can’t do much without a lot of support.

  63. dougman says:

    “Ho Hum. Another City Switches To LibreOffice…Linux doesn’t work for me. Can’t start a process. Can’t open an application.”

    Whats wrong?

  64. dougman wrote, “Just simply use Linux”.

    Linux doesn’t work for me. Can’t start a process. Can’t open an application. etc. The concept of GNU is what made the OS. Linux was just the last piece of the puzzle.

  65. dougman says:

    “GNU/Linux works for us”

    I have always thought the insistence upon “GNU/Linux” to be a manifestation of Richard Stallman’s odd personality. If we’re basing the name upon the number of lines of code making up the major parts of the distribution, you’d have to call Ubuntu something like “Ubuntu Gtk/Xorg/GNU/Linux/Unity.”

    Just simply use Linux.

  66. dougman wrote, “the only way TLW would be using Linux is from Robert’s insistence”.

    Nope. My son is also quite conversant with GNU/Linux and not at all interested in supporting TOOS. He set up a couple of GNU/Linux machines for her while I was in the north. GNU/Linux works for us.

  67. dougman wrote, “Fifteen years ago, OO was a horrible product!”

    It was not nearly as good as LibreOffice is now but Version 1 worked for me. It would crash every now and then but it did not lose any of my files. I think by version 2 crashing was done and it was solid.

  68. dougman says:

    “I knew that 15 years ago when OpenOffice.org came out with version 1.0.”

    Fifteen years ago, OO was a horrible product! Each year I would download and try it, and instantly delete when trying to replicate my work. Not until ~2010 and the split by LO, did things become productive.

  69. dougman says:

    I dare say, the only way TLW would be using Linux is from Robert’s insistence.

  70. Deaf Spy says:

    “If a workstation had both, users would revert to the old tool whenever they had a difficulty”…

    Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!

    True, Robert. The only way to have users use LO is to shove it down their throats, by force.

    That is why it works only for state administrations, where solutions are made by politicians and freetards. Free-market entities, where money talks and management pursues economics-efficient decisions, just pay to use the best tools they can get for their money.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *