Slashdot Mirror
Sun to Charge for Star Office 6.0
biwillia writes: "According to
this
heise article (in German, or Google translated), free versions of Star Office will now only be available to Solaris users. Free versions for Linux and Windows users will no longer be offered. A homemade translation of the first paragraph reads, 'With version 6.0 of Star Office, scheduled to be released in May, Sun has changed the product politics of their Office package, which had been freely distributed since the aquisition of Hamburg-based Star Division. In the future, Sun wishes to charge license fees for usage of the Windows and Linux versions. Only the version for Sun's own operation system Solaris will remain free.'"
I don't use either - was looking forward to trying Star Office 6 as I'd heard it had removed the custom desktop. Now it looks as if I'll be trying out OpenOffice instead.#
Cheers,
Ian
How is Sun supposed to make money from Star Office if they don't eventually charge for it? I, for one, would be willing to pay a small fee to use Star Office on my two desktops. $35/computer seems reasonable to me. The license shouldn't be tied to an OS, but rather a computer.
Given interoperability, I may purchase one commercial copy of Star Office for my main desktop use, and use Open Office on every other computer, it depends on how well each is distributed.
In some ways, charging for Star Office may be a good thing. Charging for software in the business world gives it some degree of credibility - that software has value if one must pay for it. I'd be even more happy if Sun offered free education and/or personal licenses to try to gain market share, while charging a fair fee to businesses.
I eagerly await Star Office 6 and Open Office 1.
"The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
What are the major differences currently between OpenOffice and StarOffice?
I remember a DoD procurement elated to StarOffice, has the price remained the same? (Are they running it on Solaris anyway?)
e4 e5
I'm very suspicious about the accuracy of this article. Sun have just announced that they'll be releasing their own Linux distribution (I think that they should call it 'Polaris'). My guess is that they'll provide a free downloadable version and charge for boxed CDs with documentation.
HH
Why not adopt RedHat's marketing model?
By selling it at the store for $$ and making it available by download for free.
I'm still buying RedHat CDs despite downloading various rawhide. I can't be alone on this.
the main problem is that sun shoots itself in the foot. examples :
1. Microsoft releases C# with large amounts of adverts. Sun goes off and releases Java 1.4 with non blocking i/o and ssl support (both advertised loudly) and then ensures that the ssl stuff doesnt work with the non blocking i/o due to the bugs present in java 1.4 which was rushed to the door too early... Result? people look at C#.
2. Ximian goes off and announces Mono which is the open sourced C# clone. Sun proceeds to piss off the apache group in a very public way who then complain loudly that java is a proprietary language. Result? people look at C#.
3. Sun announces linux support on an expanded cobalt line and drop x86 solaris in favour of linux. Sun then decides to have their cheif competitive officer write a very anti linux article. Result? linux community is pissed. sun customers look away from the cobalt line. sun customers are confused. sun customers start looking at ibm.
4. Sun announces that it is open sourcing staroffice. Linux community is really happy. sun customers start to look at replacing NT with linux and staroffice on PCs. Sun decides to charge for startoffice for linux. Result? sun customers go - huh? linux community hates sun and starts using the open source LGPLed code and ignores staroffice and sun.
In one hand we have Sun Increasing [its] Commitment to Gnome, and yet on the other it's abandoning a critical product in its battle against MSFT and professing that Linux on the Mainframe [is] Not a Good Idea. Microsoft are regularly raising the bar when it comes to talking to their client operating systems from non Windows Servers (eg the infamous Kerberos PAC), so surely having your own office suite appearing on Windows clients can't hurt, especially as everything starts to look like a big (.NET centred) communications network. I wonder what IBM thinks about all this? I get the feeling they're closer to the mark than Sun, and if nothing else they've decided their direction and are throwing their whole weight behind it, which is commendable (certainly preferrable over this wishy washy floundering from Sun). And what's with bashing Linux *and* pulling Solaris for Intel architectures. Ok, so you're a hardware vendor, but how's anyone meant to know their way around Solaris with uni labs migrating to Linux left right and centre and with you revoking any chance a hobbyist had of playing with it without parting with arms and legs for Sun hardware? Why don't you just let go of Java so we can stop concerning ourselves with what direction you've chosen for today and get on with ensuring J2EE retains its position in the web services market.