3 ms·
I 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 migrat
by jenscow 12y ago
I 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.