5 ms·
> Why wouldn't most companies try to get employees to use Libre Office instead of MS Office? Shouldn't it be sufficient for most people? Licensing costs are on
by hackuser 12y ago
> Why wouldn't most companies try to get employees to use Libre Office instead of MS Office? Shouldn't it be sufficient for most people?
Licensing costs are only a small fraction overall cost:
* Training and lost productivity as users learn the new software. It may seem simple to you, but many end users are easily confused by interface changes. Also, there is a serious learning curve for users doing complex tasks (e.g., complex spreadsheets; long, complex documents, etc.)
* IT labor costs: Configuration, deployment, administration and support; doing it on 1,000 or 10,000 or 100,000 desktops, local, remote, and at home, is expensive and challenging. Is LibreOffice fully integrated with Active Directory? With whatever deployment and patch mechanisms you use (think about that, how do you patch 10,000 desktops? Consider that an error could effectively shut down your entire company)? How available are support, labor and tools? How available are IT professionals with expertise in these areas (i.e., who will you hire? What happens to your existing staff)? Users tend to think of these things as peripheral, but they are the largest items on the IT budget. Microsoft Office passes meets all these needs with flying colors.
* Integration with other systems: Every other application and system is designed and supported for integration with and Microsoft Office. Every vendor has staff experienced in this integration.
* Data integrity: What happens when the total in the Excel spreadsheet is wrong because the formula didn't convert properly? Employees would have to check for formatting and other errors in every important file where data integrity matters. Consider that, because most people in business use Microsoft Office, many documents will be converted back and forth frequently. That means employees have to deal with these issues repeatedly, verifying conversion will be accurate before sending the presentation to the client; verifying the spreadsheets' values and formulas, in case someone on the other end decides to change some numbers; fixing these problems ... and explaining constantly to everyone outside the organization why you have these continual problems.
Much as I support FOSS, LibreOffice isn't a consideration for many businesses.
- jenscow 12y agoI don't disagree. But most of it boils down to MS Office was there first (and made by the same company as the OS). Each of your bullet points assumes a migration from Office to LO, and that there isn't already an infrastructure that supports it.
- scholia 12y agoNot really first. Lotus 1-2-3 and WordPerfect were already entrenched in businesses, and there were rival office systems for Windows from IBM and Novell. Microsoft Office won by being better and cheaper, but it took a very long time to displace 1-2-3 in particular. hackuser's points about the cost of labor and the enormous potential cost of mistakes are very well made. If you are paying knowledge workers $50,000 to $150,000 a year, then saving pennies on the cost of Office is not a smart move. When mistakes can cost your company a lot more than that, even more so....
- jenscow 12y ago> Not really first But they weren't made by the same company as the OS was. And I do agree that moving away from MS Office would be very foolish, if money saving is the reason behind it.