Well Rod, if focusing the merits of CORL software being used to help folks transition to Linux from "The Empire" is immature, I guess it's nice to know I'm in good company.
You, on the other hand, have shown yourself to be embracing an obsessive/compulsive, highly emotional status that certainly comes across as "hate" for all things CORL. You trashed their software, claiming they had:
Message 13887128
Message 13879889
Message 13882067
Implicit in these comments are the suggestion that MSFT won the OfficeSuite market mainly because WP was inferior in coding, written in assembly language, un-maintainable... etc. That statement directly implies that none of these conditions were the case with MSOffice. However, few reviewers that I have found have been willing to come right and claim that WP was inferior in performance or features to MSOffice. In fact, I know for a fact from my exposure to both products, people have commonly compared MSOffice to WP.., Powerpoint to CorelDraw..., trying to ascertain whether MS products had finally reached the standard of WP.
This suggests that people were forced into MS due to its lock on the Windows OS and MSFT's ability to decide what APIs it offered or held, to other software developers. Again, show me where MSOffice has been considered SUPERIOR in objective reviews to Word Perfect 2000. I would like to see those comparisions, especially since we seem to display our own particular bias in this discussion. You have offered no objective standard upon which to compare the two, and without that you opinion is no more authoritative, or mature, than mine.
Furthermore, you started touting StarOffice claiming that it would lead the way and didn't require "emulation" to run on Linux, yet you still haven't told me how, since StarOffice is "natively compiled on Linux", they are able to run on 6 different OS'? Are they using emulation also? And besides we now have that information about the "WINE" project where we see they are directly working with the Windows APIs and not using something like SoftWindows as used by APPL. There is apparently little performance difference between software using WINE and their performance under Windows.
So why is WP lagging behind MSFT? Certainly it's not because of the product line, because, as I stated, no objective source (one not paid by MSFT or CORL)
that I have seen has ever claim CORL products were terrible, certainly not substandard to MSFT's product line.
So yeah.. maybe WP isn't what the Linux purists might desire, but who frigging cares what they want?? It is what the customer wants and they want comfort level in transitioning from one OS to another.
Most importantly, it is what I want, and I consider myself no idiot when it comes to computers (considering how much trouble-shooting I have to do for friends and family). And this customer demand for familiarity of GUI equates to market demand, Rod... market opportunity, money.. moola.., $$$$.
The linux sector should EMBRACE Corel's efforts to bring the "unwashed masses" into Linux. The more people using it, the greater developmental resources that will be dedicated to services that OS with new Apps. And we know that MSFT won't support Linux, so that leaves it open to CORL and other companies.
And Rod, I don't need to email some jounalist about his disgust over CORL's management. We all know that Cowpland needs to go. That fact is not in question. Or at a minimum, he needs to be put in a harmless position where he can do little harm. In his stead, CORL needs a turn-around specialist with a knack for marketing software. So while you concentrate on MC, I'll concentrate on the product line, where the true value for this company exists.
There is a distinct difference between being a dismal financial failure and a dismal product failure. One is due to marketing failures, while the latter is due to inferior product.
If you are going to impugn Corel's product line, I suggest you provide a list of objective reviews that justify your derogatory comments. |
