canopic jug writes:
Bryan Lunduke at Network World calls out what other mainstream media have been too timid, or bought out, to call out. He starts by pointing out that choosing Microsoft Windows for your organization should get you fired and that if you haven't already replaced Windows, across the board, you absolutely stink at your job.
There. Finally the topic is broached in mainstream media and a proper discussion can now start among decision makers who can arrange complete migrations to GNU/Linux, Chrome/Linux, one of the BSDs, or a combination of them.
As Microsoft security problems continue to escalate since even the pre-networked, MS-DOS days, managers and front-line grunts will find themselves increasingly culpable for selecting unviable software, such as Microsoft Windows. If they wish to pay big bucks for maintenance, there are plenty of companies around to participate in the money. Canonical, Red Hat, M:Tier are just a sampling.
[Ed. Note: I debated whether or not to run this story — in some respects it's just the Windows vs *nix argument all over again. Also, there are proprietary programs which are critical for certain industries which currently only run on Windows. On the other hand, gaining a mention like this in the more mainstream media, does that mean we are approaching an inflection point? Witness the increased displeasure with Windows 10's telemetry and the difficulty in completely blocking it. What programs do you use that are only available on Windows? What keeps you from moving to another OS? --martyb]
The lack of business software on BSD/Linux is something that may put up obstacles.
Maybe Wine or VMs can mitigate it.
I don't know, Libre Office is a pretty solid program. Write is BETTER than Word, and Calc is almost as good as Excel.
And Powerpoint is a stupid waste of time and resources. Nobody really needs that piece of shit (they used it a lot where I worked).
MS Office is far, far more advanced than anything the open source world has. Well, advanced in terms of end-user features and usability (compared to LaTex being more advanced technically). Sure, LibreOffice is the same when considering student-level usage but it sucks at business scale usage. Where's the document encryption and security controls? Change traceability? 3rd party plug-in integration? Sharepoint support? Advanced graphing capabilities? Seamless embedded documents? Etc... Libre has similar features, but none of them are as good. Even the grammar and spelling support isn't as good let alone managing complex styles or imported data.
And you're ignoring the two biggest: Access and Outlook. Despite Access' shittyness, it's still best for non-programs to whip up their custom tools in the least amount of time. Forget about code quality, business users want tools which let them get their job done better and faster. Software always plays a support role, it is never an end onto itself.
Outlook/Exchange has nothing close to it. It is way more than just an email client. Encryption, email polls, secretary features (multiple people accessing the same account as one), calendars integrated with booking rooms and resources (you can buy wireless door displays which say who has booked that room and when), recalling emails the receiver hasn't viewed yet, seeing out of office messages before sending an email, etc...
And that's all ignoring the support community, tons of books, tons of tutorials, etc... of Microsoft products. If you want to replace Office, you need to be better on all those points and be better enough that it's worth the risk of changing. I don't like Microsoft, but despite their security concerns, the make very produce tools once you learn how to use them. The open source world just says "they suck" and never bothers to learn the features which makes putting up with the front facing suckiness worth it.
When Windows becomes seen as career suicide, all that software will quickly be ported to Linux (and possibly BSD).
Catch is that the ecosystem has to reach that point. Perhaps more M$-malware can fix that..