They also differ in the sense that you have to completely relearn how to do everything you’ve been doing your whole career and usually in a way that is more complicated and less efficient.
It’s not missing components, it’s the fact that the most commonly used components are clunkier, less user friendly, and feel like an afterthought tacked on after someone made the software to prove they could.witbout ever talking to anyone who uses the software to do their job. If Open Office were as good a suite of office software as Microsoft, it’d be the industry standard. No business wants to pay Microsoft license fees just because, they do it because the tools work better and create a better end product.
If Open Office were as good a suite of office software as Microsoft, it’d be the industry standard. No business wants to pay Microsoft license fees just because, they do it because the tools work better and create a better end product.
The idea that everything that businesses do is as efficient as physically possible and the executives are all mega geniuses that are incapable of making bad decisions (or are even incentivized to make good decisions) is untrue.
COBAL is not the greatest programming language to ever be invented. It, and the various pieces of dogshit software that companies collectively shell out billions for every year, are used because they are entrenched in their respective industries and corporate structures, not because of their brilliant design.
The idea that everything that businesses do is as efficient as physically possible and the executives are all mega geniuses that are incapable of making bad decisions (or are even incentivized to make good decisions) is untrue.
I never said that was true. But I’ve sat through enough budget meetings to know for certain that if Open Office were even “good enough”, let alone “as good” it would be the corporate standard, because everyone hates paying for Office.
But it isn’t, for all the reasons I listed before.
They also differ in the sense that you have to completely relearn how to do everything you’ve been doing your whole career and usually in a way that is more complicated and less efficient.
It’s not missing components, it’s the fact that the most commonly used components are clunkier, less user friendly, and feel like an afterthought tacked on after someone made the software to prove they could.witbout ever talking to anyone who uses the software to do their job. If Open Office were as good a suite of office software as Microsoft, it’d be the industry standard. No business wants to pay Microsoft license fees just because, they do it because the tools work better and create a better end product.
The idea that everything that businesses do is as efficient as physically possible and the executives are all mega geniuses that are incapable of making bad decisions (or are even incentivized to make good decisions) is untrue.
COBAL is not the greatest programming language to ever be invented. It, and the various pieces of dogshit software that companies collectively shell out billions for every year, are used because they are entrenched in their respective industries and corporate structures, not because of their brilliant design.
I never said that was true. But I’ve sat through enough budget meetings to know for certain that if Open Office were even “good enough”, let alone “as good” it would be the corporate standard, because everyone hates paying for Office.
But it isn’t, for all the reasons I listed before.