Re: Crossover / Wine cannot install Office

From: Joe (joe_at_jretrading.com)
Date: 05/18/04 

Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 20:18:53 +0100

In message <slrncaium3.bg3.postmaster@cardinal.haucks.org>, Bob Hauck
<postmaster@localhost.localdomain> writes
>On Mon, 17 May 2004 18:47:03 +0100, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
>
>
>What we have here is a failure to communicate.

I don't think so, you've summed things up fairly well. Not everyone else
has.

> Most of us understand
>"functional equivalent" to mean something like "does the same job". To
>you it apparently means "compatible clone".

I mean equivalent on a file-exchange basis, at least as close as between
different MS program versions, which I'm probably more aware than most
isn't perfect.

> You certainly can build
>fill-in-the-form database apps on Linux. You just can't do it with VBA.

Yes, I know. Having used Delphi for several years in the past, I'd
probably use Kylix. Depending on the application, I might take the time
to learn a native Linux way, but unless I'm going to be using it
regularly, it's a waste of (unpaid) time learning it. Use it or lose it.
>
>
>
>On the other hand, Joe Businessman who just wants to write a proposal
>for a customer or do some "what if" planning with a spread*** or send
>some email very likely _will_ be satisfied with OOo and Mozilla instead
>of Office/Outlook/IE. He will likely also save a lot of money and
>aggravation by adopting the former. But he won't be your customer.

It's only two or three months since I installed OOo for a tiny customer
who was unhappy about paying for another copy of Excel for his new
computer, and had apparently mislaid his CD for the MS Office running on
his older machine. The document he really needed was an invoice, which
turned out to need a minor tweak before OOo would display it properly,
with the invoice fields sensibly laid out. A difference in default text
justification of a certain type of field formatting. Trivial, but enough
to make it unusable to a totally non-IT-literate user. Which most small
businessmen are.
>
>
>> When I can get full functional support for Access databases (and a few
>> other Windows programs) under Linux I'll go for it and happily bid
>> farewell to Windows. I think it's more likely that I'll retire first.
>
>In other words, when Linux becomes exactly like Windows you will be
>satisfied with it.

No, I'm satisfied with it now. It just doesn't meet every one of my IT
needs. That's life.

> Well, that's not ever gonna happen so you might as
>well give up now. If it were exactly like Windows, it would have
>exactly the same problems and what's the point of that?

One of the bonuses of Wine/CO/Win4Lin is allegedly that Windows or
Windows apps are more stable than on bare metal. While I've apparently
had a lot less MS stability problems than many people, I wouldn't mind
that.
>
>For you, Linux is a nice file server and firewall OS. For many of the
>rest of us it does more than that.

As it does for me. I wouldn't dream of using Windows for perl work, even
though it is possible. On the other hand, as you can see, I prefer
Turnpike over the Linux newsreaders I've tried. The big advantage of
Linux is that now there is a choice, and sometimes the choice will be
Windows. I have no religious problems with that. While I dislike almost
everything about Microsoft, I can't see the point of cutting off my nose
to spite my face.

> Your requirements in terms of MS
>Office compatibility are an order of magnitude more exacting than most
>people's and I think you might want to mention that when commenting on
>compatibility.
>
Indeed. What annoyed me somewhat was the attitude here of 'there's
nothing at all you can do under Windows that you can't do under Linux'.
If I'd said I needed Windows to play games that haven't been ported to
Linux nobody would have turned a hair. Because it's work, I was
insulted. 

-- 
Joe