And speaking of MSO:
So it was a bit of a "Milchmädchenrechnung".
Even I have sometimes the feeling that 99% of germans are on this site and talk in english under each other ^^ its not a german site so... special german law things should not be brought as arguments... and if you point out to prices in america you should mention that they are without taxes...
I'm not championing either, all I was pointing out was the $500 and $150 being spouted was wrong.
I hope that LO will adopt the Lotus Symphony interface that I really like and I personally think is one of the best interfaces for an office. If Open Office adopt the the Lotus Symphony interface I may switch to that.
Certainly not the ribbon interface, I can not get used to the ribbon-interface. I takes so much time. You simply can not scan a brew of big and small icons as fast as menu items. We are trained to read text very fast. Often icons for one function are spread over several ribbons, which is very confusing. And you lose the great advantage of the old interface: Which is that menu's icons are nearly the same and in the same place in all applications. That was one of the great ideas behind the CUA (common user access) interface that MS developed in Windows. If you know one application well, menu's and icons are so similar in other applications that you quickly get accustomed. I think it was a bad idea to break this standard interface.
MS office is still the best office no doubt. There is no debate there. But that does not make Libre Office less than excellent. MS Office is for most people simply very expensive overkill. I think most offices would be better of replacing MS Office with Libre Office and have one PC with MS Office for those rare compatibility issues.
The problem for MS is that MS Office has been a mature product for a decade now and they have become a sitting duck. OO en LO have become mature products too and the gap becomes smaller all the time. The same with Windows. Rather than innovating MS is trying to sell interface changes as innovation (Ribbon, Metro), interface changes by the way that a great number of people hate, but they simply ignore that. Still they feel more and more threatened by the competition that is why we see MS-evangelists becoming very active on the Internet to spread FUD about the competition. MS still depends on her old cash cows, Windows + Office which constitute 60% of her profit.
The interface changes of MS have traditionally two reasons: trying to sell an update for a hefty price by making the application visually different. And to distract the attention of all the negative things they are introducing at the same time like new incompatible formats. It is no coincidence that with the Ribbon came with the new document formats. And it is no coincidence that that the Metro interface comes with a new Metro store. Through such changes MS forces clients to buy new versions of her software all over again. Practically speaking MS Office 2000 is still an excellent office, but it can not open the later formats, that is the only real problem, a problem induced by MS herself to force clients to pay again and again. I understand, that is part of her Business model. It is a commercial company.
The problem for MS is: Libre Office is an excellent office and it is only getting better. How long will companies keep on buying a Rolls Royce when a BMW can do the Job as well and is much cheaper? At the same time they are losing the consumers to the mobile market.
So what is the answer of MS? it is FUD. They have been doing that from the beginning but it seems they are stepping it up now. Whenever you see a review of one of her competitors products, you will read all kind of negative claims by MS-evangelists. Like real evangelist they seem to stress the same argument over and over even though they are often untrue.
And they no longer restrict to general places, but they visit the forums of their competitors too. For instance on Blackberry forums you will read constant negative FUD by MS evangelists. So it does not really surprise me they have come here now too. It only tells us that MS is becoming pretty desperate. The strategy seems to be: if we can not compete on quality, we can always try to slander products and brands of others.
It is a pity. MS does make some excellent products. MS Office is a great product, but after decades it simply is greatly overpriced for a product that is near end the of it life cycle. MS should have developed other cash cows by now, but they kept relying on monopolies too long. Negativity is not going to do the trick.