SuSE Linux will run Microsoft Office

PizzaFace writes "SuSE Linux is developing a desktop Linux distribution that will allow Windows users to continue using (some of) their Windows applications, including Microsoft Office. The SuSE Linux Office Desktop will be available for $129 in January, and will include Acronis OS Selector for disk partitioning during installation and Codeweavers CrossOver Office for Windows API emulation."

Comments

Conversion in process

[Deton8]

Half of my engineers just switched to Linux plus StarOffice for their day-to-day communications. So far, so good. If these emulators get good enough to run OrCAD, Modelsim, and the FPGA development packages, then we can lose Windows completely from our R&D operation.

Re:Conversion in process

[warmcat]

Xilinx stuff will already work under wine.
See http://www.polybus.com/xilinx_on_linux.html

Re:Conversion in process

[e8johan]

Modelsim is already available in a Unix version, I suppose that you can get it for Linux. I have, however, only used it on Solaris.

Re:Conversion in process

[Lumpy]

Why OrCAD? Have you looked at Eagle CAD? It's pretty darn close to ORCAD and is a helluva lot cheaper.. (an a large number of companies are using it now) plus it run's under linux as they sell a Linux version along with their windows version. I gave a copy (free student version that allows only 2 layer boards) to one of our design engineers, he was tickled after a couple of months and asked if we could purchase it for here. I guess the scriptable backend to automate many processes makes his job easier. I'm betting that Modelsim and the FPGA stuff will run under wine.... have you tried?

Re:Conversion in process

[PSargent]

Using Modelsim for Linux now. You can't get the PE (Personal Edition) though. That's only on Windows.

Re:Conversion in process

[Deton8]

Well, no I haven't actually tried these tools on wine -- I just assumed with all the security dongle stuff it wouldn't work. We'll give it a try and see what kind of damage it causes. Obviously, we have to be careful as these packages are very expensive and it wouldn't do to have the suppliers flag us as using pirate software. We would also need to do extensive tests as you can imagine an undetected flaw in an inner layer of a board, or worse, in an ASIC, would be a disaster.

Re:Conversion in process

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to extend this question to Protel. What about it?

Re:Conversion in process

[jeff_bond]

Half of my engineers just switched to Linux plus StarOffice for their day-to-day communications. So far, so good. If these emulators get good enough to run OrCAD, Modelsim, and the FPGA development packages, then we can lose Windows completely from our R&D operation.

Modelsim runs on Linux currently (as does synopsys design compiler and some back end layout tools). I reckon all EDA tools will soon run on linux, most of them already do anyway. The only problem with using PCs for serious EDA work is the limited amount of RAM you can install (4GB). We have a few linux boxes with 4GB of ram and even then, a single process is limited to 3GB - sometimes that's just not enough. For serious synthesis jobs we still have to run on a 64bit HP machine with 8GB of RAM.

Re:Conversion in process

[eniacpx]

Also you have to take into account file formats. Does eagle cad save in the same formats as OrCAD?
If not, it may run under Linux but it doesn't do you any good. Most of the people my company deals with would go catatonic if we started using a different format.

Re:Conversion in process

[afidel]

This is why linux on Opteron will rule. I know that we can't wait for next year when Synopsis should have everything ported, it will lower costs by a huge amount, even when you consider the high software costs. A 2 way SMP Opteron system with 16GB of ram will be killer for synthesis and should cost a small fraction of what an equiviland Sunblade costs.

Re:Conversion in process

[secolactico]

I wish I could switch to Linux on my desktop. I just tried RH8 and it's sweet. Two things keep me from switching: MS Visio and that bloody Watchguard configuration software.

I'm even willing to give up my 4 year Outlook mail history (which I can always access using wine, anyway).

Re:Conversion in process

[Lozzer]

If you can get a second PC for a day or two then you could install an IMAP server on it, copy your outlook mails to the IMAP server, then copy them to whatever Linux mail client you chose.

If you have a low powered second pc anyway you could keep it as a firewall/mail box - thats what I do.

Re:WINE

[Branc0]

What has WINE got to do with it? Wine does not run various Win32-based applications.

WineX on the other hand let's you run WarCraft, I don't know about M$ Office, I didn't find the time to test it, I had more, erm... interesting things to do?
*g*

Crossover

[CastrTroy]

Why wouldn't one just get crossover, which they could use with any version of linux, instead of giving Suse $130 to give you crossover.

Re:Crossover

[Angry White Guy]

How many geeks are going to buy a desktop OS? None. How many people want to try Linux but can't give up their Office(tm)? Suse apparently is banking on lots.

This is not for geeks. Maybe for geeks-in-training, but not for geeks!

Re:Crossover

[rseuhs]

Because SuSE will offer a complete solution without hassles. (no downloads, no extra installs, no extra budgets)

That said, no it's not for everybody. But a lot of users (especially corporations) will find it useful if it is preconfigured so that installing and using Win32 apps is easily and fast done.

Re:Crossover

[AyeRoxor!]

"How many geeks are going to buy a desktop OS? None."

I have. I started learning POs when I got my first IBM, a PCjr, at age 7. It booted up into rom (or cartridge) basic, and I started programming. Now, at almost 25, I'm a paid programmer. But I never learned linux and of my friends, the only one who knows linux even moderately well lives about an hour and a half away. So I grabbed Lycoris. Since all a GUI is is a front-end for a command interpreter, I'm doing things in the GUI and finding out what they do in the CI. My intent, of course, is to wean myself from the GUI like many people did from Win3x and 9x. Shouldn't take me long. But when I forget something in a pinch, the gui's there. Now I see the things the gui does, and look up how it does it. It's been pretty constructive.

Re:Crossover

[e8johan]

I'd say that it is for most users. Not many users want to have to fiddle with the OS, install extra packages etc. just to get it working properly. I'd say that the vast majority wants computers to be easier and force less choices (thus reducing complexity). I'm not saying that the choice should be removed, simply intelligently set from the start and easy to modify and well documented.

Re:Crossover

[Angry White Guy]

Ergo, you're a geek in training.
I have no doubts about your general geekieness, but as for your linux geekiness, it's only building. Pretty soon you'll drop the training wheels and use the gui to have 30 terminal windows open at a time.
You prove my point exactly.

Re:Crossover

[mpsmps]

Speaking from experience, it can take way more fiddling than the average computer user is capable of to get the Windows fonts (or acceptable substitutes) commonly used by Office installed and displaying well under Linux. If Suse has preconfigured this, it could make the difference between only geeks being able to use Crossover Office and anyone being able to use it.

Mike

Re:Crossover

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. Computers should be working for us, instead of us working to get our computers to accomplish some basic task.

Re:Crossover

[AyeRoxor!]

"learning POs"

Doh! PCs... Hehehe honestly, I wrote that when I got out of bed and hit slashdot :-P If there were any wonders of my geekiness... :-P

Re:Crossover

[Anonymous Coward]

Crossover Office has licensed their font technology from Apple. The MS Office fonts look great in Office, even if they don't work for the rest of the OS. You can download the fonts directly from the codeweavers setup app and install them. MS Office on Linux works great as long as you don't need access. That said, I've always thought access was a terrible database with a great front GUI & Wizards. But I've had it lose data too many times to count. While postgres is a great database with a sparse gui written in TCL/Tk (pgaccess) almost as an after thought!

Re:Crossover

[NeonSpirit]

From the various sites

CrossOver Office + Plugin bundle is $79.95 ( On sale, usual price $99 )
From Acronis OS Selector $44.99
SuSE 8.1 boxed set Personal $39.95, Professional $79.95

This looks like a net cost saving for the bundle to me.

Re:Crossover

[Fred Tourette]

"This is not for geeks. Maybe for geeks-in-training, but not for geeks!"

This is the ugly reality. Linux can remain a "boutique OS" on the desktops of a handful of geeks and ABM zealots, or thrive in the real world. Another ugly reality: MS-Office is plastered all over the real world. StarOffice and OpenOffice can huff and puff all they want, but MS-Office is one *hell* of a big house to blow down.

MS-Office - and Quicken/QuickBooks - running under Linux may mean the difference between a handful of brave souls testing the Linux waters and a stampede of conestoga wagons heading for the New Land.

Re:Crossover

[siskbc]

How many geeks have jobs that force them to interact in the windows world? I do. This geek also needs a very functional spreadsheet for manipulating data (this geek happens to be a chemist). Unfortunately, Excel beats the hell out of Star or Openoffice spreadsheet, which truly sucks. (Anyone know of a fully-functional open source spreadsheet?)

So, since I refuse to give windows access to my machine, another alternative must be found. As for who BUYS a desktop OS...I guess someone who can't find a friend with a T1? Glad I've got one...

Solution to M$ hell? I tried crossover right after it went 1.0. I found it to be about the buggiest thing I had ever used. Office (which it was supposedly optimized for) crashed all the time. Yeah, I know it does that a lot in windows, but much more in crossover. Worst, crossover itself would get corrupted, requiring a re-install of windows. This was starting to be a weekly thing (at least).

Now, I run vm ware, and it's great. Yes, it's more expensive than crossover, and actually *RUNS* windows, requiring a license (or piracy, if you prefer). But it's stable as hell (considering windows' native limitations), pretty fast (faster than a crossover implementation on the same machine), runs effectively ALL windows programs (no more "We'll get that running next year"). Oh, and since windows runs in a virtual machine, windows doesn't have direct access to my hardware.

It's more expensive, but after a month of running either, vmware rocks and is very worth it. I know a lot of assholes will say that people shouldn't take a job that requires use of M$ products, but that attitude will keep you unemployed and living with your parents for a long time.

Re:Crossover

[Reziac]

In fact, the most common complaint I hear from users is "Don't give me any damned alternatives, just tell me how to do it!" They want ONE method that works first-time-every-time. They aren't computer-oriented (to them it's just a tool, not far different from a typewriter) and alternatives just confuse them. Hell, I've had people's eyes glaze over just from watching me access Explorer via Win+E instead of via desktop shortcut.

As you say, and as a lot of folk hereabouts don't seem to get, this doesn't mean choices "must" be removed, only that they don't have to be the first thing new users are confronted with. Let them explore alternatives once they're comfortable (but remember, many average users will NEVER reach a comfort level and will always do everything the first way they learned to to it).

Re:Crossover

[Requiem]

Because some of us want to see SuSE succeed, and they can't do that on goodwill alone. Now, I probably won't buy it - I'm a student, and $130USD is a steep price for me - but I bought a copy of SuSE 8.0 recently, and I would recommend that people start doing the same with their favourite distribution.

Re:Crossover

[operagost]

Pretty soon, you'll drop the training wheels and use a bank of switches and blinkenlights. It was good enough for the PDP, it's good enough for you whippersnappers!

Re:Crossover

[ncc74656]

Now, I run vm ware, and it's great. Yes, it's more expensive than crossover, and actually *RUNS* windows, requiring a license (or piracy, if you prefer). But it's stable as hell (considering windows' native limitations), pretty fast (faster than a crossover implementation on the same machine), runs effectively ALL windows programs (no more "We'll get that running next year").

It's been a while (about 2 years) since I've had a desktop machine running Linux. I had VMware installed on it because I needed IE and pcAnywhere (Mozilla didn't yet exist, and I'm not sure if VNC was available either). At the time, you couldn't run apps that needed DirectX under VMware...has that been fixed?

(I have Gentoo building on a spare computer right now and I'm inclined to give Wine a shot at running the Win32 apps for which I don't know of any Linux equivalents (stuff such as TMPGEnc), but I'm curious about where VMware has gotten in the past couple of years.)

Re:Crossover

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty soon, you'll drop the training wheels and wire your logic chips up on a breadboard.

Re:Crossover

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you talking about. In every justice department case it has been noted that Office is MS's flagship application. Bloated as it maybe it has the features many business's need. I have not hard data here, but I know of at least 5 people who haven not made the switch because they would have to move back and forth to get Office, or configure wine (which has varying results).

Re:Crossover

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty soon, you'll drop the training wheels and wire your vacuum tubes and resistors together on a breadboard.

Re:Crossover

[Angry White Guy]

And your attempt to call me a nut by stating exactly what I am saying does what....?
I can only assume by the spelling and grammatical errors that english is not your primary language, and you completely misunderstood my post.

Someone who really wants to run Linux will choose his own distro and install crossover office himself, not buy a desktop OS that does not have the functionality of a server. Those who want to replace MS as their desktop but love office will consider this as a viable alternative, and that's the market Suse is aiming for.

Re:Crossover

[AyeRoxor!]

Breadbord!?!? Pretty soon, you'll drop the training wheels and simply connect your vacuum tubes and resistors together with wires.

Umm

[Mr_Silver]

I don't want to be the miserable sod but this is just Suse including Crossover Office in their distribution rather than getting you to download it seperately.

It's not exactly earth shattering news. Whats next? Slashdot reporting that that distibution Blah is going to come with WINE already pre-installed?

Or am I missing something major entirely?

Re:Umm

[garcia]

I think the point is that a typically "easy to use" distribution is going to come w/Office working out of the box.

It's just one step closer to what SOME of the Linux community want, easy to use desktop, easy transition from Windows, full Office support.

Downloading a product, installing said product, and getting it to work, are not the easiest things for most to do. This is what you are missing.

Re:Umm

[fatbitch]

everytime I read comments relating to linux and the desktop/business world I am frustrated by the short sightedness of some posters.

What SuSE are doing here is making the process of utilising Linux *easy* - I feel that there is a group of posters to slashdot that are extremely stubborn and opposed to this notion.

I own a car, I am not a mechanic, when I buy a car or take it to the garage I don't want to be told - 'sorry you can only drive on x type of road, to drive on y you have to replace the gearbox and upgrade the tires - we can give you the instructions but we won't do it for you' - I want to hand over my money and have a working vehicle I can drive on the majority of the roads availble to me. I don't care how it is done - I want it to work.

My father on the other hand is a mechanic - he wants to be able to modify his car as much as he wants, and to be able to drive on all the roads in the world - he would be dissapointed if he could not and probably wouldn't buy a car which would not allow him to do this.

This analogy can be applied to both Linux and Windows:

Linux satisfies the mechanic in that he can strip the car(OS) down to it's nuts and bolts and build it up in any way he wants - however (without such efforts as described in this story about SuSe) if a home user wants to mod the car(OS) so it can drive on a different type of road(run office) it is possible however without the knowledge and tools(Crossover) he cannot do it - instant dissatisfaction with his purchase.

Windows makes an effort to satisfy the home user - it can do a bunch of wizzy things - but it's pretty unreliable and can also be quite complex to setup (albeit easier that Linux) - however it can never satify the mechanic as you can't look under the hood

Linux has the ability to satisfy both types of person - in a far more complete manner that Windows could ever do. It is efforts like these that should be applauded. If SuSE bundle windows compatability with their distro does it prevent the mechanic playing with the inner workings of the OS ? no he not restricted in any way. Does it help the home user that they can install and run Office without finding out what an .rpm is ? yes
(o.k it may not be *this* easy but you get the idea)

The Linux world has some of the most talented programmers working for it - the 'mechanics' of the world are more that catered for, however home users are sadly neglected by both Linux and Windows. The work of Suse, Lycorix, Lindows, Debian is all a step in the right direction as usability and simplicity is the key to Linux succeeding.

Re:Umm

[Gerein]

Or am I missing something major entirely?

I think so. The point is, that SuSE is developing a new version of their distribution aimed at the corporate desktop. Crossover Office is just one special component, that'll differ from their normal distribution. There will be other stuff to make the transition from windows easier and probably no more server installations.

Second thing you miss is this. "Now for only $54.95"... CrossOver Office is not free. You can't just "download it seperately" for your normal SuSE distribution.

Re:Umm

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL isn't that what lindows is?

Re:Umm

[Mr_Silver]

What SuSE are doing here is making the process of utilising Linux *easy* - I feel that there is a group of posters to slashdot that are extremely stubborn and opposed to this notion.

Indeed there are, but if you look at my posting history you'd see that I'm not one of them.

I applaud a company that tries to make it's products easier and yes, Suse putting this Crossover plug into default installs is a Good Thing(tm).

I'm no cretin, but installing stuff on Linux is, for me anyway, fraught with disasters. I don't bother compiling any more as things invariably won't compile or i'm missing hundreds of files. I stick to RPM's because they're (relativily) easy.

I run Mandrake and Gnome 1.x - I'd love to go to 2.x but I just know that it'll never work if I do it manually. Much easier (and faster for me) to just grab the latest distribution ISO's and install it from scratch. Prior experience has taught me not to waste several hours installing something when I could do it in less than one (and have it working).

But I really don't think that something like this really classes as "news". Yes, they're doing a good thing and they're on the right lines - but if every time Slashdot posts an article when a distribtion adds something to make life easier, we might as well just subscribe to their mailing lists.

Re:Umm

[Phrogger]

>Downloading a product, installing said product, and getting it to work, are not the easiest things for most to do. This is what you are missing.

He is also missing the integration into the desktop environment.

Xandros also includes Crossover Office and Plug-in with their distribution. Codeweavers produced a specific version for them, one that is totally integrated with Xandros' desktop. This allows, for example, autorun to work: pop in a MS Office CD and up comes the installer. No fuss or muss. After installing, the various Office apps are appropriately integrated into the Start menu.

One would presume that SuSE would also be licensing a version of Crossover specific to their distribution with the equally good integration into the system.

Re:Umm

[Spruce Moose]

I own a car, I am not a mechanic, when I buy a car or take it to the garage I don't want to be told - 'sorry you can only drive on x type of road, to drive on y you have to replace the gearbox and upgrade the tires.

1) Make tired car analogy, get modded up to +5
2) ???
3) Profit!

Re:Umm

[Kelt]

okay... so I liked the car analogy... but the South Park Underwear Gnome logic joke is freekin heeelarious...

-Kelt

SuSE v.s. Lindows?

[thenextpresident]

It should be interesting to see how Lindows handles a vetran like SuSE entering this turf. However, should be good for the end user.

IMO, SuSE should do well. They have been much more OS than Lindows, and so they don't have to worry about all the bad press.

so does this mean..

[Anonymous Coward]

... no freely downloaded SuSE ISOs?

Re:so does this mean..

[srpatterson]

they stopped doing that by version 8.0

Re:so does this mean..

[daniel23]

> ... no freely downloaded SuSE ISOs?

The announced product is not the SuSE linux distro, but another product (at least thats my understanding)

And have there ever been freely downloadable SuSE ISOs? Free network install, but definitely no ISOs at least since 6.3

~dp

Re:so does this mean..

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe, but not having any freely downloadable ISOs, even a free edition without the parts like Crossover, will probably do more to harm them than its worth... experience has shown that distros without a freely downloaded version actually end up with poorer sales due to the lesser publicity.

Re:so does this mean..

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't mean that as a troll, I was just asking.

Re:so does this mean..

[Anonymous Coward]

experience has shown that distros without a freely downloaded version actually end up with poorer sales due to the lesser publicity.

Isn't Redhat the number 1 Linux distibution? I can't seem to find the free download on their site. Maybe I am just not looking hard enough. I personally am a Slackware guy which does have free downloads but I bought it anyway (support the cause and all that).

Re:so does this mean..

[NeonSpirit]

On the off chance this isn't just a troll, i'll bite. On the redhat home page, top right hand corner click on download.

Or follow this link

Great news!

[rseuhs]

If Crossover is able to run most Win32-mainstream apps by next year (as promised) and SuSE preconfigures and preinstalls it intelligently, the result can be *the* Windows-killer in the corporate space.

Re:Great news!

[lovebyte]

the result can be *the* Windows-killer in the corporate space.
Windows won't be killed since, AFAIK, it must be installed for Suse/Crossover to work.

Re:Great news!

[unapersson]

No it doesn't need Windows, otherwise there wouldn't be much point. The whole purpose of Wine and its derivatives is that you can run Windows applications without having the OS installed.

Re:Great news!

[Geert-Jan]

> Windows won't be killed since, AFAIK, it must be installed for Suse/Crossover to work.

No, it doesn't. Crossover Office works just fine without a real Windows installation.

Re:Great news!

[Lumpy]

no it wont... as you are still tied to the damned micorsoft EULAS and how much you want to bet that the next eula down the pipe will say "you are not allowed to run this on any operating system other than one made by microsoft" thus making you instantly a free target for the BSA Blackmail squad.

The only way out is linux+evolution+Open Office.org..

a combination that doesn't tie your companies head to a boulder like microsoft does.

Re:Great news!

[esarjeant]

Maybe. Does anyone else remember IBM OS/2? Excellent Windows compatibility was included all the way to OS/2 Warp and yet it didn't turn out to be the Windows killer.

IMHO, the inclusion of emulation layers is the first sign that your system is somehow incomplete or incapable. For that matter, take a look at the entire NT architecture -- the foundation of the Microsoft system is emulation. It can be an OS/2 machine, Win16 or even -gasp- NT....

It could be a nice tool for attracting users with applications that currently only run on Win32, but I'm not sure MS Office is the best example of this. The real issues are going to be legacy apps without Linux counterparts (client/server programs that require ODBC/OLEDB, accounting software, POS, etc.), especially those that support an existing database or proprietary firmware devices. If Crossover can successfully support these, then I think it will have done it's job.

Meanwhile, for those considering a move to Linux they should take a good look at OpenOffice, KOffice, AbiWord and any of the other myriad authoring solutions for UNIX (Emacs, TeX, etc.)

Re:Great news!

[Anonymous Coward]

Troll. Microsoft makes far more money from Office than they do from Windows. They already support OS X and if Windows starts to irreversibly fail they will start supporting Office on *nix. Office is by far a superior product and besides maybe their games is the only real quality that Microsoft produces.

Re:Great news!

[afidel]

Well they already did this with the free IE downloads, and I think office97 but I believe the clause is not there in office2k or officexp liscenses. BTW, the legality of EULA's is questionable which is why microsoft volume liscensing programs come with seperate paper contracts that are actually signed by a representative of the company, that way MS does not have to rely on a court to uphold EULA's to protect most of their revenue.

Re:Great news!

[Reziac]

And that's why it interests me. I want to see it get to the point where I can migrate my 100% non-geek clients off Windows (mainly because of the increasingly invasive EULAs) *without* them having to understand the difference.

But to migrate my clients, linux will need to be to the point where *any* WinApp install CD can simply be popped into the drive and autorun.inf does its thing with only a click or two, and without the user needing to know any arcana obscura.

Re:Great news!

[neildiamond]

Far out! I can't wait until I can run OpenOffice for Windows on Linux!

Re:Great news!

[debest]

Yes, the ideal solution is to have free software running on a free OS.

how much you want to bet that the next eula down the pipe will say "you are not allowed to run this on any operating system other than one made by microsoft"

However, even though this statement may become true (hell, it may already be true), but it is irrelevant. It would (and should) be completely ignored. If MS were to try to enforce such a clause, it would be viewed as very anticompetive, even by Ashcroft's standards.

I would suggest that Microsoft's response to this (other than business-as-usual of doing whatever possible to break WINE) would be to modify its volume licensing agreements such that Windows + Office will cost essentially the same as Office alone. This way, customers would have no financial incentive to go the SuSE/Codeweavers route, and we already know that there is no practical antitrust objection to this practice (at this time).

What they would not be able to effectively fight is an organization that wants to convert the majority of users to an "all free" environment, but a small number have to run Windows apps to do their job. This, I imagine, is where SuSE realistically is aiming this distro.

Re:Great news!

[Lumpy]

However, even though this statement may become true (hell, it may already be true), but it is irrelevant. It would (and should) be completely ignored.

not a chance if the BSA get's wind of it... remember they already hate the idea of a non-enforceable Operating system... if they can get a reason to start tromping around and searching linux/unix systems for violations.... Oh I can hear them already.....

It's like a bunch of vultures waiting on a tower near a highway.... just waiting for new victims to consume.

Re:Great news!

[Spoing]

Maybe. Does anyone else remember IBM OS/2? Excellent Windows compatibility was included all the way to OS/2 Warp and yet it didn't turn out to be the Windows killer.

While I think you're largely right, the OS/2 to Linux link is where we part ways. The following was posted on the the Linuxgames web site. The poster was responding to others who were advocating removing the choice for everyone of running Windows programs under Linux;

1. First off: OS/2's Windows layer wasn't emulation any more then Wine is. They are libraries and runtime environments. (~insert Wine FAQ entry here~)

   OS/2's runtime environment for Windows apps was good -- for Windows 2.x and 3.x programs. It was good because it was based on Microsoft's own source code for Windows 3.x.

   Because of that, you are right, there was no reason *when Windows 3.1 applications were most popular* for writing OS/2 specific applications even though the APIs were similar.

   As soon as those new-fangled Win32 programs (everything shipping now), the support fell appart. IBM required Microsoft's good graces. Since it was Microsoft's code, IBM didn't have control.

   The reason why it is a meaningless comparison; Wine _isn't_ under Microsoft's control. On the down side, every piece of compatability that the Wine (or WineX) is hard fought. That's why Wine is never claimed to be a drop-in version of Windows. The emphasis for Wine is on getting specific programs running. When the API changes, Wine can adapt (though slowly) since it doesn't care about the OS only the application layer.

That thread has some other gems, though sadly it looks like the trolls have reduced the s/n ratio to a point that Wine can't be discussed at all.

Re:Great news!

[HeUnique]

God, don't you read the comments on other slashdot stories sometime?

Back when the OS/2 came out, MS started to release the win32S extensions and encouraged lots of software companies to write software with this extension, which of-course - couldn't run on OS/2. IBM didn't have any solution fot that and they didn't continue to work on the compatibility issue, which left OS/2 in the dust..

Here we have a different case - few companies (with different goals - transgaming for games and Codeweavers for applications) are working and hacking wine to make it run the most popular applications. MS cannot ignore 54% of the population who runs Windows 95/98/98SE/ME, and only with their office 11 they start to move to win2K and XP as a requirement, a thing that will take at least until 2004. By that time, rest assure that Codeweavers will have a compatibility layer for Win2k (at least) - 2 years is a LONG time..

Reality

[e8johan]

It is sad, but this is probably the best way to get into the desktop business. The ability to run Office is often a requirement when companies aquire OSs.

It seems that they have realized that the transition has to be smooth "SuSE Linux Office Desktop combines the technology and user-friendliness of SuSE Linux 8.1 with proven tools that facilitate the migration from Windows operating systems and applications".

And the biggest advantage of this solution is also brought up the the press release: "SuSE Linux Office Desktop seamlessly enables the continued use of existing data".

The Linux distros must realize (and seems to have realized) that the average desktop user does not care for open source or extra choices. The average user simply wants a productive desktop that is easy to use and works they way they expect it to.

Re:Reality

[ycv]

I personnally think that the best way to get into desktop business would be to have a decent office suite (openoffice is still really unstable) and a real powerful tool to translate all those ugly .doc documents. And then we could get rid of at least one proprietary format !

Introducing MS application into Linux is not the way to go ! But I am not surprised that it comes from SuSE.

Re:Reality

[SilverSun]

I think a secretary or any other corporate desktop user must comply with corporate directives. The corporation (as some governments seem to have done already) must realize, that a closed data format will always be insecure. I cannot understand how any company can publish word documents on the web, or sne dthem to customers/partnres, where sensitive information might be hidden in the .doc which is not easily visible for the user.

That said, I think a smooth migration path is a GoodThing. Good Luck Linux.

Cheers

Re:Reality

[e8johan]

But we don't have that yet.

Isn't it then better to allow the users to get a smooth transition. It is more likely that a Linux user will try free alternatives than a Windows user, isn't it?

re:Reality

[EzInKy]

The Linux distros must realize (and seems to have realized) that the average desktop user does not care for open source or extra choices. The average user simply wants a productive desktop that is easy to use and works they way they expect it to.

In others words, easy migration. Nothing wrong with people wanting that especially since they have time and money invested in apps and training.

Once they get used to the idea of not having to pay for a license to use the operating system it won't take too that much more to get them to bulk at constantly shelling out for licenses to use the apps, either.

If you keep building it...they will keep coming.

Re:Reality

[d-Orb]

And the biggest advantage of this solution is also brought up the the press release: "SuSE Linux Office Desktop seamlessly enables the continued use of existing data".

I agree, and while I may be wandering off-topic...
I think that seamless integration with older MS OFfice is a must. To start with, while everyone at your workplace might love OOo, people outside might not. So you still get all these e-mail attachments which sortta work on OOo. My question is whether it would be feasible to have a single computer in your organisation's network which runs MS Office, it receives the documents which are problematic, opens them in the proper MS office, and then saves them as OOs XML documents. The advantage is that MS Office is guaranteed to read the document in as it is intended (or close enough :D), and because .sxw is an open format, the rendering could be implemented easily (ish).
Of course, I don't know how to program anything for office, but this could get over the problem of having a free suite that covers with around 90% of the documents being used, and having this as a solution for the other 10%.
Apologies for the off-topic and (possibly) mis-informed rant.

Re:Reality

[mntgomery]

And I think more importantly, once you get them on a Linux distro, it becomes a lot easier to "try out" those apps. Prior to this, switching to a Linux distro required a huge leap of faith as you jumped with both feet into a new operating system and apps and prayed that it all worked (and remained productive). Now, users can take it a step at a time. Hop on with Linux, but still use apps they're familiar and comfortable with. Once they get familiar and comfortable with the OS, they can start trying out some of the free apps. Makes perfect sense to me.

Linux Alternatives?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are enough Linux based Office-equivalent alternatives, what's wrong with these? I'm sure they work much better than the Office and are much more stable!

Support Linux, not m$crosoft!

Re:Linux Alternatives?

[Angry White Guy]

Yeah, but they don't work with office.
I've tried them all, and the formatting doesn't work out.
Interestingly enough, OpenOffice.org will remove the passwords from a locked Excel Spreadsheet , so the incompatibility isn't all that bad.

Re:Linux Alternatives?

[Tinfoil]

The office alternatives are good for many uses but not always 100% compatable. Then there is the retraining costs as well. Lastly, when it comes right down to it, Office is not a terrible program at all. It does what it was designed to do (insert your pun about virii here if you must) and it does it well. Nor have I had any stability issues with it in a good long time.

Re:Linux Alternatives?

[Unkle]

There are enough Linux based Office-equivalent alternatives, what's wrong with these? I'm sure they work much better than the Office and are much more stable!

Unfortunately, for most people the problem is that they are not named Microsoft Office or Microsoft Word. People like to stick with what's familiar, and the basic office apps (Word, Excel) have remained pretty much the same for a majority of users at least since version 6 (the earliest one I can remember using). Most of what has been added is fluff and feature creep. Also, a lot of people like to use the same program for the same task no matter where they are. My wife, for example, will only write her papers for school in Word because that's what they have at her school, and if she happens to need to make some last minute changes while on campus, she needs to be able to use the camups computer labs. I've tried to get her to switch to OpenOffice, but she won't-because it's not Word.

Re:Linux Alternatives?

[KevinGale]

It doesn't matter if the Office-equivalents are as good or even better than Office. People want to run the software they already have and know. Companies have standardized on Office and they don't want to switch overnight. When Microsoft created Windows they made damn sure it ran all the DOS apps people already owned. Then as now the best way to get people to try new software is if they don't have to give up the old software they know and use every day.

Re:Linux Alternatives?

[CaptnMArk]

The fact that any .VBS scripts embeded in office files allow execution of almost anything on the system is no small flaw.

This capability should be removed (except maybe for signed scripts, like in javascript)

Re:Linux Alternatives?

[Tinfoil]

No doubt. I totally agree with you there.

Open Office

[oliverthered]

I've been using Open Office for at least a Year with no problems, but then again I don't use.

Visio, Outlook or Access.

Visio is just painfull, so I suppose it's a good thing that there isn't a Free Visio-a-like.

Outlook is fairly intergrated and complete, all Linux equivelents I've tried so far fall short.

Access is handy for small DB needs, it's crap but still quite widley used because it's easy. I have a Free port of Access for Linux underway and expect to have a Open-Office Db driver shortly.

Anything anyone else would 'miss' from the Office Suite?

Re:Open Office

[frleong]

Anything anyone else would 'miss' from the Office Suite?

OLE Automation and Macros. Yeah, Open Office is surely a good candidate for replacing Office at home (but most of MS office@home is pirated anyway - so not much income for MS in this segment). But corporations usually have one or two apps that make use of OLE interfaces and macros for office automation.

Re:Open Office

[Anonymous Coward]

> Visio is just painfull

What's so painful about it? It's a great tool; powerful, simple and reliable.

I'd be lost without it for doing network diagrams, rack configurations and such.

Can you name an alternative?

Re:Open Office

[fruey]

Maybe it's just me, but on a 1.3Ghz machine with 128M Ram, Open Office PowerPoint clone "Presentation" thing is painfully slow.

No way I could use it to do a large presentation, whereas I can use a PII 350MHz with 64M Ram quite happily with PowerPoint.

Am I missing something?

Re:Open Office

[Ctrl-Z]

xfig? ;-)

Re:Open Office

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes you are... a second CPU ;)

I can't explain it, but I have a single CPU laptop, and a dual CPU desktop, and I wait for hours for anything to happen on the laptop but the desktop feels nice and snappy.

The processors are about the same speed.

I wonder what effect hyperthreading CPUs will have on the speed of Open Office.

Re:Open Office

[oliverthered]

Well , you cliiiiiikkkkkkkkkk heeeeeerrrrr, and then draaaaagggggggg it over theeerrrreeee. It huurrrrtttttts.

I have using the mouse when I can ususlly do things so much faster on hte KB.

I'll just add another row to this xyz..... shit it only supports 4 rows.

Repeat, the UI is just sooooo painfull to use, word art is better and easier.

Re:Open Office

[zoward]

Open Office under SuSE 8.1 Personal crashes when you try to open even a vanilla MSWord document in it. I thought I must have misconfigured something until I read Thomas C. Greene's review of the distro in the Reg mentioned he had the same problem, and had to download the original from OpenOffice.org to get it to run. Forget MSOffice; personally, I'd be just as happy to be able to run OpenOffice under SuSE.

Re:Open Office

[Bigbutt]

Project. At least at work.

I am 90% windows free but I still have to pop across the cube to a windows box to work on a "project".

[John]

Re:Open Office

[Planesdragon]

Anything anyone else would 'miss' from the Office Suite?

em dashes.

To date, every Linux word processor I've tried has looked at an em-dash (the single character that word puts in when you use two dashes--that is, two hyphens--like I'm using them in this sentence) as a letter in a word, and not a punctuation mark.

If I ever get a word processor working the way I want it in Linux that isn't word on wine, I'll post a journal about it.

Re:Open Office

[HiThere]

The important parts of Access are the GUI builder and the report writer. For scripting Python or Ruby would be a better choice than Basic. For a database you could use MySQL, Postgres, or SleepyCatDB. If you use Python as your scripting language, attaching to the database is pretty easy. Probably also with Ruby, but I'm less sure.

It's the report writer that's the real kicker. Generating *.pdf files would generally suffice, however, but page headers and footers are important, so html isn't a good intermediate form. Tex, perhaps? (I don't know it well enough to say, but those who do are very impressed by it.)

Of course, perhaps you meant you were adding the system calls that access needs to Wine, or some such, in which case I appologize for misunderstanding.

Re:Open Office

[Anonymous Coward]

We tried switching a few users from MS Office to Linux/OpenOffice and it failed horribly, Evolution wasn't feasible because we extensively use Public Folders (anyone know how to make that work?) and there were just so many annoying little nags and glitches with formatting when opening MS Office Documents. We could easily live with that if there was some easy way to convert macros over. And Evolution needs to support Public Folders.

Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[Max Romantschuk]

I wonder how Microsoft is going to respond to this one... Earlier today I learned that Microsoft is trying to force users to upgrade their OS with Office 11... This is an option they obviously would not like their users to have.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[Max Romantschuk]

Still, there are a lot of users out there with a stable (if you can call it that) 98 or ME installation which works for them on a low-spec machine.

The Win32 API hasn't changed much so it's more of an artificial way to force upgrades on people... If it works don't fix it, right?

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[Unipuma]

Could this perhaps be that with Windows 2000 SP3 or Win XP (which are required for Office 11), they can have different API calls that have not been made available in Wine/CrossOver?
I can imagine that by changing the software to make calls to the newest APIs, there's a smaller chance that these have already been made available to Linux users through Wine/CrossOver, and thus users would find their Office 11 not working on this SuSE version.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would somebody upgrade their Office to 11 and not their OS to XP? It doesn't make any logical sense. XP is far better than any 9X and if you don't want to use it, Office 2000 is still the best Office Suite on the market. It is such a joke non-issue that it amazes me that people even care.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[Anonymous Coward]

And those people would most likely not be upgrading to Office 11 (and may not even be at Office 2000 or XP). If it is a low spec machine than they probably haven't upgraded anything in years. This is just Microsoft trying to get away from the nightmare that is 9X. I don't blame them. If I made that crappy of a product for that many years I would want to get away from it as fast as I can. Apple is going to try to get away from all the years of nightmares that was OS 7,8,9, too.

I would also point out that the general ledger system I use at work has minimum OS (AIX) and database (Oracle) versions that it supports. Now obviously they don't get kickbacks from these companies but it does force our hand once in a while.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[Raleel]

Do we honestly expect MS to support 5 year old OS's? Come now. How many programs on linux require glibc2.2? Sure, the ME part is a little suspect, but give them a chance to divest themselves of the old baggage.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[Error27]

The difference is about money. With Linux you can upgrade if you want to or not if you don't. The old products are always available for free and the new products are also free.

The other problem is chargin for security upgrades. With Linux security upgrades are always free but with Microsoft you sometimes have to pay for the software all over again.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[Stonehand]

Old versions are abandoned in Linux, too. Does Red Hat still put out patches for RH-3.0.3? Does SuSE support version 6.0 anymore? The individual package upgrades aren't free, as they're not offered anymore. So again, you need to upgrade your distribution if you want recent security fixes, et al...

Don't expect lifetime support for software. Period.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[ncc74656]

Do we honestly expect MS to support 5 year old OS's?

Win2K isn't five years old. SP3 has been nothing but bad news...not only are there the privacy/security issues with its license (brought up here before), but every single machine I've seen that was "upgraded" to SP3 has started misbehaving in one way or another. On one machine, a FireWire webcam that always worked fine before would cause a bluescreen when a filter graph involving the camera was closed. Another machine was hosed so badly that MSN (the dial-up service, not the website) wouldn't work. As a result, all of my Win2K machines are at SP2. They still have most (all?) of the updates in SP3 and some of the updates that have come along since SP3, but they all still run properly and I didn't have to "accept" SP3's onerous EULA to get there.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[Anonymous Coward]

I just don't understand. What more do we need? How much further can we go? Why do we NEED office 11? Office 2000 is just fine for office use, and you can't get much further without bloating for no reason. I just can't see why people need to upgrade things that are just fine the way they are.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[IamTheRealMike]

I can imagine that by changing the software to make calls to the newest APIs, there's a smaller chance that these have already been made available to Linux users through Wine/CrossOver, and thus users would find their Office 11 not working on this SuSE version.

Short answer: no.

Long answer: probably no. There is basically no way that they can stop Office from running on Wine. They can't stop it legally, that would be a major violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, and they'd be convicted almost instantly. They can introduce new APIs that aren't in Windows already yes, but then everybody would have to upgrade Windows in order to install Office - unless that upgrade was free, that's not going to happen quickly. If the upgrade was free, then Wine would probably be good enough to have the upgrade installed on top of it, I installed IE6 today and it worked great.

Even if there was no upgrade for these new APIs, Microsoft still lose, because Wine can easily have new APIs added. The simpler the APIs, the easier they are to add.

The only possible thing they could do is to add such a large amount of code, such complex features into Windows that the Wine team get seriously behind, and then make Office require those features. Which is in fact what they appear to be doing with the SQL Server based filing system idea - if Office 11 was to require that, then CrossOver would be seriously screwed as it'd be an absolute nightmare to replicate. It could be done though, DirectX and RPC are nightmares to replicate too, but it's happening none the less. Anyway, this is just idle speculation, you don't just "add" support for that kind of thing to Office overnight, even if they threw resources at it, it'd take years.

Wine has caught up with Microsoft. There are only a few issues remaining with Office itself, for instance online help doesn't work right yet. Some more polish, and Office will run perfectly under Wine. At that point it's simply a pissing match, who can throw resources at the Windows APIs faster? Maybe at the moment the answer is Gates, but Linux development scales far far better than Windows development does by Microsofts own admission, so basically Gates is screwed - we've won.

Mark my words, in a few years we're going to take it for granted that we can download and use Windows apps just as easily as people actually using Windows, just as we take it for granted that we can run servers that stay up permenantly, and that installing Linux is easier than Windows today.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[cmeans]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that for WINE to work you'd still need the Windows DLL's etc. for the API mapping to work, which means that each user would actually need to have a license for Windows...which is all M$ should really care about...it's still getting people to buy their OS, even if they're not using it directly all the time...

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[IamTheRealMike]

Not exactly. Wine is capable of using Windows DLLs if the Wine builtin ones aren't up to scratch, but you can run it without any copy of Windows at all. The apps currently don't work as well though. One day, hopefully wine won't need this crutch anymore...... it's certainly not a critical piece of the architecture though.

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[cpeterso]

I don't think Windows (in all its forms) is as much a moving target as the WINE developers make us think. Most commercial Windows apps want the largest possible customer audience. So most companies develop their apps run on Windows 98 as a bare minimum. If WINE can just emulate the (five years old) Win98 APIs, most commerical Windows apps should work fine (including Office 2000).

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[IGnatius T Foobar]

There is basically no way that they can stop Office from running on Wine.

How about this:

• Place a new API call in Windows, let's call it VerifyGenuineMicrosoftWindows() or something to that effect.
• Office 11 makes a call to this API, looking for a specific cryptographic signature
• Windows replies, using the private key, which is embedded into only Genuine Microsoft Windows
• Any WINE developer who attempts to extract the private key for use in the WINE package is promptly thrown in jail, courtesy of the DMCA (i.e. the Disney/Microsoft Copyright Act)

Sound feasible?

Re:Interresting problem for Microsoft...

[Error27]

>> So again, you need to upgrade your distribution if you want recent security fixes, et al...

But "it's free, so quit your whining"...

More information/commentary at

[elodan]

the Register

Ease of installation is what counts

[ites]

The 'just download package X' syndrome is one of the main barriers for simple folk using Linux.
Actually, even for experienced users, it's a relief when we get something like Debian's apt.
What SuSE are doing here is to provide a distro that will run MS-Office with no tuning or tweaking or HOWTOs.
This is at once banal, and important. Seamless compatability with Microsoft products is a key tool in the fight to move users off Windows.
And this news is a sign that SuSE have understood this. That's worth saying.
(Just to give another example, we spent several days trying to make Oracle 9i work with Debian, and RedHat, and finally tried SuSE... it came with the necessary (trivial) user accounts preconfigured, and Oracle 9i installed and ran almost at once.

Re:Ease of installation is what counts

[Anonymous Coward]

gee... installing the crossover software is sooooooo hard...

$ ./name_of_shell_script

i guess by "simple folk' you mean retards?

Re:Ease of installation is what counts

[Anonymous Coward]

...Debian, and RedHat, and finally tried SuSE...

The install manual says that you need the user 'oracle' and the group 'dba' (and maybe others). Or does RTFM conflict with ...no tuning or tweaking or HOWTOs...?

Hmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Even Microsoft CEO, Steve Ballmer can no longer deny that Linux has established a place in the server room of enterprises."

We'll see about that.

Great...

[Calomnious Awkward]

...now I can finally run NortonAV on my Linux box too. (or was that 'have too')

As if Slapper weren't enough...

[jaredcoleman]

I hope this can run .vbs scripts!!!

very good business model...

[Anonymous Coward]

1 - embrace and extend
4 ?????
5 - profit!!

it did work for M$....

Re:very good business model...

[Theodore Logan]

Yeah, foor legs good two legs bad!

Why not? It works for Slashdot trolls.

Btw, There's usually a 2 and a 3 in there.

Re:very good business model...

[Anonymous Coward]

IT'S NOT A FLAMEBAIT. Freak moderator. It's THE EXACT OPPOSITE.

Visio Whore

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps I'm just too much of a Visio whore but I actually _like_ it...it allows me to do spiffy flow-charts very quickly. Database modelling is OK (for showing to clients I guess, the Create Table statements tell enough of the story for most). I haven't ventured into the UML/code generation aspects of visio for ages, don't intend to. I can type much faster than I can click about 20 times to create a single property.....What is it about Visio that you think sucks? What is better? You mention there are no good open-source alternatives, but what are the closed source ones?

Re:Visio Whore

[oliverthered]

The UI in Visio is just so painfully crap, I havn't worked out how to add an element using the keyboard yet, I've been told it's not possible you need drag and drop.

Visio is just far to slow, I find it easier to produce documents with diagrams in corel draw or word.

Visio is a good idea, it's just the UI that Sucks, I've never found anyone that uses it by 'choice'

Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[delphi125]

http://news.google.com/news?num=30&hl=en&ie=UTF-8& filter=0&q=cluster:www%2ebetanews%2ecom%2farticle% 2ephp3%3fsid%3d1035914045

I'm surprised this isn't on the /. main page already!

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[strmcrw]

http://www.heise.de says than MS Office 11 will need Windows Installer 2.0, which only WinXP and Win2k+SP3 have anyone knows if this Installer runs under Wine ?

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[Krilomir]

So what? Use the new office with the new windows. Windows XP and 2000 has been out for quite a while, and Office 11 isn't even released yet.

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[gl4ss]

yeah it's not like ms is supporting 98 even anymore anyways, i thought they acted to it by now as if it never existed.

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[delphi125]

It will require 2KSP3 or XP, both of which have 'interesting' License 'Agreements'. Oh I forgot, they have stopped supporting 98. Never mind the fact that anyone BUT MS writing software for Windows still has to support the huge installed base of 98 users, in addition to 2K, Me, XP. But I do agree with you except: use the Old office with the old Windows (if you have to).

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[tijsvd]

Neither will Slackware 4.0 run Open Office. Is that so weird?

If MS is not allowed to depend on new features in a new OS, it would hardly be worthwile to create new features, would it?

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[hankwang]

So will this increase or decrease the push to upgrade to new versions of Office? People are more or less forced to upgrade to new Office versions partly because you can't read those Word documents with old versions of the software which people e-mail to each other for some reason (this viral behaviour is thus propagated as the upgraded user starts to mail his documents around).

Would Office11 not running on older computers (a) boost the sales of w2k as well, or will it (b) have the opposite effect of being unsellable?

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[NetFusion]

Windows Installer 2.0 for Win95/98/ME Released 25 Sep 2001

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[MtViewGuy]

Mind you, this is actually in many ways a GOOD idea.

Given that Windows 2000 Professional and Windows XP uses the memory model pioneered by Windows NT (e.g., vastly improved memory management and much more graceful recovery from program crashes), anyone running Microsoft Office 2000, Office XP or the upcoming Office 11 should run it under the versions of Windows I just mentioned. Windows 95/98/98SE/ME uses an older memory management model, one that has a bad habit of running out of system resources quickly and doesn't gracefully recover from program crashes.

Small wonder why Windows 2000 Professional is so heavily used in corporate environments nowadays.

It will be very interesting to see if the new version of SuSE Linux will support Office 11, including Office 11's XML support. Or better yet, will we see new versions of OpenOffice and StarOffice that generates XML documents that can interoperate with Office 11.

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[CavemanKiwi]

Hmmm so it is only on the operating systems with the EULA which allows M$ full access to ya PC, NASTY!

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[ncc74656]

http://www.heise.de says than MS Office 11 will need Windows Installer 2.0, which only WinXP and Win2k+SP3 have...

Here's the version for pre-SP3 Win2K and NT 4...needed it to install the Platform SDK.

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[commodoresloat]

yeah... if you must use Win98 then run Office 97. Or 2000, but even that is bloatware, esp if you're running on a c.200 MHz pentium 2. If you want to run the new version of Office, get a Mac. :)

Re:Windows 98 won't run MS Office

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the big deal? When OS X was released it was made clear that legacy apps wouldn't work with it.

The reason why Win9x and Office9x were so unstable was that they were designed to be backwards compatible. If they tie it to a single generation of OS, I think they can make it slimmer, and more stable. Let's hope anyway!

oh great

[Tom]

The death of office productivity finally available for Linux users, too.
Will the paperclip work, too, or will we just have to put up with virus-prone macros, proprietary and bloated document formats, the crappy user-interface and memory-hogging sluggishness?

Oh, wait. Now Linux users can pay Microsoft money so they can continue fighting Linux wherever they can.
Go left, everyone just one crucifix.

Re:oh great

[Anonymous Coward]

> crappy user-interface

Jeezuz! You must be kidding!

I suppose emacs is your idea of a great user interface, you fucking retard.

Re:oh great

[Tom]

Read any paper written by someone with a clue about interface design - windows and office are nightmares. Just because you've become used to it doesn't mean that it's good. Humans have adapted to tyranny, hunger, disease, religion and a billion other bad things, so windows is by far not alone there.

And no, emacs isn't my idea of a good UI.

There are a lot of resources out there about good interfaces and interface design. Spend ten minutes with google if you actually care.

just like xandros

[leuk_he]

It's just like xandros that includes the crossover pluging for the xandros 1.0 $99 product.

If you want a debian clone instead of a suse clone.

always a first.. yes but..

[SystematicPsycho]

Probably nothing new other than it's a major announcement, and I bet redhat are closely watching this one. Seriously now, isn't this a big kick in the face? What about OpenOffice, AbiWord etc? The only reason I've ever needed WORD is because some moron wrote something and sent it over in a .doc file or .ppt. I think the real answer is for the justice dept to force m$ to open up there document formats.

Re:always a first.. yes but..

[MyHair]

I work for a Fortune 500 company, and there are way too many Excel and Word documents to ingore when considering an office suite. Many of the more useful Excel files use VBScript because many of the savvy users learned bit-by-bit how to do some neat feature in Excel. Don't underestimate the time it would take them to transfer those skills to another office suite and don't underestimate their loyalty to Excel.

I'm too far down the bureaucratic chain to know the hows and whys of our future software purchases, so I don't know if Suse running MS Office makes things more attractive for us or not. But I am fairly sure that all other user software needs (terminal sessions, browser plugins, other network clients etc.) are available with free software now.

I have a pipe dream of building a modified Debian distro targeted for my company with a distributed filesystem for the .deb files for fast reimaging and updating. Maybe I'll try it sometime.

Re:WINE

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes it is. The cool acronym says otherwise, but that is nowadays just to have a cool acronym.

Since it does more than just reimplement the API, it is by definition an emulator. Get over it.

Way to go SuSE!

[croftj]

Being a big fan of SuSE, this is great news. Now all I have to do is convince my boss to fire a co-worker to free up the $129.00 for me to buy a copy and get rid of my 2nd PC!

Re:Way to go SuSE!

[Anonymous Coward]

$129? No way, dude! Just download it!

Re:Way to go SuSE!

[HeUnique]

You can't. There won't be a free version.

The next version sounds interesting, too.

[Observer]

Note that they're scheduling an Enterprise Desktop version for Q1 2003, too, for the larger scale companies. (And already have 2 German commercial organisations on board, with 3K and 1K desktops respectively, to smooth out the rough edges in deploying and supporting on that scale.) Sounds as though this might turn out to be a serious injection of business realities into the task of getting Linux et al established at desktop level.

Too expensive for non-geeks

[TheLinuxWarrior]

Why bother with SuSE for $129, when you can get Xandros (which has the same office functionality) for $99.

And of course Xandros is based on Debian, which I hear has a package management system that is the cats ass.

Re:Too expensive for non-geeks

[RebRachman]

Most individual users would put up the extra $30 for an operating system by someone already recognized as an industry leader, rather than Xandros, a newcomer. To me the exra $30 sounds worth it.

Re:Too expensive for non-geeks

[TheLinuxWarrior]

That's definitely a good point. That's also why I mentioned that Xandros is based on Debian, which has been a pillar in the linux community for some time now.

Re:Too expensive for non-geeks

[man2525]

Xanadros has some industry experience, namely Corel Linux. From their corporate background, In August 2001, Xandros acquired the Corel Linux Business Division's award winning software development team with the objective of creating the Xandros Desktop.

Re:Too expensive for non-geeks

[NeonSpirit]

According to an article on The register the version of CroseOver which comes with Xandros is not supported by CodeWeavers.

Having said that, you need to know that Crossover is not supporting the version that comes with Xandros. For support, you'll have to pay extra. The nice thing is, you probably won't need any support. "It just works," is what Xandros CEO Michael Begos told me. Now that I've had the chance to install Xandros and run it, I have to agree. .

This could account for the price difference.

Re:Too expensive for non-geeks

[TheLinuxWarrior]

I missed that article.

That's definitely worth consideration when making the choice.

...besides Office ?

[mirko]

This sure sounds interesting (despite my reluctancy towards SuSe stuff). Now the real good thing would be if I could use it for more :
I am a Win/Cubase guy and I would like to know whether this API would allow me to use my souncards drivers, their own utilities, Cubase... etc.
BTW, could I play DVDs using PowerDVD ?
My realpoint is : how deep does it "simulates" windows ?

Re:...besides Office ?

[(H)elix1]

As far as playing DVD's... take a look at http://videolan.net/. They have windows, solaris, bsd, linux, and a few other platforms covered. Try it, and if you like what you see in windows it will be the same deal with SuSe.

Re:...besides Office ?

[son_of_asdf]

I think that we audio folks are going to have to wait for Ardour to finish 1.x development before we have a powerful, stable pro audio app on Linux. Aside from the cool factor/interesting challenge of getting Cubase to run under an emulator, I can't see it being up to the task of serious multichannel audio production, at least not for a looonnnnnngggggg time.

Re:...besides Office ?

[mirko]

What about GSMP ???

why?

[tps12]

I guess I'm glad that something like this is available (rather than it not being available), but I have to wonder what the point of it is. The Open Source development model results in software that is provably superior to proprietary solutions (see Edgar Raymond's excellent essay, The Cathedral and the Bizarre for more info). This is why KOffice and GNOME Office are so great, despite their small development teams and short development cycles. So why would anyone even want to run M$ Office on a Linux workstation? No thanks, I'll stick to what works: AbiWord, Gnumeric, and Tux Racer!!

I bet it won't run Office 11

[microbob]

Seems the new Office 11 will only run on XP and W2K SP3.

Get the scoop from ZeeDee Net....

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-963777.html

I mean, it was just a matter of time....

Re:I bet it won't run Office 11

[Pike65]

I don't care.

I'm still using Office 2k, and it does everything I want it to. I see no point in upgrading because I don't use all of the features of 2k, let alone the bloat that comes with Office XP.

Of course, this argument only works as long as they support the older file formats in newer versions. I don't dare speculate how long that will last bearing in mind the above nastiness . . .

Split MS!

[JanMark]

Let's face it, MS Office is important to many people. Infact it is one (or the) killer-app for MS Windows. They know this in Redmond. I would vote for splitting MS in two (or more) parts, one would do MS Office and the other MS Windows. I think the Office people would port Office to Linux in no-time. It would make business sence, but it would not be good for the Windows company.

Think of all the unnecessary programming effort that SuSE and other are putting in getting MS Office to work under Linux!

MS is a monopolist and it fighting hard (and dirty) to keep it that way.

I vote for breaking up MS or at least decoupeling MS Windows and MS Office.

You may think I am a dreamer, but I am not the only one!

Re:Split MS!

[Anonymous Coward]

> I vote for breaking up MS or at least decoupeling MS Windows and MS Office.

Who gives a god damn what you'd vote for ?

Re:Split MS!

[jonesvery]

I was going to moderate, but found that the options that I have available just weren't sufficient. Consider yourself to have received a (+1 idealistic, but alas, the DOJ has tried that already and met with very limited success).

:)

Re:Split MS!

[Anonymous Coward]

So, that would so not happen. If you split MS by division, then the Office team would continue to do what it does: make Office for Windows. The Mac BU (Yes, it is a separate division) would still continue to make Office for the Mac, and now there would be even less communication between the two teams. Rewriting Office for the Mac was done because there was an opportunity there.

Yes, the Mac community is dwarfed by the Windows community, but Apple has a thriving, loyal set of customers, and a good portion of them use MS Office for Mac. If you want MS Office team to port Office (~15 Million lines and growing) to Linux, it would require the team to rearchitect the entire products. Lets say that you are a business and you spend 20 years developing a product. Would you like to reengineer your product with different tools, different APIs, etc.

Also, how much of the Windows APIs does Xover Office really emulate? Microsoft adds new APIs to every version of Windows, and Office uses these APIs and sometimes has to support working around these APIs just in order to get things running on older OSes. Is it really a surprise that Office only works on a few older versions of Windows, and not all versions?

These products are great. Microsoft has been spending Billions of dollars in research and development costs for years to make these products better and better. While some people out there are still figuring out how to make the old versions run on their cheap PC and others are trying to make cheap knock-offs, Microsoft is analyzing where the products should go next. By the time you get compatability with Office XP on Linux, Office 11 will be far ahead, and Office 12 will be even farther ahead, and when Longhorn comes out, how many new features are you people going to have to clone to compete? Dell alone pumps out a Million computers a Month with Windows XP. Why? Because people want it. And most people aren't the kind that thinks that Microsoft is out to get them. Most people think that Microsoft has some amazing products.

Typical /. front page headline: Someone (anyone) tries to beat Microsoft. Read more into the story: Someone has made a copy of Office 97 or 2K. Why are Open Source people waiting for inspiration to come from Redmond? If Linux were as great a desktop experience as you people claim, and as easy to set up as you people claim, then why isn't it packaged in pretty boxes and installed on Millions of NEW computers a month? I've used Linux. I've used Windows. I've used MacOS. I've used commercial UNIX. Of all of these, Linux is at the bottom of the totem pole for OSes which can be configured without assistance from an expert.

Oh, and there's one other thing. Linux and Windows differ in that Windows is self consistent. Linux is just the kernel, and everything else is anybody's guess.

Re:Split MS!

[Anonymous Coward]

I vote for breaking up MS or at least decoupeling MS Windows and MS Office

Good thing the DOJ isn't interested in the votes of girl-less, thick glassed, pasty white, pimple faced, pear shaped nerds in this case. Then again, if they actually did take this to a vote, you and the .0001% of people that agree with you wouldn't come close to winning.

Re:Split MS!

[Anonymous Coward]

I vote for YOU being put on MY foes list.

'Open' Wine?

[nurb432]

Are codeweavers still going to fold back in their work for getting this to work into the orginal wine code?

Or have they changed their minds and decided to keep all this cool stuff to themselves, much as others have been doing lately..

MSOffice ablity isnt worth that sort of cost to me personally ( startoffice/Koffice does fine for what i need ), but if its folded back into the open code, then its worthwhile.

Re:'Open' Wine?

[BoBG]

Codeweavers is/has already (and presumably will continue to) live up to this promise. Their enhancements to WINE have been submitted (and accepted) into the main WINE tree.

I have sat down and beaten the freely available WINE into running Office, and IE, and Quicktime. I had the benefit of an installed crossover plugin/office to compare config files, etc and it still took me a couple of hours. What you get for your money is a pretty installer and all of the time you would otherwise spend config'ing to do other things. Well worth it to me. IMNSHO, Codeweavers is a company well deserving of my money and support.

Re:'Open' Wine?

[IamTheRealMike]

Well worth it to me. IMNSHO, Codeweavers is a company well deserving of my money and support.

Most definately, I've just been playing with 1.3.1 beta and it's fantastic. At work, my last Windows dependancy was IE6, which works great in CrossOver. Not only that, but I can get informal tech support on the mailing lists too (sshhh). Jeremy White, the guy who runs CodeWeavers, is a top guy - a brilliant mix of hacker and business man. He does in fact contrbute patches to Wine himself and has very high standards when it comes to software freedom. Think of them as the RedHat of Wine.

Wine has a big perception problem, because people download a development Wine release, or even Wine CVS (i'm guilty of this), finding that nothing works and assuming Wine sucks. No - you'd be surprised at just how much works when you have a proper distro like CrossOver. I have trillian sitting on my desktop now for instance, it's by no means perfect (in fact it suffers from a few serious bugs still) but it runs, runs stable and is very close to running perfectly despite not being a supported app.

1.3.1 is out soon, like in a few days. I'll be the first in line with my wallet.

Re:'Open' Wine?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a beta tester, you get it for free ;)

Also, don't forget that the 1.3.1 beta runs other things - like Office XP (the cracked version), ACT 6, Flash MX, Dream Weaver, Kazaa, mIrc, Internet Explorer 4,5,5.5,6, Real One and other apps pretty smoothly..

Worth the money!

It does not have Outlook so it is not worth it.

[sh0gun]

With the functionality and appearance of the mail client Evolution, users will not miss Microsoft Outlook.

With all the available office like components for Linux the only in my opinion that Linux is missing is a good email client and it looks like they will just let you use Evolution instead of trying to have Outlook work on Linux. Quite a shame, I could go without any of the others but I need Outlook.

Re:It does not have Outlook so it is not worth it.

[nonmaskable]

Outlook works great with the Codeweavers crossover office product - I use it every day on my work desktop. A few minor cosmetic glitches, but all the functionality is there.

Free Port of MSAccess??

[nurb432]

What/where is this beast?

Re:Free Port of MSAccess??

[oliverthered]

www.sourceforge.net/projects/haccess

Sourceforge site is a bit outof date, so mail me (at the sourceforge email address) if you want a copy/assistance

Re:Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the most intelligent thing I've read all day.

Pffft

[bogie]

Just keep piling on that proprietary code into the core of your distro. We all know thats the key to making the linux desktop successful. Just keep adding more and more proprietary code until you've created another windows.

Hell the GPL just exists so that companies can pay lip service anyway. Right? I mean that's the trend now. Make your distro mostly GPL and then tack on some proprietary stuff?

Everyones doing it, so it MUST be the right thing to do.

I can't wait until every linux distro is in some small way proprietary! Won't that be great! After all it IS how linux made its name.

Re:Pffft

[bogie]

The thing is that Suse, Xandros et al don't get is fighting MS with proprietary code is a loser. I mean if one thing has been proven its that no company's proprietary code can stand up to MS. Its too easy for MS to crush them.

Open Source is Kryptonite to Microsoft. Its the ONE and ONLY thing they can't destroy by regular means. They can't buy it out, and they can't embrace and extend it. That is my point, and that is the only way to win against them. Tacking some code on your distro which allows people to run MS apps just plays into their hands. It certainly doesn't lead to freedom from MS, it just reenforces their monopoly on another platform. When will companies learn this?

Re:Pffft

[binaryfeed]

Simply put, if your worried about this, use Debian.

Re:Pffft

[HiThere]

Well... no. Debian tries, but there are still problems. If you are *really* worried about this try the HURD. There I believe that they have actually removed all commercial code.

OTOH, if you just want to do a pretty good job... Debian is better than LibraNet is better than Red Hat is better than Mandrake is better than SuSE is better than Lindows.

N.B.: These are estimates only. And I don't know where the other distributions fit in. But some of the kernel drivers have potential problems. Nobody can know how serious those potentials could become. In fact, it's impossible to write code that doesn't have potential problems, thanks to our wondrous patent office and legal system. You just choose the degree of risk that you feel safe with, and hope for the best.

Re:why? - Access that's why

[Mantrid]

I can replace Word easy. I may even be able to pry Excel out of Accounting's cold dead fingers. I am unaware of any open source application that is a good replacement for MS Access. I'm not a programmer but I can make useful tools in MS Access (with some light scripting - I can do some code, but not a whole app from scratch).

If there is something out there that is a match for Access XP, I'd sure like to know about it - it should be able to connect to anything ODBC can connect to etc...

Come to think of it use of Outlook XP is taken for granted - it integrates with our Exchange server for appointments etc, etc...is there a OS replacment with the range and features for the Outlook/Exchange combo?

Having replacements for these things would continue to drive cracks into our dependance of M$.

(not trolling here, I seriously would like to know about this! To start if I could get a linux box running that could report off of P.SQL and MSSQL that would let me get started...)

Competition Brewing

[orcaaa]

There are so many companies focussing on the desktop these days. Redhat, Mandrake(it always did :)), Xandros, Lycoris, Lindows and now SUSE. This makes for a very interesting year coming up to see which one, if any, gains supremacy in the Desktop arena.
BTW, Whats next, Slackware and Gentoo based desktop solutions ;) ?

This is bad

[henrikhansen]

Microsoft Word, Excel etc. are proprietary formats. Why would anyone who knows about these things use MS Office anyway?

Open Office gets better and better, and I think Suse ought to support the ideas behind open formats instead of being selfish and thinking in the short term.

Re:This is bad

[adamshamblin]

I think Suse ought to support the ideas behind open formats instead of being selfish and thinking in the short term.

Selfish is right. What do moves like this do to the development of open source/free office suite development? We all know by now that MSOffice isn't necessarily 'better' but 'common'. It's not like by adding support for Office they are doing anyone a great service. At the risk of my Karma, I'd have to say that this is just SuSE whoring.

Re:This is bad

[karlantoine]

They can support MS Office for the short term AND OpenOffice for the long term.

Re:This is bad

[yatest5]

Microsoft Word, Excel etc. are proprietary formats. Why would anyone who knows about these things use MS Office anyway?

Because (insult removed here), the OS / Apps your company chooses to use shouldn't influence the people / companies you work with.

Because when you tell your client 'we can't read *.doc format', you'll look a bit of a dick.

Re:This is bad

[Anonymous Coward]

That's why, after the conversion, you have one machine with a licence for the Office applications, to do document conversions when/if necessary. IIUC, though, OO reads .DOC just fine anyway.

~~~

Market differentiation and $$s

[jonathanjg]

I'm just your average slashdot reader, and I am getting confused myself about which product does what. I don't think your average joe at company X stands a chance of deciding upon which linux/office/ combination to go for, especially since we will see this market expanding even further. Also, am I the first one to see this, but what price advantage is $139 compared to a an XP licence in the business world? (After all you don't get fired for buying M$). There just needs to be something more to make a company go for the KILLER LINUX DESKTOP and this is MARKET DIFFERENTIATION

Crossover on RedHat

[Anonymous Coward]

Well it seems I have the tech support from CrossOver confused as they can't come up with a reason why CrossOver office won't install on a RedHat 7.3 box... anyone have similar problems?

Office 11 EULA

[earthforce_1]

So what is to stop microsoft from slipping something into the EULA prohibiting Office 11 from being used on a "potentially viral" GPLed OS?

Re:Office 11 EULA

[Calomnious Awkward]

Let's hope so. That would be a blatant anti-competitive action. Somebody might even get the idea to file a lawsuit.

Re:Office 11 EULA

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that nobody reads or obeys EULAs? And that with the exception of one or two US States, they aren't binding?

Re:Office 11 EULA

[oliverthered]

Fair use, I don't think that they will be able to nforce such a restriction in the EULA, especially in Europe where there's a whole lot of consumer protection over contracts of sale.

Re:Office 11 EULA

[Animats]

So what is to stop microsoft from slipping something into the EULA prohibiting Office 11 from being used on a "potentially viral" GPLed OS?

The fact that it's an illegal tying arrangement under the Clayton Act. That's not an enforceable contract provision, and Microsoft has never tried to enforce it in court.

The problem will come when they try to enforce it with Palladium.

Mac Office on Linux?

[alistair]

If running Microsoft Office on Linux is such a requirement, why is there no effort to run Mac OS X applications on Linux?

Microsoft Office X is far nicer then office 2000/XP and can read all these file formats. Microsoft make good money out of this port so aren't going to stop producing it any time soon. Because Microsoft don't own the underlying OS they are restricted in the number of changes they can make to Office X to break emulator compatability, unlike with WINE.

Yet OS X is based on Free BSD, so a binary compatability layer should be far easier than emulating Microsoft Windows. I realise this wouldn't give us Visio and possibly not Access, but I would take this option up long before running a heavyweight WINE install on my box, plus we would get the nice Mac plugins which ae generally every bit as good as their Windows versions.

Re:Mac Office on Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Er. Microsoft Office X is compiled for PowerPC.

Wine doesn't have to emulate the x86 processor for Win32-x86 binarys runing on x86-linux-wine.

Re:Mac Office on Linux?

[GauteL]

Because x86 Linux is more widespread and important than PowerPC-linux.

WINE is not an emulator, it's just an implentation of the WIN32-api. Running Office X would also require emulating a totally different processor architecture.

Running OSX-apps on PowerPC-Linux might be possible if someone implement all the APIs necessary (perhaps GNUStep might work in the future to run cocoa-apps).

There are however LOADS more developers for Linux/BSD on x86 than on PowerPC.

Re:Mac Office on Linux?

[GreenKiwi]

If you are running LinuxPPC, you could check out MacOnLinux.

Writing the equivalent of WINE for OS X would be a very very large undertaking.

Re:Mac Office on Linux?

[Jon Abbott]

Office X is written in Carbon, which is a compatability layer to allow Mac OS applications to work seamlessly with Mac OS X with minimal code tweaking. Sadly, Carbon applications cannot easily be ported to other platforms. According to this article, Microsoft's MacBU unit chose Carbon because it allowed them to port their code to Mac OS X in a year.

Even if Carbon allowed for easy cross-platform compatibility, it would be at the source code level and not the binary level. The best hope we would have to run Office X on Linux would be to couple Mac-on-Linux with a fast PPC system emulator for x86. Unfortunately the latter does not exist (to my knowledge).

Re:Mac Office on Linux?

[tonyhill]

Mod the parent up.

If the source code for Office X were available, porting could be fairly straight-forward. This is not the case. Office X is already compiled for PowerPC hardware, and MS is surely not going to release the source code.

WINE works because Windows programs compile to the same processor instructions that Linux or BSD on x86 do. It is then only the linked libraries that WINE needs to replace.

For more helpful info about WINE, check here.

Tony

Re:Mac Office on Linux?

[Ulwarth]

Crossover is for people who have PCs. They are emulating an x86 OS (Windows) on Linux for x86. Running OS X applications would require processor emaultion as well - not only a whole new ball of wax, but likely to be very slow.

It would make sense for Linux PPC to be able to have a WINE-alike that can run OS X apps, and in fact it probably does have such a thing. But this is not big news because Linux PPC is a minority inside a minority.

Re:Mac Office on Linux?

[IamTheRealMike]

If running Microsoft Office on Linux is such a requirement, why is there no effort to run Mac OS X applications on Linux?

A few reasons:

• Why bother? Linux has equivalents for pretty much every OS X app in existence. Whether they are better or not is really a matter of opinion of course, but one of the driving forces behind Wine is lots of custom business apps that are written for Windows and there are no equivalents anywhere else for them. This doesn't apply to the Mac.

• It'd be very, very hard. OS X isn't as complex or featureful at the API level as Windows from what I've seen, but even so replicating APIs is insanely difficult. Don't let the open code of Darwin fool you, for most of the APIs that "Mac" native apps use, as opposed to ports of Linux apps, the implementations are closed. Being based on FreeBSD would only make it every so slightly easier. It'd require a complete reimplementation of Quartz for one, and then Aqua - that'd especially cause problems as Apple would sue for infringing their look and feel. This case would be indefencible, you can't legally protect a look and feel, but they'd do it anyway (they have before), and who would fight the m?

• It'd be slow - you'd have to do VMware style CPU emulation as well. Wine is in theory as fast as Windows, because it's just remapping function calls, something that would happen under windows too. The moment you throw CPU emulation in, performance would die. Add into that all the performance issues OS X had, and the insane amounts of optimization they had to do (think quartz extreme) in the early days as well, and you have unusably slow apps.

Because Microsoft don't own the underlying OS they are restricted in the number of changes they can make to Office X to break emulator compatability, unlike with WINE

Myth - Microsoft cannot make any API changes that will break wine, as those same changes would break all the other Windows apps too. The most they can do is add new APIs. Note that I think you can run apps written for Windows 1.0 on XP: that's how good they are at preserving compatability.

I realise this wouldn't give us Visio and possibly not Access, but I would take this option up long before running a heavyweight WINE install on my box, plus we would get the nice Mac plugins which ae generally every bit as good as their Windows versions.

???? Wine is about 7mb? It's far from heavyweight, this is just FUD. Oh yeah, one other myth - IE starts fast because it's well written by the way. Compared to Mozilla on Linux, and IE6 under Wine on Linux, Moz has the advantage (in theory) yet IE still starts faster.

Not sure what you're thinking of when you say "nice mac plugins" - there are more plugins available for Windows, and plugins integrate with the web page so "nice" doesn't really enter into it. Considering that I'm buying CrossOver purely so I can run the Adobe SVG plugin in IE (no other browser supports host scripting merge, which I need), this point irks especially.

Re:Mac Office on Linux?

[cfish]

You guys know that SuSE is struggling to make some profit.

I use both Office X and office XP for biz school work. (unfortunately)

For start, the UI is entirely different. Templates look totally different. For example, the panels in OfficeX powerpoint looks totally different. OfficeX has "sub-bullet-indent" and I never found that in OfficeXP. Plus, there are a lot of add-ons and 3rd party software that has no OfficeX port. StatPlus for excel for statistics analysis is one of the progs that I have to use to compensate Excel's weak statistics features.

Man, I miss ASCII text but it just isn't gona happen in business.

That's Hilarious

[EzInKy]

"The posting attributed to Microsoft said: "We understand that this decision won't be popular among all of our customers, but it allows us to create a better and more stable product..."

and new and improved EULA's, too.

Ever hear of private property?

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as SuSE abides by the GPL when distributing GPL code, it doesn't fucking matter if they tack on some proprietary shit. For Hell's sake, what the fuck did you think StarOffice 5.2 , or IBM's ViaVoice, or Sun's Java tools were fucking Free Software?

If you don't like what SuSE's doing, then don't buy SuSE. Is it that hard to use Debian or Slackware or *gasp!* Gentoo?

Re:Ever hear of private property?

[bogie]

"what the fuck did you think StarOffice 5.2 , or IBM's ViaVoice, or Sun's Java tools were fucking Free Software"

Umm no I didn't. Nor did I support it. So what's your freaking point?

"If you don't like what SuSE's doing, then don't buy SuSE"

No arguing there.

Re:Ever hear of private property?

[HiThere]

As long as the code that is not freely copyable isn't required for the rest of the system to work, and is on separate CDs, and can be installed without having those guarded CDs, then there isn't any problem. It's just not clear that that's what's being done here. But it could be.

It will kill nothign at that price

[nurb432]

At that price per desktop, corporate users might as well go for the 'real' thing. No way to justify it.

Personally, I dont like Microsoft's applications/OS, but from a business standpoint, there isn't any real advantage to go an *alternative* route, when its at this cost level. ( not even touching on TCO issues here )

And *many* reasons to stay with MS, in this case.

True there are other reasons to switch, but you wont get it done this way.

I'm a little tired...

[Anonymous Coward]

of all the effort that is going into porting Windows programs to run under Linux. The entire idea of the open source/free software movement is to free yourself from proprietary software reliance. I moved to Linux in '98 to avoid using closed-source, stifling software that really gave me no real choices and freedom. It is time that the Linux advocates put their money where their mouth is. If you are an open source developer, you should write for the open source movement, not assist Bill Gates with embrace ans extend. Microsoft talks the talk when it comes to hating Linux and open source in general, but if you pay for Office and other programs, then you are doing nothing to help the open source movement. Face it, people... you DO NOT NEED ANY Microsoft programs anymore. Unless you are a hard core gamer, you don't even need Windows. One of the things that keeps open source from really taking off in the general population is the continued reliance of Windows-based software. Linux could dominate the dekstop in 5 years if people would develop alternative and quit the BS of interop programming. Linux is supposed to be an alternative to M$, not a partner, willing or unwilling. It's time we got off the M$ horse and walked on our own.

Re:I'm a little tired...

[mccalli]

Face it, people... you DO NOT NEED ANY Microsoft programs anymore. Unless you are a hard core gamer, you don't even need Windows.

OK then...just find me full-featured replacements for:

• Quicken (UK)
• Cubase Audio
• Premier
• Acrobat (full thing, not the reader)
• Exchange Server (calendaring, LDAP/IMAP does rest)

and I'll agree. Got any? The Ksomethingorother Quicken-a-like isn't there yet, neither is GnuCash. Cubase Audio? Hmm. Premier? Nope. Acrobat? Not that I'm aware of, though I imagine this has the best chance of having an equivalent. Exchange Server? Nope, that's why the Kroupware project exists.

Nope, sorry. I play zero PC-based games, and I still need Windows. Not even a Mac will do - still no UK version of Quicken (my constant cry...).

Cheers,
Ian

Re:I'm a little tired...

[Anonymous Coward]

• Sibelius

Re:I'm a little tired...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ian,

Find a few willing Linux developers and write your own. By your own admission, there is a European need for fiduciary software. If it's not there, roll your own. I have written a number of tools for myself that there not present, or if they were, were shoddy at best and lacking feature sets that I wanted. For example, I wrote my own image manipulation program to handle my digital images that I take. It does everything from resizing, framing, filtering, etc. The only thing that even comes close is ImageMagick.

Re:I'm a little tired...

[mccalli]

Find a few willing Linux developers and write your own.

A good answer. Yes, that's the actual solution to the problem.

The trouble is...when? I have a full time job, a two and half hour each way commute and a nine month-old daughter to look after.

So whilst I accept your point completely, it's simply not practical for me. That's why I'm prepared to pay Intuit for Quicken - it's my time versus their costs. My time is more rare.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:I'm a little tired...

[babbage]

Just to pick nits, aside from Exchange server you just listed a bunch of non-Microsoft programs. Now granted, they all need Windows to run [will Wine do? I honestly don't know], but Quicken is already an alternative to MS Money, MS afaik doesn't offer media software like Cubase or Premier, Adobe themselves offer versions of Acrobat [dunno about more than reader, you may be way ahead of me here] for Win/Mac/Linux/Solaris, and Exchange, well, aside from Domino/Notes there is no major alternatives, and all the DIY approaches fall down for want of calendaring [but keep an eye on iCal, in terms of both the protocol/format and the Apple application -- that may be the best hope for an Exchange/Domino killer that I know of today].

It's not exactly ideal, but you might be able to get away with a Mac and VirtualPC. That'll get you native versions of most of the software you want, and you'll be able to run Quicken in emulation mode. If you need to run Exchange, well, I *guess* you could do that in emulation, but it would be more of a stretch. But anyway, for the other stuff you should be able to get by with OSX/VirtualPC.

Re:I'm a little tired...

[Anonymous Coward]

still no UK version of Quicken (my constant cry...)

I predict your "constant cry" for money management software would lessen if you went Free and Open Source with your application and OS choices. For starters, you'll be accounting for far fewer expenses in the form of license fees and upgrades of proprietary works. :-P

Re:I'm a little tired...

[WWWWolf]

I use Windows for most of the games and video capture/editing, and Linux for everything else... Recently, I've noticed that Linux is getting really, really good in graphics and design side. Clearly beats the crap out of Windows, but Macs are probably still the kings on this field, even when the machines and programs are more expensive - but that's just quality. =)

Acrobat (full thing, not the reader)

There are some stuff for this: GhostScript has ps2pdf, which is just sweet except that it rasterizes fonts other than the Adobe basic fonts, and doesn't compress (haven't used this for a while, maybe it has improved). <bauhaus>But then again, who needs fonts other than Helvetica? Who even needs capital letters?</bauhaus> =) Some apps have pretty good native PDF output. For example, Scribus supports PDF output pretty decently, font embedding and all.

Re:I'm a little tired...

[Anonymous Coward]

Much of Acrobat (at least V4) runs fine under Wine.

Re:I'm a little tired...

[MooRogue]

* Quicken (UK)
Well, Crossover Plugin supposedly runs Quicken as well. I haven't tried it yet, but maybe it would run the UK version of Quicken

* Cubase Audio
I'm not familary with this product, so i can't comment

* Premier
Cinelerra makes a good effort. The UI is different enough from Premier that it takes a while to get used to, but all th right features are there

* Acrobat (full thing, not the reader)
hmm... i guess you could use ps2pdf to create PDF documents, then use xpdf to view them

* Exchange Server (calendaring, LDAP/IMAP does rest)
Samsung Contact (formerly HP OpenMail) *supposedly* is a Exchange server replacement. I haven't had enough experience using it to really make a judgement call on whether it fully replaces Exchange or falls short. Anyone else out there know of it?

For myself, i've fully made the switch to using Linux 100% as a desktop environment. If an application does not have linux program that compares to the Windows version, i've found that either Crossover, or just plain WINE is enough tog et any remaining apps working just fine in Linux.

Re:I'm a little tired...

[IamTheRealMike]

Face it, people... you DO NOT NEED ANY Microsoft programs anymore. Unless you are a hard core gamer, you don't even need Windows.

I need it. My project at work involves web design, and it HAS to be able to work well in IE. Because even version 6 has its own quirks and peculiar interpretations of the specs, I can't just write to standards and hope it'll work (though I usually write for Moz first, then hack it to work in IE), so I have to be able to run it. Without Wine I wouldn't be able to use Linux at work at all, so I'd be even more reliant on proprietary software.

And of course, you're forgetting, sometimes/often commercial software kicks the ass of the open equivalent. The interactive query interface for my web app only works in IE. Why? Because Mozilla screwed up when it came to proper plugin embedding APIs. Adobe did support Mozilla once, then they scrapped the API they'd previously been advocating and kicked Adobe in the shins at the same time. They still have no good plugin interface, yet IE has had a massively powerful system for ActiveX controls to integrate with IE for years, and it's totally stable.

I love Mozilla and use it as my main browser, have done for years, but this time around they screwed up and IE does it much better than they do. Considering that most of my users will be on IE, I'm not about to drop the interactive query feature either - it's something Mozilla users will have to do without.

Re:I'm a little tired...

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps you didn't hear, get the penguin shit out of your ears. THERE IS NO LINUX EQUIVILENT AVAILABLE ANYWHERE AT ANY COST!

Re:I'm a little tired...

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, exactly!

No-one is married to "Microsoft". They are married to the apps they use (Microsoft or otherwise). To paraphrase: "It's the apps stupid!"

Linux is severely lacking in mature robust user level apps and until there is a Linux version of all adobe products, cubase, MS office et al. there is NO incentive to switch to a new OS what costs the same as windows (As far as THIS article is concerned) but behaves completely differently and doesn;t run the same or even similar apps.

An FYI there is no way a real time 0 latency program like cubase, logic or reason is going to run through any emulators. They need to be natively written to handle the real time hardware acess required or they are completely useless.

Re:I'm a little tired...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm... Spend months and months writing a "money" app so that I can run Linux, one that will surely suck in comparison to "Money" and "Quicken". Or buy one for $50 at CompUSA and use it on Windows. (Multiply x5 or 10 of my favorite apps that have no Linux counterpart)

Hmmm, HMMM! Which one will I choose? Which one...

Sometimes I don't believe that any single person using Linux for anything other than a gateway or web server actually uses a computer at all.

Typical geek comment with zero business sense.

[1000101]

How many geeks are going to buy a desktop OS?

If nobody ever paid for the OS how do you think all of these linux distros would still be in business?? My God, it doesn't take a genius to figure out you need income to pay your employees and stay alive. These free-for-all linux times we're living in will come to a screeching halt within the next few years. Why you ask? Because most of the distros are made by companies that are publicly held and their share holders will demand more revenue. If the OS is so much better than OS X or Windows, why is it such a bad thing to pay for it anyway?

Re:Typical geek comment with zero business sense.

[Angry White Guy]

Because I helped make it. That's why.

Um, and how do I win here?

[occamboy]

OK, so here's the selling proposition:

For $129 I can get an OS that runs Office (but doesn't include it, as far as I can see) and which possibly runs other Windows apps, and which definitely runs Linux apps.

Or, for much less than $129 I can get an OS (Windows XP), that absolutely runs MS Office and which definitely runs vrtually all other Windows apps.

Linux is useful and fun for us nerds, but is a bit of a sell to non-nerds, and I don't see the above selling proposition as favoring SUSE for desktop applications -- Linux has no inherent appeal to non-nerds.

If one really wants or needs to run MS Office, XP makes sense. If one wants Linux on the desktop, I'd go with Redhat 8.0 (with its out-of-the-box non-sucking fonts, except in Mozilla) along with Open Office (excellent free replacement for MS Office) and other software that is designed for Linux use.

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[alecto]

For $129 I can get an OS that runs Office (but doesn't include it, as far as I can see) and which possibly runs other Windows apps, and which definitely runs Linux apps.

Where? (Excluding OEM bundles, NFR copies, demos, etc.)

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[NeonSpirit]

And where are you going to get an XP licence, retail on amazon is $176.99 for an upgrade and $269.00 for full, this is after rebates. With corporate bult licencing you will get this down by 20-30% but SuSE will almost certainly do the same.

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[ajs]

Or, for much less than $129 I can get an OS (Windows XP), that absolutely runs MS Office and which definitely runs vrtually all other Windows apps.

Linux is useful and fun for us nerds, but is a bit of a sell to non-nerds, and I don't see the above selling proposition as favoring SUSE for desktop applications -- Linux has no inherent appeal to non-nerds.

Linux appeals to many demographics. The key is that Linux is not actively marketed to those demographics. Every home user I've gotten to really try out Linux has found that it meets or exceeds most of their needs, and the big seller is that it saves them having to go out and purchase dozens of software packages that just come with your average Linux distribution.

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[occamboy]

XP comes preinstalled in most corporate-type PCs. The savings from deleting it is typically small or none -- I'm pretty certain that it's well under $129.00.

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[Dean Sas]

from suse next year?

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the OS (I think it is an OS this time - certain earlier Microsoft products don't really qualify...) that "absolutely runs Office" retails at GBP 163.32 for a SINGLE user licence. (There is a special price of GBP 81.07 but only for customers who have already paid full price for one of the aforementioned non-OSes.) One would hope that SuSE's product would be licenced to the public under some combination of free software licences, so the customer need pay only once. A company with four new machines (and thus falling outwith the domain of the Open licence, remembering that in any case the Open licence does NOT apply to Windows except in so far as the customer has previously bought Windows at full price) may stand to gain, after allowing a 35% surcharge for British customers (cartage, duty, transaction fees), around GBP 541.41.

(Having said that, same customer might stand to gain around GBP 2551.31 by buying pure binary CDs of the software from www.cheaplinuxcds.com or similar, and using Red Hat/Debian, OpenOffice and KDE (no proper SuSE there); the customer may also buy one CD-ROM of Debian to use as a bootstrap and then compile a system from newly-downloaded or bought source.)

(Microsoft prices are from www.dabs.com; prices may be a few pounds higher or lower at other resellers, and the number of Air Miles (or similar) granted may vary and may be nil. Prices include Value Added Tax; there is a carriage charge of up to GBP 7.05 including VAT.)

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[HiThere]

Since SuSE is using CrossoverOffice, I persume that it will be released with the standard CodeWeavers commercial product license. In other words, you can't copy it. And you *really* can't distribute it.

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[cheezedawg]

You could wait until Microsoft offers XP Pro for $40 to registered Microsoft partners again. They have done this twice so far this year, and they throw in a pack of Big League Chew gum to boot. Or you could get XP home edition for about $90 OEM. If you pay $269 for it, then you are a moron.

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[zurab]

Or, for much less than $129 I can get an OS (Windows XP), that absolutely runs MS Office and which definitely runs vrtually all other Windows apps.

First, See the retail XP home edition pricing.

- Upgrade from Win98/ME: $99
- Full version: $199

Sure you can get it cheaper from other sources legal or not. Most of them still end up above $129 even for home edition. That's for retail pricing.

Linux is useful and fun for us nerds, but is a bit of a sell to non-nerds, and I don't see the above selling proposition as favoring SUSE for desktop applications -- Linux has no inherent appeal to non-nerds.

Second point, it's not about nerds or non-nerds. You need to read the referenced article from SuSE about the product release. The title in the heading says "SuSE Linux Develops Linux Desktops for Enterprises" in big letters, cannot be missed. Later in the article - "For the first quarter of 2003, SuSE Linux projects the release of SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop. With a focus on easy central administration, this Linux version will be optimized for deployment in large-scale enterprises, public administrations and companies with multiple locations." Now, when you talk enterprise, it's a slightly different animal. Licensing and contract terms are different, prices are different, etc. MS has a tendency of forcing customers to upgrade even if said upgrade is met with firm resistance from customers. In the same eweek article read the figure that 60% of MS' customers still run Win95/98. Clearly, these customers are resisting the cost of upgrade as well as being locked in one of the new controversial licensing schemes from Microsoft, some of them even ending up paying more than once for the same software.

From what I read and know, there is definitely a market there that will explore and consider an alternative supported OS that will run MS Office reliably; since they will not have to incur significant user training costs. They definitely will not switch everyone from Win9x to Linux overnight but they will be willing to evaluate and implement on a smaller scale as a starting point. SuSE's job is 1. marketing to and convincing these people, 2. delivering a reliable product. Once you pass the test, have few key happy customers under your belt, then others will start noticing you.

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[Anonymous Coward]

Redhat 8.0: After EIGHT versions, fonts don't suck anymore! Yay...!

(?)

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[Anonymous Coward]

More to the point if you include all distros. After 500 versions font's almost don't suck any more.

Pathetic. Mow many more years before they don't suck at all on all apps in all distros? 10? 20?

Tired of waiting, waiting, waiting, always waiting for Linux to catch up. I've got real work to do...

Re:Um, and how do I win here?

[Anonymous Coward]

Excluding OEM bundles . . .

Catch me running it!

[BluBrick]

Until you do, I have a Win partition capable of running any win32 s/w, and that recent has win32 files saved to it. Try to prove that those files were saved under something other than windows. Oh wait, dont do that until both of our two critical inhouse apps (both VB) run under wine. Running Office 19xx/20xx is all well and good, but INHOUSE apps are where the biggest userbase is at. As soon as I hear that VB6 apps run perfectly under Wine, I start running some sort of linux desktop at work. Until then, I'm shackled to Redmond.

Could you repeat that?

[linuxhack]

which I hear has a package management system that is the cats ass.

... so, does that mean that you like it?

Re:Could you repeat that?

[TheLinuxWarrior]

I'd love to try it, but I'm not a Debian user. That's why I said "I hear". That seems to be the number one thing that Debian users talk about as being the advantage of using the distro.

Since I work for a large corporation (100K users), we've chosen a distribution with corporate focus and support plans.

I did try to install apt-get for rpm on one of my systems, but it failed, and I haven't followed up to see if it has been fixed. It's been a while now, I probably should give it a shot again.

Re:Could you repeat that?

[HeUnique]

If you're using redhat - go to freshrpms.net and download/install the apt4rpm - works like a charm under RH 7.3 and RH 8.0

For other RPM based distributions - apt4rpms.sf.net

Re:Could you repeat that?

[TheLinuxWarrior]

I think the last time I tried it was on 7.1 or 7.2.

I'll give it a try again.

Thanks for the info.

Re:why? - Access that's why

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the problem is not access more than word or more than outlook. The problem is lack of a really nice office suit that looks nice, works easily and can work with other office applications. To date Open Office, StarOffice don't cut it. MS office does a better job becauseit is coherent, easy to use, powerful and works nicely.

If no one can create an office suite including all there is in MS Office, Microsoft will continue to rule.

Like hell...

[Sacarino]

Followed the trends lately? Pay-per-use software licenses? If you can't BUY your copy of software X anymore, you just LEASE it from Microsoft then $150 for a desktop ain't that bad. I mean, you may get fscked on the Office "lease" (whatever it's called) but at least you wouldn't be paying an ongoing OS fee as well.

You use Abcess? Ewwww...

[Anonymous Coward]

I can hear my girlfriend whispering "cheeky" as she reads the subject line over my shoulder, but nevermind that. Linux does have a unixODBC driver, but I've never used it. MySQL and PHP work nicely for my home database needs, and I use MS SQL at work anyway. (Bleah) I do think that MySQL talks to ODBC, but you'd have to read the manual for details.

As for replacing Outlook, have you tried Ximian Evolution? I use it on an Athlon XP 2000 with 512MB RAM and it works pretty damned well. It's not the bat out of hell that Sylpheed is, but Ximian claims that Evolution can talk to Exchange servers.

Re:You use Abcess? Ewwww...

[Mantrid]

Access is good for providing short databased that interface with the main databases (running on Pervasive.SQL which does have a linux server package - hmmmmm) and MSSQL.

MySQL, as I understand it is just the database right? I'll use the p.sql tool or the MSSQL tool sometimes when I need to do updates or look up data fast. The problem comes in providing the standard user with 'access' (haha) to the data in a way that works for them.

What OS utility, program, etc would I use to do this? GUI is quite important for a lot of users :)

Re:You use Abcess? Ewwww...

[jd142]

Access is more than just a combo of mysql and php. It pretty much allows the user to click through wizards and make basic entry forms, queries, and reports. While you can certainly accomplish all of that using php and mysql (I do), the ease of use of Access is its main strength.

I can walk a person through making a query over the phone with my eyes closed. Telling them how to make a while loop and proper line termination syntax is simply not going to happen.

In fact, as a database implementation, it isn't that great.

The closest thing to access is StarOffice/OpenOffice's data access and macros. If Access is a 9 in terms of ease of use for simple things, SO/OOo is a 7.

Visio Alternative = Dia

[jaaron]

While it doesn't have some of the features and templates that Visio does, Dia is a free (GPL) alternative.

Crossover is the StarOffice killer

[nsushkin]

Unfortunately, Crossover lets you use Microsoft Office in Linux. That just means that fewer people will buy StarOffice or be interested in downloading OpenOffice. As the result, OpenOffice will be killed.

I'd much prefer OpenOffice survive and compete with MS Office. Crossover is evil.

Re:Crossover is the StarOffice killer

[Anonymous Coward]

But if Microsoft Office is a better product, which right now it is, isn't it better to have them compete directly with StarOffice so that they will be encourage to make an even better product? Isn't that what capitalism is all about?

Re:Crossover is the StarOffice killer

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't that what capitalism is all about?

No. Capitalism is all about money. Period.

Re:Crossover is the StarOffice killer

[Anonymous Coward]

Capitalism - an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.

So fuck off asshole troll.

Re:WINE

[The Original Yama]

A true emulator duplicates the hardware as well as the software. WINE still relies on the host CPU's instruction set, so it is not a true emulator. If you ran, say, MacOS on an x86 CPU, that would be emulation, since you would have to duplicate the instruction set of a PPC.

Better uses for $129

[nagora]

Get yourself a copy of RH/Mandrake/whatever and send the 129 bucks to OpenOffice.org. Why rely on software with no source code? It doesn't make any sense.

TWW

Is Outlook 2002...

[nyc_paladin]

going to work with Crossover Office that Suse is distributing. Besides paying a little extra for Evolution to support Exchange 2000, that's the only thing keeping me from converting all my work to Linux.

I actually own the codeweavers crossover suite...

[Mysticalfruit]

I went out and spent the money and all the office apps work execpt for project... which is a problem for me... I need project. My boss uses project and its part of my job requirement that all my activities are connected to project. Now if there was some application that could RW project files I'd be very happy and could sever my windows ties...

Re:why? - Access that's why

[perlyking]

We are thinking of switching entirely from access to mysql for our fairly small projects. Mysql is much faster, less buggy and is easy to interface to (VB, perl, even access ^_^ ). I dont know whats keeping you with MS Access - are clickable buttons really that important to you (well if they are there are still gui clients for mysql).

SuSE DO support OpenOffice

[pix]

SuSE do support OpenOffice - it is included and installed as standard on SuSE 8.1. If all you want is OpenOffice then just use the standard distro.

This is aimed at companies who have already made a decision that they must have MS Office and want to do it on Linux - SuSE is providing an easy entry.

Re:SuSE DO support OpenOffice

[NeonSpirit]

Or you could use Sun's StarOffice included in ProOffice from SuSE.

Yeah, but...

[FearUncertaintyDoubt]

...I have a lot of Word documents with macro viruses. Will these run properly on SuSe?

Re:WINE

[mezzin]

I am running wine and office runs fine! Crossover office is a wine derived product ;-)

That's why I use OS X

[jbrownc1]

There's a non-Wndows OS that has been allowing you to run Office for some time now. It's called OS X.

Typical business comment with zero geek sense.

[geekster]

Are you saying that Linux will stop being Free and free? Debian?

Re:Typical business comment with zero geek sense.

[Melantha_Bacchae]

geekster wrote:

> Are you saying that Linux will stop being Free and
> free?

Business needs a prepackaged, pretested, and supported OS that they can slap on hundreds of machines at a time. That is where the big distributions and their shareholders will find their money. That will also be a good place for Apple to sell Macs running OS X.

For the geek or group of geeks willing to lovingly craft their own distribution, Linux (or as Godzilla calls it: My Custom OS) will always find a way to be Free and free. It will always do things ten times faster than Windows. And if geeks ever get bored of it, they will just write something else that will be Free and free.

The only threats to Linux are Microsoft's Palladium and Millenium, and the Holling's bill. If we can avoid those, the future for Open Source OSs will be bright for both geeks and business.

Chief Tsujimori: "I won't let you get away. I will never let you escape."
Godzilla elegantly lifts his tail skyward to give her the "finger", crashes it down on the water, and submerges.
"Godzilla X Megagiras", December 2000

VMWare

[jmcwork]

I did not read all the posts but hopefully someone else has mentioned VMWare as an alternate solution. Since there are many applications that are available only on Windows, show up first on Windows, or are cheaper for Windows (SlickeEdit, Rational Rose, etc.) being able to access a virtual machine running Windows is pretty nice.

Re:VMWare

[NeonSpirit]

One of the isues with VMware is that to be legal you still need a licence for the guest operating system, so there is no saving in licence fees. In fact as VMware desktop is chargable there is net cost increase.

VMware does have a place in the market, I am currently evaluating the ESX versoin

Re:VMWare

[Anonymous Coward]

I use an older server (PII 400) running Windows NT4 Terminal Server and Citrix MetaFrame. Then I publish my Windows apps and configure my Citrix client on my workstation to connect in seamless mode. This essentially gets me my missing Windows apps in KDE or Gnome (or whatever WM I feel like that day). They look like they're running natively, anyhow. It's been great for when I need Netware specific tools (and a GroupWise client).

Not that this is a real solution for the problem at hand...It's just what I do.

Why did I post that?

Thats Good

[nurb432]

That's a good thing, i know they used to contribute but wasn't sure if they had taken the easy path and stopped, as several others seem to have lately.

While its an admirable task and they do warrant the financial support for those that need the compatibility, its purely a side issue to me, and was purely curious.

I always strive to use native applications to get my work done. Why only go 1/2 way, if you have the choice as i do.

But i commend them for their efforts in general.

Great, if all you use is Office

[simetra]

Q. How many pc's are used just/mainly for MSOffice?

The industry I'm in relies heavily on 3rd party apps that have been built for Windows. These 3rd party companies have spent millions making their apps work under Windows, because that's what "we" have begged for for the last x years. What are the odds of them jumping up and saying "Hey, you want a Linux version! Okay, we'll get right on that! And it'll be free!" ??

As much as I'd like to ditch MS on my desktop at work, I really can't, and imagine there are millions of users in the same situation.

Re:Great, if all you use is Office

[Anonymous Coward]

As much as I would like to stop doing drugs, I really can't, and imagine there are millions of users in the same situation.

Re:Great, if all you use is Office

[Anonymous Coward]

You dumbass. There are compelling reasons to get off drugs. No compelling reasons to rewrite a perfectly good windows app for a bunch of whining, I want it for free bastards.

What is this Acronis thing?

[Ed Avis]

Licensing Crossover I can understand, its functionality isn't easily duplicated (even by the main release of Wine). But this Acronis thingy? Aren't there already n+1 different graphical partitioning tools for Linux?

The only new thing as far as I can tell is support for resizing NTFS partitions. But now that Linux supports NTFS surely even that could be done. I'm surprised SuSE didn't write their own application... perhaps they were just in a hurry to get something out.

Re:What is this Acronis thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Acronis is SWsoft!
Notice the eminent kernel hackers.
I hope there is no GPL code in OS selector ;-)

pixelbeat

Isn't this admitting defeat?

[realmolo]

Seems like there is a lot of emphasis on running Windows apps, especially Office, under Linux. This is because there STILL isn't anything to truly replace Office under Linux. Isn't that...well...shameful? Wasn't the "free software movement" supposed to make BETTER software than the corporations could? Why can't we have an Office-killer? Actually, I know why. It's hard to make an Office killer, and costs money to do right. And money is the one thing that the Linux developers don't/won't/can't have.

Re:Isn't this admitting defeat?

[borgheron]

Not really. It just provides a bridge for Windows users to start using Linux on the desktop.

There is nothing wrong with maintaining compatibility with legacy systems. ;)

GJC

Re:Isn't this admitting defeat?

[Reziac]

OR... maybe this is simply good competition, so the linux-native office suites will be forced to make themselves just as good (in the eyes of the average user, who needs seamless document handling, not "almost good enough") ... or if they can't or won't do that, die at the hands of natural selection.

As to money, perhaps if the alternatives were just as good, they too could sell boxed copies at solidly profitable prices. Maybe the linux world thinks everything should be free, but average users buy BILLIONS of dollars worth of software off the shelf every year. And this is about reaching the hordes of average users, not about wheedling the attentions of one more tightfisted linuxhead.

Will they ship Windows along with the product?

[joestar]

It would be more consistant. Strange to see a Linux company dealing so much with proprietary stuff.

Re: Linux and g33ks

[p0rnking]

"How many geeks are going to buy a desktop OS? None. How many people want to try Linux but can't give up their Office(tm)? Suse apparently is banking on lots. This is not for geeks. Maybe for geeks-in-training, but not for geeks!" Who said this was for g33ks? "...will allow Windows users to continue using (some of) their Windows applications..." Suse is hoping to add to their current client base, by expanding the use of Linux. Linux is not just for the hardcore g33k anymore, it's for people who want a choice. I will agree tho', Suse is banking on lots, by giving it a $129.00 price tag. If I want an OS to run Windows programs, for that price, I'm better off with sticking to Windows. The price has to be lower, to make it more attractive to make the switch.

Forcing to upgrade is quite OK

[Jeppe Salvesen]

I think it is quite OK for Microsoft to require a more advanced OS with their new Office package. After all, sometimes you need to drop the backwards compatibility in order to move forwards.

However, if they break the backwards compatibility, they should (be forced to) maintain and sell the old office and keep patching those security holes in the previous version. After all, they are declared a monopoly by US judges, and forcing users to upgrade their entire system in order to install Office software would be outrageous.

So - if they continue to support and sell Office 2000, I will not have a big, ethical problem with this. I'll just keep on using openoffice and/or Abiword/Gnumeric no matter.

Re:Forcing to upgrade is quite OK

[schlach]

However, if they break the backwards compatibility, they should (be forced to) maintain and sell the old office and keep patching those security holes in the previous version. After all, they are declared a monopoly by US judges, and forcing users to upgrade their entire system in order to install Office software would be outrageous.

Are you in America? It's very unlikely in this country that any court can/should/would force a company to continue supporting a product it doesn't want to. There are exceptions where public safety is concerned. If someone found a bug that Office documents could cause a computer to catch fire, and not just a little one but a *fireball*, then, yes, a court could force them to do a recall and upgrade (although, for PR's sake, they'd probably do it voluntarily). But because you want to support new file formats? Fuhgettaboutit.

When you're buying Office, you're expecting to be able to use that software as long as you can find computers that can run it. I know, MS wants to change the licensing model. They're allowed to, you know. If it makes money, then they were right. If it costs them a lot of business, which it probably will, then they were wrong.

Bottom line: not spending valuable time supporting products that most people don't own anymore and won't make them much money, freeing up developers to work on new products that can actually make money is better business (and evolutionary) sense than the other way around. So companies do that. If they didn't, they would die.

Re:Forcing to upgrade is quite OK

[Jeppe Salvesen]

I was mostly referring to the "sell" portion. They should be forced to keep selling older versions of their software for those with normal requirements. We use Office97 at work (finally, slowly upgrading to Office 2000), and it words nicely for our needs. All the business logic stuff is (wisely) in separate systems, with just enough glue to avoid a print and ocr solution.

In fact, if Office97 was usd 100 and Office XP was usd 200, most people would buy Office 97. I want people to decide when to upgrade themselves, not allow themselves to be dictated by corporate boardrooms. Whatever happened to customer rights?

What about Macro Viruses?

[iceT]

So, how do you stop Word from sending macro viruses when it's running under Wine?

Should Crossover figure out how to support AV software too? If not, how do you protect the normal.dot file from a macro virus under Word? Would it work with the normal.dot file read-only?

The closer we get to having these applications run WITHOUT adequate virus protection is a pretty serious risk, don't you think?

Re:What about Macro Viruses?

[Anonymous Coward]

Crossover (as well as wine) have full control over the windows API. That means they can prevent viruses from working, just like MS can prevent netscape from running. Crossover can fake access to normal.dot for user modifications, yet prevent viruses from modifying it at all. Remember that wine controls both the program being loaded into memory, as well as all the API used.

Yeah right

[Jesus IS the Devil]

How many days will it run before M$ puts out a patch that'll completely break it for Linux?

Don't count your blessings.

MOD PARENT UP

[Anonymous Coward]

It may not have been the only reason they did it but I'd bet its a "bonus benefit"

No Open Office Visio replacement

[nsushkin]

There isn't really a good alternative to Visio of the same quality of open office. I believe Visio is the only missing piece for me to switch completely to Linux, because there are a lot of Word docs with embedded Visio diagrams that cannot be correctly rendered by Open Office. I wish Open Office had a Visio replacement. Perhaps the OOo Chart project will grow up to be that missing component.

Another minor quip is that there is no PDF export from Open Office that correctly renders document links and references as PDF links the way Adobe PDFMaker does it. Maybe it will come in some future OOo versions, however it doesn't seem very likely to happen soon. The announced PDF export feature seems to be just another link to printing to PDF via ghostscript.

There are also some attempts related to the KDE project worth evaluating.

• Kivio - for all types of diagrams
• Umbrello - for UML

Sounds like WINE

[madshot]

So SUSE is going to configure wine for the distibution so that people that can't figure wine out can still run the m$ product? Personally I am very happy with OpenOffice.

$170 cheaper than windows

[yerricde]

Suse is banking on lots, by giving it a $129.00 price tag. If I want an OS to run Windows programs, for that price, I'm better off with sticking to Windows. The price has to be lower, to make it more attractive to make the switch.

When building your own computer or buying a $200 naked PC, you need an operating system. Let's see now... Windows for $300... SuSE for $130... $300... $130...

Re:$170 cheaper than windows

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on. Who doesn't have an old Windows 9X disk sitting around. For a home user Windows XP might as well just be $99. And if you are buying a PC and plan to use Windows anyway why not buy it with the machine and get the benefit of the OEM price.

Re:$170 cheaper than windows

[p0rnking]

Windows 2000 PRO CD and Manuals OEM - CAN$219.85
Windows 98 REL 2 English OEM - CAN$164.75
Windows XP Home OEM - CAN$149.75
(Deals Direct.ca) And those are CDN prices, so the US prices are like what, 1/3 of that? And if you're gonna say, well, that's OEM, you don't get the support that you would with the full retail, well, look at what Suse is offering for their $129 version "The recommended retail price for one workstation is $ 129.00 and includes detailed documentation as well as 90 days of installation support." Just installation support, nothing else. Linux, from what I remember, was suppose to be "free", charging $129 for a few extra things, that don't fully work yet, is not worth it. I'm sticking to what I said earlier, I'll pay the extra $30 and am sure it'll work with all the programs that I want to use.

Could MS respond to such threats by...

[borgheron]

changing the EULA to make it a violation to run MS Programs on any platform other than a Windows platform?

I mean, considering all of the other ways they restrict their users, I'm not sure this falls outside the realm of possibility.

Just my paranoia showing... :)

GJC

Re:That's right... Some

[the_argent]

Nice point there about some of the community wanting to move Linux onto the desktop. Whether or not Linux is able to gain a foothold onto the desktop market is probably one of the great three Jihad's (the other two being which distro is better, and gnome vs. KDE) that end up hurting linux more than any FUD that Microsoft puts out.

argent

Fixed incomes

[yerricde]

XP is far better than any 9X

Is Windows XP better than Windows 98 on a five-year-old computer owned by a public school system that has to beg for funding to purchase even the slightest upgrades to its computers?

Re:Fixed incomes

[Anonymous Coward]

Then they wouldn't be buying Office 11 would they? This just emphasizes my point. Most individuals aren't going to buy Office 11 unless it comes with their computer which would also come with XP. Most companies use 2000 and would not be affected by this. Most not-for-profits and schools can't afford either and are going to stick with 98 and Office 97 which really is actually pretty good.

Re:Fixed incomes

[Anonymous Coward]

public school system that has to beg for funding

Public schools systems generally demand several thousand dollars from you each year and have you kicked out of your home if you don't pay it.

Re:Fixed incomes

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes.

Taxpayers would need to buy new hardware

[yerricde]

This is just Microsoft trying to get away from the nightmare that is 9X.

Then why isn't there a "Windows XP School Edition" designed to run on the really old computers owned by public school systems supported by people who only grudgingly pay their taxes?

Re:Taxpayers would need to buy new hardware

[Anonymous Coward]

How old of computers are we talking about? There are huge academic discounts available on XP so cost should be an issue and I've seen XP run comfortably on a 400 Mhz machine with 128 MB Ram. If you have less than 400 Mhz then that really sucks. Maybe the next time the school board wants to update the football team's jerseys you can start a petition to spend the money on computers instead.

Re:Taxpayers would need to buy new hardware

[Anonymous Coward]

How are you guys going to affordd Office 11 if you can't afford new computers and Windows XP? Maybe you should get your priorities straightened out. I hardly think your school needs anything beyond Office 97 or 2000.

Pentium 133 won't run Windows XP

[yerricde]

Use the new office with the new windows.

The new Windows, unlike the old Windows 98, won't run on old Pentium 133 computers that public school systems can afford.

Re:Pentium 133 won't run Windows XP

[Anonymous Coward]

You posted the same idiotic comment 3 times. I hope you get moderated to troll hell. If you have 133's then you aren't going to be installing Office 11. There is no reason. The money is much better spent buying new computers. You point is moot and really only serves to strengthen Microsoft's point. I just pray to God that you don't get sympathy moderation and instead get the "Redundant" you deserve.

Re:Pentium 133 won't run Windows XP

[Anonymous Coward]

Well said.

Re:Pentium 133 won't run Windows XP

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, so they aren't going to be installing Office 11 (i don't know who will, because it looks like a lot more feature bloat for no reason, but that's another thread.)

This will still hurt those school systems, because surprise, surprise, Office 11 is incompatible with older office formats. So, all of those school districts which thought they were getting a deal with free MS software are in for a nasty awakening. That's the price for dealing with MS.

Re:Pentium 133 won't run Windows XP

[yomegaman]

Oh, won't someone please think of the children!

Re:Pentium 133 won't run Windows XP

[Anonymous Coward]

Office 11 is incompatible with older office formats

Show me one shred of evidence of that. Microsoft will be adding XML support but it does not intend to stop supporting backwards compatible files.

Linux runs faster than Windows on 1997 HW

[yerricde]

Neither will Slackware 4.0 run OpenOffice.org. Is that so weird?

Unlike recent versions of Windows, recent versions of Linux can be slimmed down to run acceptably well on obsolete hardware.

Re:Linux runs faster than Windows on 1997 HW

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha, you surely are the most bone-headed poster in the history of Slashdot. God, you can literally feel the stupid crawling into your brain after reading your post.

Re:Linux runs faster than Windows on 1997 HW

[Anonymous Coward]

But no matter how slimmed down Linux is Open Office is still going to be slow on old hardware maybe even slower than Office 95 on Windows 95. Slimmed down Linux to me also implies no X at all. I run a slimmed down Slackware 8 as an web server and it has no X. Of course I am running it on Dual 533 with 1 GB Ram and a 40 GB hard drive.

Don't be such a fucking baby.

[Anonymous Coward]

SuSE isn't violating the GPL by adding in this software. Who cares if they do it? I thought the important thing was freedom of choice, not free beer!

Created another Windows? Yeah, Linux is pretty close to that, if you mean the software is totally bloated and extremely unnecessarily confusing. As far as being proprietary like Windows, well, you are pretty far removed from reality if you believe Linux is headed down that road.

The slippery slope fallacy is a favorite of zealots though.

EULA restrictions

[incog8723]

I didn't see anyone comment about the typical Microsoft EULA, so pardon me if this is redundant, but it typically [paraphrased] goes something like this:

ANY MICROSOFT APPLICATION CAN ONLY BE RUN ON A MICROSOFT OS.

Do you agree? yes/no/cancel

at least, that's what I've been seeing lately in their EULAs. It's a shame, but at this point, EULAs are completely legally binding.

I don't understand why linux developers are putting so much time into supporting Microsoft APIs, when they COULD be spending their time optimizing software for linux. It's quite ridiculous.

Now, I know the argument about wanting to make it easier to switch to linux for the average joe. However, we all know exactly what Microsoft will do when people start running their software with linux on a grand scale. They won't let it happen.

Let's say Microsoft Office X.XX works on SuSE Linux. The next release, Y.YY will NOT WORK, and it will be intentional. The "average joe" doesn't want to keep upgrading his distro. I consider myself a geek, and *I* don't want to keep fiddling with shit. I just want the GODDAMN thing to work... I've lost my passion for computers.

It all seems so pointless now :)

I'm so bitter.

Maybe: Suse vs Xandros?

[walterbyrd]

Seems to me that Suse in following Xandros: including crossover office in their diesto. Xandros is less expensive, and, I think, includes a commercial version of wordperfect.

But a lot of people really like Suse.

Just use Quicken (US)...

[Anonymous Coward]

and multiply everything by .64

Re:Just use Quicken (US)...

[mccalli]

and multiply everything by .64

:-)

Seriously though, I'd thought about trying to use the US version on MacOS X. The problem is that it would also need support for UK tax rules.

Cheers,
Ian

XP Home has no support for SMT CPUs

[yerricde]

Who doesn't have an old Windows 9X disk sitting around.

Who can still find his or her old Windows 98se or ME disc? And who can find one that isn't scratched so bad it's unreadable?

For a home user Windows XP might as well just be $99.

It appears that unlike Microsoft's Windows XP Professional operating system, Microsoft's Windows XP Home Edition operating system will not work well with Intel's newest Pentium brand processor. The new CPU has a "hyperthreading" feature that lets two threads share one set of datapaths, for performance that lies somewhere between one CPU and two. It appears as two processors to the operating system, but XP Home supports only one logical processor, unlike XP Pro which supports two. XP Home also does not support a remote desktop similar to that of XP Pro or any X11 based system.

And if you are buying a PC and plan to use Windows anyway why not buy it with the machine and get the benefit of the OEM price.

With the OEM discount, the price of Windows XP Professional comes down to about $141 per seat (based on this 3-pack). If Walmart.com were to sell the $200 PCs with Windows XP installed, the price would rise to $340, and the Windows license would make up over 40 percent of the price of the computer.

Re:XP Home has no support for SMT CPUs

[Anonymous Coward]

Who can still find his or her old Windows 98se or ME disc?

Anyone who isn't a mental midget. And why would it be so badly scratched? It's not like you need it to install, you just need it long enough for XP to verify it as a previous version.

Microsoft's Windows XP Home Edition operating system will not work well with Intel's newest Pentium brand processor.

There is no indication that this will be the case. Hyperthreading will not be handled by the OS but by the BIOS. You have not support at all for that statement.

XP Home also does not support a remote desktop similar to that of XP Pro or any X11 based system.

It might not remote desktop but it does have remote assistance which for a Home user is pretty much all you need.

Re:XP Home has no support for SMT CPUs

[Hestas Coyote]

Quote: Who can still find his or her old Windows 98se or ME disc? And who can find one that isn't scratched so bad it's unreadable?

I can. I know exactly where my win 98, 98se, 98me, NT4 Workstation, 2000 Pro, and 2000 Server disks are. And all are perfectly readable. Taking care of the CDs you want to keep should be a high priority. If you have a burner, you should copy the originals and only use the cd-r media to install and pass around to your friends, or leave out in the open so that anyone can use them.

No longer save as Word 97?

[yerricde]

I hardly think your school needs anything beyond Office 97 or 2000.

That is, until new Word drops support for saving in Word 97 format. Then how are grade 6-12 teachers supposed to respond to kids who typed their report up on a new computer at home, and now the document crashes Word? A computer-illiterate teacher would send the kid down to the office for "hacking" into school computers.

Re:No longer save as Word 97?

[Anonymous Coward]

Again. More FUD from you. Microsoft has not indicated that it would drop support for older file versions anytime in the near future. Right now Office 97, 2000 and XP all use the same file version. Office 11 will add support for saving in XML but will also still be able to save in the current format.

I also have never seen a newer file format crash an older version of any Office document. It just won't recognize it.

When assholes like you spread bullshit all you do is perpetuate the myth that Linux users are just a bunch of angry geeks who hate Microsoft come hell or high water.

0S/2

[asv108]

Maybe. Does anyone else remember IBM OS/2? Excellent Windows compatibility was included all the way to OS/2 Warp and yet it didn't turn out to be the Windows killer.

Os/2 windows compatibility was good, but that's because you were required to have windows disks, which is something they didn't advertise for the obvious reasons. I remember installing os/2 warp and then to my amazement, the installer asked me for windows disks 1-* on the 3.5 drive, but I only had 5.25 windows disks. Needless the say, I immediatly returned 0s/2 warp and waited 6 months for windows 95.

Re:0S/2

[operagost]

Or you could have bought the blue box, which included full Windows support for about $25 US more. OR you could have told OS/2 to look for your Windows floppies on drive B:. OR, you could have swapped the drives in your BIOS or on the cable.

Your loss.

Good luck

[tmark]

I wish these people the best of luck, but I doubt this is ever really going to work in any meaningful way. *If* Office under Linux ever gains any traction and Linux becomes any more of a threat as a result of having Office available on Linux, MS will do something to break it in their next version, sending all the people running Office on their Linux boxes back to buy Windows licenses, and making clearer then ever that Windows is where you run Microsoft Office. In the long run this might do more harm than good.

Short of having a native Office on Linux, the only thing that will be really useful to the Linux community IN THE LONG RUN is to have a viable Office suite that reads the same formats, or have a viable Office suite SUPPLANT MS Office on ALL desktops. Sadly, this day is far from here.

paddling upstream

[bilbobuggins]

IMO, when trying to convert windows users to linux - this is going about things exactly backwards.

the first step is to break the Office reliance, and get people to use OO.org, SO etc. on windows
people don't care what OS they use as long as it does what they want
instead of chasing a wild emulation goose that will never be perfect - leaving the faults of the software to be blamed on the OS, show them a perfect alternative on something their used to and then an OS switch will barely even be noticable

SuSE and the Enterprise

[Homebrewed]

I like SuSE- a lot. That said I'm migrating my SuSE machines to Gentoo and Debian. Why? Simple, really-- lack of support.

Last summer, I got an email from the SuSE- security list. It appeared that they had decided to quit issuing security patches for 6.4, which I had installed on my workstation when I built it, 2 years prior. And just the other day, I got an email saying that they were doing the same with 7.0.

Not a problem? Upgrade, you say? Well, I've upgraded RPM-based distributions, and it just plain sucks. There's always stuff broken... well, everyone who has ever done a full system upgrade to an RPM-based distro knows the score, so I won't go on.

Now, translate this to the enterprise. You've got 1000 2-year-old boxen with SuSE foo.x installed on them. SuSE sends you an email saying they're going to quit issuing security patches for this version in a week-- no warning. You've got a year or two left on the boxen life cycle. So what do you do?

Personally, I don't think that this all-too-real scenario sounds like much fun at the small-business level, let alone at the enterprise. Sheesh, even Mickey$oft has announced that they will support all their products for 5 years from the date of release.

SuSE in the enterprise? Until they decide to maintain a level of security and update support that coincides with the lifecycle of enterprise hardware, I think I'll pass.

Re:SuSE and the Enterprise

[Anonymous Coward]

> Not a problem? Upgrade, you say? Well, I've upgraded RPM-based distributions, and it just plain sucks.

Umm; SuSE is actually the one and only rpm based distro whose update really works. I'm posting this with SuSE 8.1, that has been upgraded from 7.0->7.1->7.2->7.3->8.0 and is now running 8.1. It really works, believe me.

> well, everyone who has ever done a full system upgrade to an RPM-based distro knows the score, so I won't go on.

Not me. Happily using SuSE, and it just works(tm).

> SuSE sends you an email saying they're going to quit issuing security patches for this version in a week-- no warning.

In that case you should install current free version that still has support.

> SuSE in the enterprise?

Oh yes. The only one (almost) ready for it.

Re:SuSE and the Enterprise

[Fizzol]

>Oh yes. The only one (almost) ready for it. Unless of course you've got my mouse and my CD-Rom drive which SuSE 8.0 didn't like at all.

Microsoft Office? That's great but...

[cerebralsugar]

What will really set the world ablaze is emulation of solitare and minesweeper. Those are the real 'productivity' applications.

Why oh Why!!!!???!!!

[GweeDo]

Why are these linux distrobutions doing this? It seems every day we hear about another linux distro including some form of Wine to allow people to keep using license encumbered bad software (mostly MS Office). I am thankful that Redhat has not done this (I run Redhat 8.0) but has instead chosen to include OpenOffice.org a great office suite that I have had no problem importing and exporting (rather complicated stuff even) from Office97-XP formats. Please, all of you that happen to head up some linux distro....DON'T DO THIS!!! Support the better open standard!

So?

[Erwos]

If I want to run MS Office, I'll boot into an MS OS. You need to remember, a big draw of Linux to businesses is _price_ - if they can't beat MS on that (and I have not seen UL's licensing for their proprietary stuff, but you'd think it was per seat if they included Crossover), why would a business bother to even use it? Just use Windows, and skip the expense of converting to a new OS and retraining everyone.

I was at an IBM dev conference last week, and the IBM guy seemed to think that the last hurdle in Linux on the desktop was a good office productivity suite. Hello? Dump $10 million into OpenOffice, and you'll have that!

Honestly, it amazes me that no one's able to just donate a million dollars to get a GPL'd MS .doc conversion util completely done. The ramifications would be so startlingly that it would rock the industry.

Seriously.

-Erwos

Not without my Clippy!

[duncan7]

From The Codeweavers supported apps list:

Known Limitations ...
* The Office Assistant does not work well yet and usually causes malfunctions. Thus it is disabled by default.

Is this a bug or a feature?

Wine is open source

[Moritz Moeller - Her]

The only proprietary thing in the new SuSE edition is the Arconis NTFS repartitioner. I don't see the point though, because if I am using a reliable wine, why do I still need a Windows partition?

Codeweavers make all their source code availble under LGPL at http://www.winehq.com. The only proprietary bits in Crossover Office are some configurations settings and an installation wizard with icons.

Re:Wine is open source

[nagora]

he only proprietary thing in the new SuSE edition is the Arconis NTFS repartitioner.

I was more getting at why are people supporting the use of MS Office than complaining about a lack of source code for SuSE. I assume that Word is still proprietary!

TWW

Re:Wine is open source

[Moritz Moeller - Her]

Ah, ok, I misunderstood. Well, if you already own Word, why not use it, if you must or want?
SuSE does not sell it, AFAICS, so you have to get it yourself.

I would prefer lyx, OOo, kword and gvim any day...

Competition for Mandrake ?

[tananda]

Much fun. The only reason I still have a windows partition is because the sims (AND EXPANSION PACKS) won't run under linux.. yet. SuSE sounds promising, however. The day is coming, soon I won't need windows on my home machine anymore at all. w00t.

LINUX stands for

[GravySkin]

Linux is Nothing Until Xrossover

Cause then they can run windows apps baby.

It's all about apps!

CORRECTION

[yerricde]

You have not support at all for that statement [about XP Home and hyperthreading].

You're right. I didn't. After a little more research, I found that Windows XP Home Edition will support hyperthreading.

Maybe not 97 but 95

[yerricde]

Microsoft has not indicated that it would drop support for older file versions anytime in the near future. Right now Office 97, 2000 and XP all use the same file version.

I've read reports somewhere (I forget where) that either Word XP or Word 11 has a severely broken Word 95 output filter that causes Word 95 to crash when opening even the simplest Word 95 format document saved with the more recent version of Word.

Mod parent up!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

yes!!! mod parent up!!

Industry Leader

[dead sun]

But you can see that right in the article SuSE says, "Today, SuSE Linux, the international Open Source technology leader and solutions provider..."

SuSE is obviously the leader in Linux and all Open Source because they said so in the article. Debian has nothing. Or they're tooting their own horn a little hard maybe. I'm not sure they can lay claim to the title of international Open Source technology leader.

Natively?

[vonsneerderhooten]

Will SUSE support these windoze apps natively, or will this be just WiNE integration. I suppose if WiNE is integrated so well, it's transparent to the user, then that could be percieved as native.

Oh Well... My $0.02

-D

MSs EULAs

[Anonymous Coward]

MS will just change the EULA in the next service pack ( or watever they call them for office) that specificly requires using their shitty OS. I have only looked at one MS EULA resently ( a year ago). It was for EI on HPUX, and contained a phrase that stated that the licensee must have one valid license for the OS that the product was made for. Not to much of a streach to stating that the Product must run on MS Win XP etc.

It's not just the desktop and Office...

[random_nick]

It's not just the desktop and Office what makes MS the industry standard.
For large corporations it is equally appealing that using policies it is possible to control every aspects of your workstations, servers, from installation to additional software roll-outs to desktop settings, from the smallest organizational units to the enterprize level.

Has been done

[Anonymous Coward]

The Windows Media Player has a EULA which requires you to "have a license to a
qualifying microsoft operating system". This issue has come up with the codeweavers crossover product:

http://crossover.codeweavers.com/pipermail/plugi n- support/2002-April/002896.html

Nothing prevents Microsoft from doing the same thing with the Office 11 EULA.

Re:Has been done

[Spoing]

I'm not a moderator currently, though I'll lend my 2+ karm here by reposting it;

The Windows Media Player has a EULA which requires you to "have a license to a qualifying microsoft operating system". This issue has come up with the codeweavers crossover product:

1. http://crossover.codeweavers.com/pipermail/plugin- support/2002-April/002896.html

Nothing prevents Microsoft from doing the same thing with the Office 11 EULA.

Re:Has been done

[IamTheRealMike]

Nothing prevents Microsoft from doing the same thing with the Office 11 EULA.

Actually, the law stops them. It'd be pretty cool if they did put such a clause in the EULA actually, because then CodeWeavers could sue them, win, and have more funds to develop Wine with.

They've tried very hard to do this kind of thing before, but it would be blatantly illegal product tying - they've put in similar clauses then taken them back out again in the past.

Re:Office 11 uses a different format

[Anonymous Coward]

Office 11 uses a different file format, they have to upgrade if they want to be able to handle files that are saved in that format. Of course, they could switch to openoffice, and have some of their kids work on implementing office 11 as a special project.

DIA

[Anonymous Coward]

DIA. Its quirky but so is Visio. I like DIAs quirks better.

Same price as Jaguar...

[djcatnip]

just to point out that $129 is how much Mac OSX 10.2 Jaguar costs, too. yeah, yeah, yeah, hardware costs, lame mouse, blah blah blah.

Re: Linux and g33ks

[Anonymous Coward]

last I check (about 20 mins ago) our oem windows licenses cost $95, microsoft support means 2 phone calls, exactly that, 2 phone calls no more no less. Last I checked XP didn't have enough by way of compatibility or stability to replace 98se in the windows world, it only ships with new pc and only if the customer wants the latest and greatest and has no legacy apps. As for ME (rofl) ok we don't need to talk about that twisted convulution of sick thing. If a customer doesn't have legacy applications, then why move them to XP? why not linux. And if linux why not and a good sql db client, ximian for mail, and openoffice for the rest? In a buisness users aren't supposed to be able to install random applications and expect them to work, so that's not an issue, they usually aren't even supposed to be able to access the floppy and cd-rom drives. In a home environment, the little old lady down the road isn't going to know the difference all she's doing is checking her email and has to call 4 times to find out how again anyway. As for "Power Users" of the windows variety, I thought they were willing to learn new things? Gamers... the last thing you want to do to gamer is stick them on XP, half their games won't work right and XP performance is shit, stick them on 98se where all their games will run.

Linux shouldn't go the OS/2 path

[Jungle guy]

Back when IBM tried to confront Microsoft in the desktop OS field, they tried to make OS/2 completely compatible with DOS. You could run (most) DOS and Windows applications with it.

The result? Software developers wrote programs only for DOS, as they would run in DOS and OS/2. If you wrote a program for OS/2, it would not run on DOS.

Windows emulation and Wine (Wine is not emulator) are cool, but shouldn't be a cornerstone for Linux distributions. They are good if you are in an enviroment where 90% of the programs are Linux native and there is only one Windows software that is stoping the company to migrate. But if Linux developers put too much effort on it, independent software developers won't have an incentive to write native Linux apps.

Who needs a "desktop solution"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not me. Give me a 2.4.19 kernel, ReiserFS, XFree 4.2.x, the Ion windowmanager, XMMS, Galeon, Evolution, multi-gnome-terminal, Emacs, the Ogg Vorbis tools, ALSA, teTeX, CUPS, Perl, and apt-get. Oh, and a working vi for when the shit hits the fan and I have to boot single user. That's all the desktop solution I need.

Though Libranet's PPP tool and Adminmenu are pretty damn sweet.

Stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

If anyone really needs to use Office, they should stay away from Linux.

Strangely enough

[RTPMatt]

er, last night i setup office 2k in my suse 7.2, and it works fine. so im not quite sure what the $$$ is going to get me, other than possibly savin me a few min of d/l time. any ideas?

Mental exercise: whenever you hear 'easy to use'..

[SideshowBob]

If you just don't get 'easy to use'.. try this mental exercise: whenever you read/hear 'easy to use' make a mental substitution: 'easy to use' = 'hassle free'.

I think the phrase 'hassle free' much more accurately describes the problem. If I have to install Linux distribution X, download package Y, deal with package dependencies A, B, and C, edit config file /etc/foo (first learning the byzantine format that it uses) just to perform a task that I can do 'out of the box' on Windows/Mac OS X, then the average user will take the path of least hassle.

This has nothing to do with intelligence, as so many Linux geeks mistakenly assume. Imagine a heart surgeon.. he/she is obviously intelligent enough to get a M.D. and practice medicine. Just because he/she can't edit X11 config files and get Crossover installed does not make him/her an idiot, just lacking in appropriate domain expertise; primarily due to lack of time/interest.

When Linux is as hassle free as more successful desktop OSes then Linux has a chance to make it on the desktop. That is what this SuSE thing is all about IMO, removing one of the hassles a user would have to deal with in order to use Linux as a desktop OS. Now start working on the next one, and then the next one, and then the one after that.. :-)

NTFS resizing

[rickmoen]

The only new thing as far as I can tell is support for resizing NTFS partitions. But now that Linux supports NTFS surely even that could be done. I'm surprised SuSE didn't write their own application... perhaps they were just in a hurry to get something out.

Mounting NTFS and resizing it are distinct problems. Since you mention it, there is a new-ish NTFS filesystem driver for Linux kernels, and it's reportedly more reliable than the old one, but you still have to watch out carefully for corruption problems after using it in read-write mode.

On the resizing front, though, there are more options than most people realise, and I've recently published the results of my research into that subject.

Rick Moen
rick@linuxmafia.com

SuSE!=Support

[theolein]

I am busy implementing an OSS based CMS (PHP/MySQL) for our company and because we had very tight deadlines. I ordered and installed SuSE 8.0 because I was in a hurry and didnt want to have to customise Debian or play to much with config files. MySQL refused to work for some strange reason. I did the whole damn MySQL installation by hand and still it wouldnt work. Called and mailed SuSE support (free installation support is supposedly offered). They mailed back to tell me that MySQL, which is installed by default is not supported and that I should get a service contract. I had by then downloaded and installed Debian and MySQL was of course working. I mailed SuSE back and told them we would now use Debian instead of their useless support contract.

Perhaps I expected too much from them but, really, MySQL is not rocket science and one PAYS for SuSE, damn it.

Full copies of Crossover & WineX HERE

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey guys:

As I believe this software should be FREE, here is a FTP with full copies of:

- CrossOver Office
- CrossOver Plugin
- WineX

ftp://simplylinux.org/pub

KEEP LINUX SOFTWARE FREE PLEASE!

Linux should be better then windows not like it

[heideggier]

If there is one thing Linux needs to do it is to stop being so tied to Windows, I know a lot of people use that OS and it makes sense to ease the user experience by making stuff as similar to it as possible but everyone needs to consider this, a person who lives is squalor only knows squalor. I mean seriously windows is shit,. The only decent versions of it are 98se and win2000, it is bloated, even today, has poor security out of box, in the case of 98 poor memory management, a badly laid out directory structure ("my documents" anyone) and the less said about the registry the better. It also comes loaded with worthless apps just put in because some guy at the Redmond marketing department decided that .NET was going to be the next big thing, A problem that's just getting worse. If you become obsessed with giving people what they are used to then there is no incentive to change, to make things better, ultimately to do it right in the Unix way.

Loads of examples of this mentality can be found, the most striking being the continuation of bad GUI habits from windows, true when there have been examples of good GUI's for years, like MacOS or BeOS.

However, this idea of running Office better then windows has got to be the ultimate, not only is it a slap in the face of all the free office projects out there but it is also redundant, if it talks off Microsoft are only going to work out some way of stopping later versions from running. Clearly effort would be better spent creating a file conversion tool for *.doc and *.xls type files, after all no one talks about running Photoshop under Wine because you can always edit your tiffs in the Gimp.

I am all for the promotion of wine to run old apps that are never going to be ported over, or another way to run games until Linux grows as a desktop platform, but using it to turn Linux into a better windows then windows is a destiny that will only lead to Linux becoming a modern version of OS2 (IBM tried this the same trick years ago). I Personally feel that Linux is a platform that deserves better then distributors like Suse/Redhat just turning into a cheap knock off windows 98.

The reason people are getting so worked up in this discussion is because it is a symptom of a greater illness.

pgaccess

[oliverthered]

Have you looked at PGAccess, it does form and report building for Postgress.

Last Post!

[alpg]

UNIX Trix

For those of you in the reseller business, here is a helpful tip that will
save your support staff a few hours of precious time. Before you send your
next machine out to an untrained client, change the permissions on /etc/passwd
to 666 and make sure there is a copy somewhere on the disk. Now when they
forget the root password, you can easily login as an ordinary user and correct
the damage. Having a bootable tape (for larger machines) is not a bad idea
either. If you need some help, give us a call.
-- CommUNIXque 1:1, ASCAR Business Systems

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...