10 ms·

I'll believe Microsoft loves Linux when I can install Microsoft Office in my desktop Linux machine. Everything else is marketing. Edit: to expand, the corporat

• growse 7y ago
  This seems oddly specific and arbitrary. What if the engineering effort in porting it over is not economically viable?
  • Macha 7y ago
    Given the direction they're going with the web versions of Office 365, it's entirely possible that the future involves them deciding porting stuff to the Windows version is not economically viable and relegate the native apps to legacy support like IE.
    • akeck 7y ago
      I've been 100% Office 365 web apps on Linux Chromium since around February. So far, I haven't hit a situation that has required spinning up my Windows 10 VM.
      • cbcoutinho 7y ago
        What do you do when you want to edit a document or compose an email offline?
        • skinnymuch 7y ago
          I am guessing Office 365 has some sort of offline capabilities. Maybe not? For the email, can’t you write it anywhere? Difference is it’s not officially a draft in an email client.
          • nolok 7y ago
            Office 365 allows you to install the latest version of word excel ... too in addition to their web versions. It’s actually the superior part of the offering, even though Hm tends to focus on the web part (why superior ? Automatic upgrade to latest so no mismatch of versions inside your company, no expensive acquisition cost merely add less than ten euro a month to add a new user, disable the next month if it didn't work out). The installer fails on wine last time I checked, but porting an installation from windows works fine, and the account and license connection is fine too.
            • mavhc 7y ago
              Office 365 is 700 things all with the same name. Office 365 web apps (free), Office 365 the monthly updating desktop Windows version of MSOffice (not free)
          • pletnes 7y ago
            Outlook webmail works fine offline. You need to enable some setting though.
        • akeck 7y ago
          I don't know. I'm in a US coastal megalopolis covered in cell data towers, so I haven't encountered that issue yet. I'm sure it will happen at some point, but I think the web apps have offline capability.
    • unparagoned 7y ago
      That's actually kind of happened. One note program is no longer part of Microsoft office anymore. Instead you are suppose to use the onenote app. It's a hassle but you can install the old program and it's still much better than the app
• nightfly 7y ago
  It's more likely that Microsoft Office will become 100% "cloud" based software.
  • dreamcompiler 7y ago
    That's never going to happen. The US government is a huge Microsoft Office customer, and national security-sensitive documents cannot be placed in a cloud that's not completely controlled by the government.
    • a012 7y ago
      Sounds like they'd build a Gov-Office365 cloud if there's a deal just like AWS Govcloud.
      • jackvalentine 7y ago
        They already do that - https://www.itnews.com.au/news/dta-becomes-microsofts-first-protected-aussie-govt-cloud-user-500673 https://www.itnews.com.au/news/dta-becomes-microsofts-first-...
    • Spooky23 7y ago
      There’s already a US Government Community Cloud for moderate risk (.com) and a US GovCloid for higher risk (.us) workloads. As with all things multicloud and Microsoft, it’s easy to get into trouble in the community cloud.
    • kbumsik 7y ago
      Have you heard of AWG Gov tier?
• merb 7y ago
  OT: I only need Outlook or at least a decent Groupware Client for EWS (EWS for Outlook Online Sync/the customer version)/office365. That does not have sync issues, etc. Bonus: if it can sync Contacts with Linphone. And I would pay for it after a 10days testing period. electron version is ok, but not preferred.
• bdcravens 7y ago
  Pretty sure porting SQL Server to Linux was more than marketing.
  • bluedino 7y ago
    Run SQL server on more cloud providers that way
    • bdcravens 7y ago
      Of course. Similarly, Linux is run more than Windows on Azure.
      • msftlvslicnsing 7y ago
        This also means the majority of OSes operating on a Microsoft proprietary cloud arch are based around a kernel whose governance is becoming increasingly influenced by - you guessed it - Microsoft.
    • jaboutboul 7y ago
      Okay but this is the future of our industry. Are they just supposed to roll over or die? Shouldn’t we appreciate that after decades of bad blood they’ve decided to now wise up? Shouldn’t we give the benefit of the doubt? Companies have to face it. Community-which was once considered auxiliary bullshit that needed lip service—has now become the de-facto requirement for how to engage users and customers in a technology business. Now that we see them doing it we want to criticize them?
      • msftlvslicnsing 7y ago
        Companies are not people. They are not owed any second chances, olive branches, benefits of doubt. Nothing is stopping any of MSFT's OSS-Forward ideas from being brought up by capable people in other contexts. > Community-which was once considered auxiliary bullshit that needed lip service—has now become the de-facto requirement for how to engage users and customers in a technology business. I don't know what you're referring to; I don't see any difference in community engagement in the industry on the whole compared to 10 years ago.
• dekhn 7y ago
  they ported SQL Server but I doubt they would ever port Office. It would make more sense to use your browser to access online Office.
• mips_avatar 7y ago
  You could use office 365 on your linux machine.
  • chme 7y ago
    Offering a cloud service to a linux user is like tempting a vegetarian with meat. Linux users often choose Linux because they want to be in control of their data and devices, cloud services are about giving control of that away to companies.
    • ses1984 7y ago
      I think a significant number of Linux users don't care about this.
      • chme 7y ago
        That depends. If they are a Linux user because Linux runs on their server, router, mobile phone or what not. Then you are probably right. People that go through the trouble of installing Linux on a Desktop Machine, where Windows or MacOS was probably pre-installed, will either dual boot or use Linux exclusively. If they dual-boot, they will probably just use Office on the non-Linux System and not care. But if they use Linux exclusively they will very probably care about the freedom and control Linux brings.
        • ses1984 7y ago
          I still disagree. I used Linux almost exclusively because it made my job easier and I don't like switching between operating systems, and I use cloud services like Gmail and Dropbox. I also use the free version of onenote from ms. I just use whatever is convenient. Then I switched jobs, they gave me a new MacBook that doesn't run Linux so I use osx. Ten years ago I cared about privacy, now I feel like that ship has sailed. My own privacy is not that important. The privacy of my fellow citizens is gone. I mourn it kind of, but you can't close Pandora's box.
        • umanwizard 7y ago
• throwaway_391 7y ago
  I would recommend against using Office 365 web ui for word/excel etc, I'd also recommend avoiding the MacOS Office build for the same reason: They're both buggy as hell, the type of bugs that will make your document render in unintended ways when somebody opens it on the other side. At some point, Word for Mac decided to remove whitespace between words on my resume - I couldn't see them and generally exported to PDF, but I didn't hear back from prospective jobs that asked for a word format specifically. Office 365 Web and desktop application really need a complete revamp, they have reproducible bugs and horrible UI/UX in edge cases. I also really hate when Microsoft decides I want to store my sensitive data on their cloud for no apparent reason despite saving to local disk, it really seems like a 'whoops we accidentally did this but you should try it!' kind of move from MS. This is the perfect example of a monolithic application with chronic feature creep.
  • viraptor 7y ago
    > I'd also recommend avoiding the MacOS Office build for the same reason I never understood why they made it a effectively a different product. (Once you go past the trivial interaction) Different features, different behaviours, different problems. Why is excel for Mac not the same engine with a different UI?
    • throwaway_391 7y ago
      Probably likely to do with the toolkit used to build the Windows version and inability or unwillingness to port it to Mac. They really need to start from scratch and build solid, easily testable product because the current methodology doesn't work. I especially love the bugs where when in one specific track changes mode typing in the comments section drops keys, or when using 'read aloud' the voice randomly changes gender. Office 365 on a Windows 10 LTSC virtualised host w/ no other software.
      • dtech 7y ago
        > They really need to start from scratch and build solid, easily testable product because the current methodology doesn't work. Isn't that exactly what you're trying to do with the web version
• stevenjohns 7y ago
  I would settle for just Skype for Business on Linux. No excuses why it shouldn't be on there... and yet it isn't.
  • xxs 7y ago
    Skype for Business has been replaced by teams which is not much better and pretty much still an awful chat application.
    • senectus1 7y ago
      only for the cloud version. S4B server edition is still in active dev
    • userbinator 7y ago
      Teams is worse in that it appears to actually be Electron instead of the semi-native (I don't think it's pure Win32, judging by the UI latency and appearance) Skype for Business.
    • antisemiotic 7y ago
      Being awful is Skype's killer feature. You can't carpet-bomb with pings, you can't comfortably copy and paste code or logs into it, half of devs who use linux don't bother running it on a VM and instead use flaky third-party clients, it eats messages randomly, so long story short - people generally avoid it except for trivial shit. And on the odd day when they don't, I get a copy on Outlook anyway. I've read some horror stories about Slack, and I shudder to think what would happen if my company moved to it.
• tw04 7y ago
  Given that Microsoft is a for-profit company, what's the financial justification for writing office for Linux on desktop? The market share isn't even a rounding error and you're talking about them investing tens of millions minimum into the development. The fact they have office on Android, iOS, and osx proves it's about market share and common sense, not some fabricated hatred or fear of Linux on the desktop.
  • veridies 7y ago
    They don't have a mobile OS anymore. Apple is hardware-limited; there's a much larger buy-in required if you wanted to switch from Windows to MacOS than to Linux. And companies could save a LOT of money on computers if all they needed for software was Office and that were available on Linux.
    • riffraff 7y ago
      yeah but the money they'd save is money that would go to microsoft through windows licenses and support, why would they want to lose that?
  • pizza234 7y ago
    > what's the financial justification for writing office for Linux on desktop? Well, the same argument could be applied to their open source contributions. Considering that [canonical corporate view is that] patented ideas are expensive to produce, and that exFAT is patented, what's the financial justication for open sourcing it (the specs or else)? The argument is ultimately against "Windows love Linux". The thesis of the parent is just that they're doing unsubstantial moves (or worse, manipulative ones), and that if they "truly loved Linux", they would do something substantial, which, for the corporate world, is to support Office on Linux.
    • close04 7y ago
      This argument can very easily be used against people who claim they love Linux and FOSS but they never really seem to be willing to part with the same amount of money other people are willing to give MS. Donating $300 for every copy of Libre Office you use would go a long way to making MS Office on Linux completely unneeded. Same goes for donating similar amounts for every Linux you install. I guess everyone's love has limits and it's usually money. As for MS's contribution to open source you have to consider the difference in magnitude between the revenue that Office generates and the revenue that their other open source contributions do (would?). Then consider also the development effort involved. It looks like OP just wants exactly what MS doesn't offer completely disregarding the alternatives, and I'm pretty sure they would not be willing to pay the markup for the extra development involved.
• dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago
  > I'll believe Microsoft loves Linux when I can install Microsoft Office in my desktop Linux machine. I'll believe Microsoft loves Linux when I can install Windows after Linux and it doesn't mess up the bootloader as if it were the only game in town.
• decoyworker 7y ago
  Maybe they don't want to deal with how shitty a graphical desktop environment is on Linux. I've largely given up on Linux with the exception of the terminal because of this. There are just too many graphical quirks and glitches. I know that Linux is merely a kernel but I wonder how things would have played out if the kernel contained some form of graphical environment. There are so many competing environments that you have massive choice but also nothing that really works well either.
• jaakl 7y ago
  I'm not sure that "desktop Linux machine" is really a thing. I hate to feel that Linux has won servers and IoT, maybe mobile, but clearly lost desktop. Desktop is a dying thing by itself, so not bad after all.