Slashdot Mirror
Why Buy Microsoft Milk When the Google Cow Is Free?
theodp writes "Touring a high school with Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt informed students they're eating Google 'dog food' because Microsoft's costs money. 'Why would we use Google Docs over like Microsoft Word?' a teacher asked the class. 'Because it's free!' exclaimed a grinning Schmidt. 'Schmidt's comment,' writes GeekWire's Blair Hanley Frank, 'highlights one of the risks Microsoft faces in the academic world. While Microsoft has started offering schools incentives to use Office 365, including free licenses for their pupils, the company is under greater pressure from its competitors. As more schools like Chicago's face budget shortfalls, free and discounted products from companies like Google and Apple, especially when attached to financial assistance, start looking better and better.' Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes and fund schools that way, rather than relying on their charity or free software."
Why does Apple look better?
Both my private and work machines both have MSOffice on them and I still use Google Docs for the bulk of my writing. It is light weight, easy to use, accessible from anywhere, and easy to share with collaborators. Office 365 is a bit better in some of those regards, but still makes collaborating with external entities more difficult.
" ...Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes ..."
Wouldn't they have to pay taxes first?
Apparently countries are very afraid of companies doing their business elsewhere. But that's already happening, companies just virtually move their business to whatever country requires the smallest percentage of taxes of that type. My own country The Netherlands, is very much part of this. So we recieve a few million euro's extra tax income every year, but we and other countries miss out on billions of euro's of tax money every year because this is allowed.
Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes and fund schools that way, rather than relying on their charity or free software."
She is making a dangerous assumption that if tax revenues increased the extra would be spent on schools
1) Cloud office suites store documents.... in the cloud
2) Cloud office suites make you 100% dependent on their apps. Sure... Google uses "open formats" but as they add features and other companies add features, they lose formatting compatibility.
3) Here kid, the first one is free. Using free cloud software is great while it's free. Where's the guarantee that it will always be free? When it's not free, how much will it cost? Will I actually be able to move?
4) Are you seriously asking me to trust Microsoft, Google or Apple more than the other? This just is laughable. They're all a bunch of crooks. The only difference is, at least for now, Microsoft has governments around the world already treating them like crooks, so they at least have to try to be honest. Apple makes absolutely no pretenses of being an honest player and Google... they scare the shit out of me.
In the end, the best solution is a cloud player which has a clear means of licensing their software and running it within your organization without them being involved. So far as I know, Google doesn't even try for this. Microsoft does have a product, but it's not easy to get.
So for now, I'll use desktop and mobile apps and cloud storage. Thank you very much.
P.S. - It's scary how I am not nearly as worried about government spying, I simply accept it as part of life. But Google really scares the shit out of me.
...but will continue to be addicted to a software that is bad for you.
You will still be delivering your data in the hands of people you don't (or shouldn't) trust, with the addition that at least with Word, you know they just want to sell you an application. With Google, the bottom line is not even selling stuff to you, they want your data and usage.
So, you are trading a dealer that will sell you their product, to support your addiction, for a dealer that wants to give drugs for you, for free, and will make you work for them, while you get high.
GREAT DEAL! ;)
Why use Google Apps when LibreOffice is not only economically free, but spyware free?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
TINSTAAFL
does a bell ring in berlin? or the principals' office? or code.crock?
I was asked to pay when my corporation subscribed. Once you're bigger than a certain size, you're stuck paying. Only fools think Google is some fountain of free.
... you'll be ok. Of course plenty of people don't but then the world is full of idiots and IT is no exception.
As for the companies - sure, they're all out to make money one way or another but if they offer something free then lets milk them for it. Just because someone uses MS Office or Googld Docs at school doesn't mean they'll be wedded to MS or Google for life. Most people who use Linux day to day started off using something else at first whether it be an 8 bit home micro or a PC running Windows or a Mac.
'Why would we use Google Docs over like Microsoft Word?'
Stupid question:
- Word should be compared with LibreOffice
- GoogleDocs should be compared with Office 365
The FOSS movement should work to educate such people. Perhaps we should call it Bespoke Handcrafted Libre FOSS because some people equate "free" with "cheap and nasty"
As much as I dislike MS, Google services are as free drug candies. Why not? Are free!
As if there wasn't drug free alternatives available. Also for free and free.
no need to second guess so the text is unthreatening unless misused?
Thinking more about it: Not asking "why use X instead of Word", but asking "Why would you use Word instead of anything else?"
Only reason I use Word is because I from time to time get some strange formated and macro filled document from a client who lives Word and I need to use Word to properly read the document. -> so the only reason I'm using it from time to time is because I'm forced to do
Most of my stuff I write in a normal text editor (and save it inside a git repository ;)).
I only use Word/LibreOffice/GoogleDocs/... for formating and to meet a clients needs.
For personal stuff, which needs formating I normally use LibreOffice.
For publishing stuff I use latex.
-----
Bottom line is, I see no reason to use Word over any other tool.
Even if LibreOffice, GoogleDocs, Office 365 and Word would all satisfy my needs, there is nothing that Word offers to me that separates it from the rest.
-> Why use Word?
the only serious option is (la)tex anyway. It's neither google kind-of-free, nor costs microsoft kind-of-money.
For any other serious application, neither google nor microsoft are an option either.
For anything less serious (private shopping, birthday cards, ...) both options more than fulfil the needs.
Google makes its money via data mining and invasion of privacy. Microsoft no doubt makes some money via the same process, but undoubtably makes the lions share via paid software such as Windows and Office. Short of licensing fees for something like the official Android apps for companies producing Android phones and tablets, I cannot think of a single Google product that costs money in the same way that Microsoft does, so their income has to be substantially based on data mining and privacy invasion.
Ideally the best option for cash-strapped schools would be something like LibreOffice, which is free but has far more functionality than Google Docs and doesn't invade your privacy for the benefit of some corporate entity. But of course, since Google has lobbing power and marketing and LO's makers don't, you'll never see anyone give a fancy speech about the benefits of open source tools such as LO.
And so the cycle of corporate ownership of education continues, it's just simply moving between Apple, Microsoft and Google, none of which should have as much power as they do with people's data...
pussy? Somehow it sounds like it does.
Those using Google docs are not bothered that their data is on Google's servers? I like the offline versions of these tools i.e. MS Word, Excel, Powerpoint primarily because my data is where I want it to be.
'Why would we use Google Docs over like Microsoft Word?' a teacher asked the class. 'Because it's free!' exclaimed a grinning Schmidt.
It is NOT free. It might not involve a cash outlay but Google isn't providing Google Docs out of the goodness of their heart. You are paying with personal information that they can then sell to others who want to advertise to you. You are trading Google something, it's just not cash. Nothing wrong with that in principle but Eric Schmidt pretending there is no cost is disingenuous. When making this deal with teachers to get personal information of minors it's borderline creepy.
People buy what is perceived a "good" deal. Whether the "good" is for the buyer or the seller is always a good question.
Why do people buy bottled water? The tap-water is free...
Why would you call him an idiot? It's a legitimate question. Apple's software isn't free, they offer the same bulk license educational style-discount that Microsoft does. Not to mention that elementary students (K-12) are more likely to use document editing software and unlike Google Docs/Microsoft World, Apple doesn't have a viable competitor in this space, unless you consider TextEdit an alternative...
Why use Google Apps when LibreOffice is not only economically free, but spyware free?
Because it makes certain types of collaboration harder and LibreOffice requires Java which you may not desire for security reasons. I have standardized my company on LibreOffice but we use Google Docs for certain things that require multi-user access like select spreadsheets. Google Docs also give us some (crude) document distribution control that is more complicated to replicate with LibreOffice. This is not to say there aren't lots of advantages to LibreOffice (there are!) but Google Docs does have some advantages which LibreOffice can't yet match. Whether you need those specific advantages depends on your particular situation.
The google cow doesn't give all the same kinds of milk and dairy products available from microsoft. What's wrong with having both?
Also, google is not necessarily free.
Greed is the root of all evil.
If a product appears to be free, you are the product. People write down data in documents, and Google is in the data business. Google docs is far from free, you just pay them different.
to be fair, they are not advertising to minors in any way in google apps, other than in branding.
--Sam
"Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes and fund schools that way, rather than relying on their charity or free software."
Of course she would. Big Labor's all about squeezing those nasty eeeeevil corporations for all they can get.
Why should Google pay taxes to the district so they can buy Microsoft? Why should they be forced to help their competition at gunpoint?
Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
OpenOffice, or LibreOffice if you prefer, is free as in beer and free as in freedom. Why take the lesser free?
Cloud isn't free, Web "apps" aren't free and Google software isn't free. If you don't pay for something from a big corporation, you are likely the product. Good luck to the people willing to put all they digital life's eggs in the unreliable and risky cloud basket by Google Inc. http://kingofgng.com/eng/2014/03/20/cloud-computing-isnt-made-to-last/
. . . at some point Google is going to want a ring. And you're not going to like the consummation.
MS Office is supieror to all other office software in every way. Everything else is just dog shit. Seriously.
You sound like you were living in some dictatorship where the supreme ruler can just ruin your life on will. Kinda sad and funny that is actually the case. I mean, I guess the government can ruin your life in pretty much any place in the world, but for example most of Europe has sane enough justice system to keep your life from being destroyed just by filing bogus lawsuits.
Free isn't as important as "good enough". Just because something's free doesn't mean we all dive into it - it has to be *AT LEAST* good enough as well.
The problem MS has is that things like Google Apps for Education"good enough" for almost everyone's uses and - to schools - free. I've put entire schools onto it. Why not? Gigabytes of "always up" storage, accessible from web, PC, Android, etc. Gigabyte-sized inboxes with one of the best email services around (GMail). Integration into your AD if you desire but also manual / CSV user/group management. Enforced signatures on email, group permissioning, all kinds of integration and automation, and switching to them is just a matter of changing your MX record once on any domain you'd like them to handle (and you can always change it back).
Google Apps so that people can work from home on the same documents they created in school. No need to spend fortunes on Office licensing just so that that temporary, occasional member of staff can edit a document.
Google Calendar, which does 99% of whatever I've seen people actually use Exchange calendaring for, with unlimited calendars, no licence fees, no software installation, no onerous browser requirements, no need to expose your servers to the world.
I've seen schools do most of their timetabling through Google Calendar - it's free and good enough, such that they haven't bothered to look for alternatives because, well, why? They don't have any problems with what it does or does not do.
That's before you even get into Google Pages, all the other stuff they offer and their Android device management (which is great - set policies, install apps and remote wipe Android devices remotely for everything in your Google "domain").
Sure, there are power-users somewhere that have problems with it - I am a school network manager and I certainly had other things that I used and just used, say, IMAP or iCal formats to put the data into the things I wanted it in, but hell - for 99.9% of my users it was more than good enough and, because we were a school, free. I've even seen a much larger school use it just to clear some space on their servers so they don't have to upgrade RAID. Give everyone 5Gb of Drive storage and suddenly all that junk they "must have" on their accounts isn't as important any more.
And, if you ask, they will guarantee that your data stays under EU control - and they have a standard EULA that states just that or schools in the EU wouldn't be able to touch them.
Free is one thing, but Google Apps etc. is good enough that I've actually paid for it (more storage etc.) in the past and would pay again for it in the future. But there are numerous places I've worked where "free" and "more than good enough" are the terms that won the decision. Even in places with annually recurring MS licenses under educational licensing deals anyway.
This is the age of just enough computing, combining just enough processing power to just enough software. The Berkley approach works still.
Yeah... I have to admit, you're onto something about the unions. If we had one at work, we'd be paying a fortune in fees. Of course, they would have us earning more than minimum wage, and we would be paid for all the hours we worked, too. Those fiendish bastards!
Why Buy Microsoft Milk When the Google Cow Is Free?
Because not everyone likes to milk the cows.
Arbitrary code can run on your machine from the day it's assembled. Java or not makes absolutely no difference in that. That's what a computer IS - a device that runs arbitrary code.
Why aren't they using libre office or latex, if they are worried about big companies? It's also free, but gives you 100% control over the programs - if you want and/or need.
It's not like it's hard to find open source'd tools for those uses these days.
Sure, some teachers are lazy and overpaid, just as any other worker can be. However, to suggest that is typical by comparing today with an idealized version of yesterday ignores reality. Wages need to increase with the rise in the cost of living, class sizes have gone up, and many of today's parents don't teach their kids to be respectful, and expect the school system to take on the responsibility of raising them. And no, I'm not a teacher, union member or shill.
You are technically correct about Google not showing adds to minors within their Google Apps for Education range of products. But that statement is disingenuous. They still harvest data from every user within GAE and use it to target ads to minors outside GAE. Once they leave GAE and start surfing YouTube (and what minor doesn't), they get targeted ads using data from GAE. Also, the majority of websites use Google AdSense for their site advertising. Every one of those sites that minor will visit will have targeted ads using data from GAE.
If you don't believe me, here's a good article to read over at SaveGov. Google admits to these practices via a legal deposition filed in California over a class action lawsuit against this very practice.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: When a service is free, you are not the customer. You are the product.
Nice that Google is offering free office software but Google is an advertising/search company. I bet all those schools using free Google Docs is a great source of marketing data. There really isn't much charity here I'm guessing.
Google treats your data(the product) no differently than Facebook. It is there to be mined for the benefit of the advertisers(the customer) and Google's bottom line.
https://epic.org/2014/03/googl...
Google Docs crashes. Alot. I've seen kids crying at their terminals because that last 30 minutes of typing just disappears.
Backup? You have to pay someone to backup Google Docs. That ain't free.
And oh yeah, there are laws that state I need to be able to access anything my staff has in Google Docs in case of FOIA request. In a Google Apps domain, all those Docs files are private by default. How do I search them?
I don't contest the logic of this statement in and of itself, but I do wonder were this kind of thinking ends. The Government has it's own critical tasks to perform, and officials should focus their efforts on, well, governing what they're supposed to look after. Should the government build it's own office chairs? It's own cars? How about servers? Handguns?
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
"'Why would we use Google Docs over like Microsoft Word?' a teacher asked the class. 'Because it's free!'"
My response: "But it sucks. It doesn't have the features of Word, doesn't do a good job of interoperability (outside of itself), and well, we all know Google searches each and every document...each and every word....and associate it to the account it's saved on...."
I'd be a lot more in favor of being represented by a union if they didn't seem so hell-bent on protecting the weakest of the herd. Some people genuinely need to go, and they do all members a disservice by keeping the slackers and idiots on. It's bad enough that many of the best (for certain definitions of best) get sucked into management. I'd like to see unions represent a counterbalance to corporate power - not as an organization for protecting idiots.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Because it's NOT free?
Because of industrial espionnage, because of NSA, because of google compiling stuff about my docs, because Google switching and suddenly deciding your Google docs and their google docs, because servers crashes, because I've seen what they did to youtube, because Google is dirty, lying and two-faced, because if it's free you're the product being sold.
Because Ooo, which IS free, for real.
GDocs, It's NOT free, at all.
If you have no idea, you are a stupid troll or just plain stupid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple_Inc.
Google Docs is not free. Ask Stallman about this. The code is closed source and off limits to anyone except the anointed ones at Google. You never know if Google will data mine your data, basically you have given all of your sensitive data over to google.
A truly free package would be LibreOffice, open source, and which does not demand you hand over all of your data over an internet connection to Google's grid.
...only corporate PR.
Anytime Facebook is mentioned we here endless cries of "But... but... but... you are teh product!@!!!111!!! Dats why teh Fazeb00k is freeeeee"
When Google does the same thing? Crickets.
You fanboys always know how to tickle the funny bone, even early in the morning.
Have fun being data mined.
...as far as we know.
I pay enough in school taxes already......
You really don't understand how unions and contracts work, do you? It is not about protecting the poorest workers - why would any union member want to do that? It makes more work for everyone else and makes all look bad. It is about making sure the contract is followed (especially language pertaining to discipline and dismissal) in each and every case.
If a lousy worker is being kept around it is because a manager somewhere is too lazy to do their job and get rid of the worker.
Too many would rather pawn-off a bad worker on another department or group rather than document the problems, attempt corrective actions, and dismiss the worker if that action doesn't improve performance.
Because the government is owned by businesses like Microsoft, Apple, and Google?
> Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes and fund schools that way, rather than relying on their charity or free software."
I'm sure she would. And I suppose the schools are all going to buy software for the students then? Or perhaps the students will stay after and do all their work at school. What a self-serving bi**h.
"... Union president ... said ... rather see ... more in taxes"
Haven't heard that before.
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
Or at least I assume she was joking.
"...dont trust anyone...VM I rent." Yup, no inconsistancy there!
What you don't understand (aside from basic grammar) is that teachers' hands are tied these days. In many districts they have no leeway on how to teach, and are basically forced to stick to a script, even where it just doesn't work. On top of that, they are no longer allowed to discipline children--All they can do is send a problem student to the principal's office, who then sends them right back to class.
And by 'problem student' I'm talking about the ones starting fights. Students aren't being expelled or even suspended since the school's funding is based on the number of enrolled students. The kids know there are no consequences, and so there is no fear of authority whatsoever.
Parents aren't doing their jobs raising their kids, and teachers are for some reason expected to pick up the slack. Yet they've had any authority to do so stripped from them.
When was free ever really "free"? I hate articles like this. What happens when these kids get out into the "real" world, not the free one where lawyers, accountants and most offices are still using Office and they find out that they have none of those skills other than general word processing abilities. Yes you'll need training. These articles make it look like 80% of business is using Google Docs. Whatever
If you think they get paid so well, why don't you give up your job shilling and go work as a teacher? There are certain inner-city districts who will take anyone they can get.
"Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes and fund schools that way, rather than relying on their charity or free software."
No, I think free, industry standard software will do more for these kids than putting more money into the school system. I don't think more money to the schools is going to fix the problems these students have, empowering them with relevant skills will.
If a lousy worker is being kept around it is because a manager somewhere is too lazy to do their job and get rid of the worker.
Usually it is very, very difficult to dismiss a bad worker. You have to get them on some kind of technicality that is written into the union contract. For instance, an orderly at a hospital who is not doing their job is instead fired for showing up late.
Union members will also gang up on a non-union complainant. If you file a complaint about the orderly from my above example, you are likely to have a bunch of grievances filed against you, even though they are unjustified.
The system is broken.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
And it is fantastic.
We still have microsoft in the server closet, but in the past two years we've dumped our Terminal server/SQL farm for cloud based apps, and moved off of exchange to Google Apps.
We're now rolling out chromebooks as a replacement for MacBooks in the classroom. The combination of quick boot time, instant data save to the cloud, low acquisition costs, and no ongoing costs simply can't be beat.
We can buy 5 chromebooks for the cost of one MacBook - with a lot less administrative overhead.
Sure, there are creative areas where MacBooks still make sense, but handing a child a $1000 laptop no longer makes sense. There is enough stuff in the cloud to teach kids how to research, write, and learn.
Besides, we need to stop teaching kids "Microsoft" or "Apple" and we need to teach them how to learn. The tool should be irrelevant.
Because frequently google comes around and shoots all their cows in the head without warning you.
-Seacrest out!
Companies pay more in taxes (ie. fund schools...if that's even where corporate tax as opposed to say residential tax goes? Maybe some. Maybe.) not by earning more profit by selling more software.. but by closing corporate loopholes to avoid paying taxes completely. Karen Lewis needs to *educate* herself, before spreading her lack of understanding and loud mouth fables to youth.
LibreOffice and wikis are REALLY free. Free as in freedom, not free as in controlled by someone else and data-mined to boot.
With real freedom, you control when upgrades happen, you can decide when APIs change, and you can add features or fix bugs. Unlike Google Docs, where your stuff just breaks because Google felt like changing things up and the most obviously useful features are half-built and frequently orphaned.
"It may suck, but it's good enough for schools..." Thanks, Eric. FTFY.
The original proverb is "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?", referring to sex before marriage.
The headline should be "Why buy the Microsoft cow when the Google milk is free?" Makes better sense.
If I recall correctly, long ago Netscape had planned to charge for it's browser. then IE came out for free. Turnabout.
I've been a member of three different unions throughout my life, and I've never seen the behavior you describe. I've heard it many times from anti-union people, but I've never actually seen it. I don't see why any union would want to make it difficult to fire a crappy employee. That only hurts the union.
Like the person you responded to, I have seen more than a few managers that aren't willing to be the one to document misconduct or poor performance, or are unwilling or afraid to be the one to actually confront an employee and/or pull the trigger on termination.
I agree that more sensible and truly free solutions like libreoffice offer the best compromise. But it's not only about freedom, it's also about features. If you do very light work, GDocs are OK. But anything a little more sophisticated than a simple letter or a basic spreadsheet are completely mishandled by GDocs (mostly in their mobile version). What I am saying is that while GDocs are very convenient, I end up using an actual suite (MS Office or Libreoffice) because of the full set of features that it provides. GDocs simply doesn't cut it. It would be about time for Google to get serious and provide a product that it's not just free but also capable to satisfy the needs of more advanced users. Libreoffice, under these circumstances, is the best option.
No surprise there. To the teachers unions, throwing money at the problem is always the answer. They always claim that if they just had more funding, they'd be able to buy more books and supplies (or software), or shrink class sizes. But, if you provide the necessary materials for free, well then, that's just not good enough. They're like the pan handler on the street corner holding the sign that says, "Will work for food." If you try to offer them work and/or food, though, they decline -- they just want money.
sig: sauer
Few today remember the actions of Apple in the period just before the introduction of the IBM PC until the unveiling of the Macintosh. As the '70s drew to a close, Apple was being outclassed by the performance of microcomputers based on Z-80 and Intel 8085 chips The aging Mostek 6502 couldn't keep up and the Apple II's architecture was unable to support the I/O demands that were developing. Faced with languishing inventories of Apple IIs, Apple Computer, Inc. began selling the systems to schools at prices that were widely believed to be below cost, or "dumping".
Of course, dumping is an illegal activity, but Apple was never called on the carpet for it. It is likely that this maneuver saved the company, all the while indoctrinating a generation of nascent computer users in the "Apple way". You might wish to note, at the time Microsoft provided the BASIC interpreter for the Apple II.
So anyway, this line of attack is not new.
It is entirely possible that neither of our experiences represents the true "average".
I can assure you that fear (either for physical safety or simply for harassment) is often a motivation for why proper documentation does not happen. My very good friend has been a victim of physical intimidation. My wife and her co-workers have been harassed through mass, bogus grievances after going through proper documentation channels. The savvy managers simply track when the bad eggs come in each day. Fortunately, everyone has a few late days and too many violates the contract. Quite obviously, this kind of bullshit leads to mutual suspicion and a terrible work environment all around. Of course, I'm in a union-friendly city (Philadelphia). The feds just arrested a bunch of thugs for vandalizing a church that was being constructed with non-union labor.
Now, I'm not necessarily anti-union in concept - just as I am not anti-corporation in concept. But this shit has got to change. Corporations and unions are both out of control - two sides of the same corrupt coin. We need reform of money entering the public system from such organizations, and physical violence and intimidation is straight-up no good.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Thank you for everyone who worked to make Libreoffice so great!
LibreOffice it's free! It's great! It's local software for local folks, with none of that being on MS's or Google's hairy teat.
https://www.libreoffice.org/
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
Maybe you need to educate yourself.
I use Google apps all the time. I even got Google certified for Google apps.
I really want to like Google. I am sick to death of Microsoft's abusive monopoly.
But Google apps are poor quality. Google seems unwilling to fix serious bugs that have existed for years. Google drive does not sync worth a damn. And there is still no Linux client.
Again, I really want to like Google, but Google makes it more, and more, difficult.
Please do not post incorrect information.
Consider Google's start page. It was around for years. Used, and relied upon, by millions. No doubt it was highly useful in getting people to use Google.
Then Google yanked it for absolutely no good reason.
Microsoft is losing market share like mad. Everybody hates their new OSos.
In the most dynamic part of the market: tablets and phones, Microsoft is totally failing.
We may be *finally* seeing an end to Microsoft's abusive stranglehold on the industry.
Maybe we should be teaching kids iOS and Android?
We should all give in, and help perpetuate Microsoft's abusive monopoly.
We should absolutely insure that nobody else ever gets a chance to penetrate Microsoft's market.
Isn't that what you are really saying?
BTW: I use Google apps, LibreOffice, and MS-Office. I have no problem with it.
OpenOffice.org and Libre Office are free too. I also found Abi Word. It can open .doc and OpenOffice.org write files too. on con about Google Docs is that I need to connect to the internet to use it, correct? What if my laptop can't find free wi-fi? Just a thought.
Linux is amazingly fast and easy to install. Windows takes all day because the multiple updates, and reboots.
How is LibreOffice more difficult than MS-Office? At least LibreOffice does not *constantly* make radical changes in the interface. And LibreOffice does not have that awful "ribbon."
Yeah...Office might suck, prefer LibreOffice anyway (cross platform and free) but the biggest downside to google docs is when you're suddenly left without internet access.
Bummer, no google-nada. Any installed application will of course still be usable. And that's another thing... Google products are not free, stop pretending they come without a price. Just because there's no $ amount in your face that's exchanged at purchase time doesn't mean it's free and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop telling the kids that it's free also. That's MY bucket of sand and I'd appreciate it if you'd remove your head from it, thanks! :) .5% a Day at Scrypt.cc?ref=baagt Helpful irc chat at #scrypt.cc on freenode.
Got BTC in a wallet somewhere? WHY? Mine is earning an average of
Warren Buffett warned of the lack of long term value in software back in the 90s when he said 'No, I don't invest in Microsoft as I don't understand the long term value.' or something very similar.
You would think that teachers would be smart enough to understand that. It just has hidden costs.
Skydrive and Google docs are both "free"
Google docs had better simultaneous editing, and it works decently on my Windows, Linux, iOS and Android devices.
Except, it never came back on-line :(
While I am no fan of Microsoft, Google will more and more come to resemble Big Brother. Google's free software seems great and benign for now, but you pay for it with your loss of privacy. Like Amazon, Google's goal is to crush the competition by destroying traditional business models. When Google is between you and every online experience, the only product they need to sell is you.
You are a customer when you use Google services. Google provides you a service, and in return you provide them some of your screen real estate.
If you do not pay Google with cash then you are NOT their customer. Google pays me through a form of barter for my personal information. That makes me a vendor. However I do not pay Google any cash and therefore I cannot be their customer. The saw that "you are the product not the customer" isn't quite true. Strictly speaking the product Google sells is the ability to communicate to/with me and I am the vendor of that product.
Google make its money mostly from advertising, but that's only they provide a good product to their customers that they are able to do that.
Their ability to deliver (your) eyeballs to their customers (paying advertisers) by providing you a useful service does not turn you into a customer. It makes you a vendor. You are "selling" your personal information to google in exchange for a useful service.
Movie theaters make most of their money from concessions, but they are not "pop-corn companies", the primary product is showing movies which enables them to sell their more profitable other product of popcorn.
Bad analogy. I still pay the movie theater for the seat. The fact that they make much of their profit off concessions doesn't change the nature of our relationship. However I would disagree that it does not make them a concessions company. You are what you make your money doing. Many gas stations are really convenience stores that use gasoline sales as a lure to bring in foot traffic. Movie theaters really are concession stands that use movies to lure in customers. Google really is an advertising company that uses free information search to lure in traffic. They are what people pay them for.
I'm a customer who pays with my information. Google then takes that information and offers it to advertisers
No you are NOT a customer. You are a vendor. You are "selling" your information to google (for services) who then sells it to advertisers. If you aren't paying cash to Google, you are not Google's customer. The maxim that "you aren't the customer, you are the product" isn't actually true because the product google offers is your attention and information about you. You are the vendor for that information. You "sell" to google and google sells to their customers.
It is possible to have more than one type of customer.
Very true but most of us are not customers of google. Who is a customer is ultimately dictated by the directionality of cash flow.
We used to see this behaviour quite often in the transit union in our city which encompasses all city bus drivers in Ottawa. Several years ago there were a number of public scandals where drivers were caught on cellphone video doing something illegal. I specifically recall one incident where the driver had a newspaper spread out over the wheel while driving. The union's public response in every single case was to spring to the driver's defense by denouncing the videos as a violation of the driver's privacy and completely brush aside the safety risks.
Now, in my office, I haven't heard of this kind of "defend everyone at all costs" behaviour, but managers are definitely fearful of it.
Which is, of course, more vulnerable, and therefore the schools systems are more vulnerable, esp. since they're far short of funds to hire enough qualified help to secure all the schools.
Now, LibreOffice goes head to head - ok, some VM scripting, macros, and other bizaree things that Office does may not work... but are you going to look me in the face and tell me that anyone under college is going to use that crap to write papers and homework? For that matter, who in college (except maybe business majors) will use it?
mark "and linux is a *lot* easier to manage than the arcanity of M$, and there's zero annual license fees"
... I'm a customer who pays with my information. Google then takes that information and offers it to advertisers. So, if Google wants me to keep paying with my information, they have to provide me, their customer, with a good service...
What happens if one day, some Google executive decides they know so much about you that it's not worth it to give you free service 100% of the time?
This is always the danger of proprietary software, no matter how much you pay, what you pay, or even if it's free -- at some point, someone can arbitrarily snap their fingers and your service is gone. You may not be a customer that they want to please forever... just for right now, while it's profitable.
We really need to support efforts like LibreOffice and ownCloud, so that we can have our own systems regardless of what anyone else does.
I won't jump onto the free software bandwagon (it frankly is not that great on the whole from my experience), however lets look at MS Office all on its own for a moment.
Since they went to the almighty Ribbon it has been an atrociously miserable tool to use. The interface got dumbed down by hiding a lot of stuff, or just plastering over features that were once pretty common to use to the point where I can't even find them at all. I find that their interface first, functionality second approach has made MS Office something I dread using at work. If it were free at home I would likely only install it for being able to natively read other peoples files on the occasions I have to, which is pretty rare.
Sadly for MS, I find Libre Office just as usable (maybe slightly more so) for my purposes. The warts of being less polished, less mature, and inheriting some of the poor MS features it had to are made up for by the severe drawbacks of the stupid Ribbon dumb down on the MS side.
"Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes and fund schools that way, rather than relying on their charity or free software."
Well, Karen Lewis .... I'd rather see companies concentrate on what they do best, and then share some of that for free with schools when they see fit to do so!
The typical union mentality of "Pay more taxes! Give us more money!" doesn't necessarily solve a thing, except insuring raises for overpaid school administrators.
When you look at the TCO, Macs are not significantly more expensive that PCs considering they don't need to get upgraded as often. I just retired a Mac laptop that I had been using for 9 years, the only reason I retired it is because it's was from the PowerPC CPU days and apps that I wanted to use couldn't run on it.
There's a real problem with using Google being used in schools. See http://www.edweek.org/ew/artic.... They are collecting information that is part of a student's academic record. That looks like a violation of FERPA law. The big surprise in this lawsuit is that Google hasn't agreed not to collect that data, just that they won't use it to present ads to kids (at least, not in school. It isn't clear if Google thinks it's OK to push ads to you on your home account).
Pupil/Teacher Ratio
For public schools, the number of pupils per FTE teacher—that is, the pupil/teacher ratio—declined from 22.3 in 1970 to 17.9 in 1985. After 1985, the public school pupil/teacher ratio continued to decline, reaching 17.2 in 1989. After a period of relative stability during the late 1980s through the mid-1990s, the ratio declined from 17.3 in 1995 to 16.0 in 2000. Decreases have continued since then, and the public school pupil/teacher ratio was 15.4 in 2009. By comparison, the pupil/teacher ratio for private schools was estimated at 12.5 in 2009. The average class size in 2007–08 was 20.0 pupils for public elementary schools and 23.4 pupils for public secondary schools.
The number of public school FTE teachers has increased by a larger percentage than the number of public school students over the past 10 years, resulting in declines in the pupil/teacher ratio. In fall 2001, the number of public school pupils per teacher was 15.9, compared with a projected number of 15.2 public school pupils per teacher in fall 2011.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=28
from the proverbial horses mouth.
Because after all these years, you STILL can't create a multiple-column Google document. That and the Personal Information Protection Act - http://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/doc...
Multi-user editing is useful to some of us. I use it almost daily with my kids to help them with homework.
Also, I don't trust my HDD, and I am too busy to setup some crappy backup solution for my desktop. If I am going to "just use dropbox" might as well "just use google" -- there's not a lot of difference, except... I lose searchability in dropbox.
I think in the past 2 years I have had 1-2 instances where it was unavailable when I wanted to use it. Loaded up ye-olde-desktop-app and made a doc, but once GD was back on-line I uploaded it.
but it lacks many features of anything previously mentioned. :(
She is making a dangerous assumption that if tax revenues increased the extra would be spent on schools
THANK you! That is beautifully expressed. It should be instantly understood by anyone hearing pro-tax propaganda by Lewis or others in a debate or comments-allowed-publication setting.
It's a prototype for similar arguments for raising taxes allegedly for other purposes as well.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
> Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes and fund schools that way, rather than relying on their charity or free software.
I bet she would. Because money going into school budgets is more easily absorbed by the union, (especially in Chicago) whereas free software and essentially any supplies or resources that go directly to the classroom, are less easily turned into higher wages for union bosses.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes and fund schools that way, rather than relying on their charity or free software
of course. if they rely on charity, they don't have a choice in how or where the benefit is "spent". companies can influence things in ways that directly or indirectly benefit them. need money for your art program? how about a bunch of chromebooks instead?
on the other hand, i suspect charity is more directly translated into student benefit than tax dollars. tax dollars, if they even make it to the school, are divvied up between unions, administration, etc. before anything gets to the kids.
Would you use an OS that is free and open source but is developed by your government?
Because google docs sucks.
Microsoft's anti-google campaign requires that Google be the cow.
Cows are stereotyped as being dirty, stupid and easily controlled.
"Like a cow to the slaughter." is how you should be thinking of Google.
Milk is stereotyped as clean, healthy, wholesome and fecund with
secondary associations of happiness, children and nurturing.
This is how you are to think of Microsoft; not Google.
Microsoft desperately needs to rebuild it's mind share and regain control
of the ecosystem and it can not do that on merit so please stop interfering
with the subtle smear program that constitutes their only way of competing.
We may be *finally* seeing an end to Microsoft's abusive stranglehold on the industry.
Yes, but the possibility that they will simply be replaced by another company's abusive strangehold (*cough*Google*cough*) is too high. I want Microsoft to fail. They deserve to fail. I literally believe Microsoft is the biggest roadblock holding back technology today. However, I still want them to be around and influential enough to keep Google or Apple or Amazon or Oracle or whoever else from becoming the same thing.
Plus, now that they finally have a new CEO, they might change their tune and stop being such a boat anchor on the industry. Yes, I don't expect them to stop being evil, but maybe they can avoid delivering another Vista or Windows 8 in favor of products like XP and Windows 7, which despite their flaws, are at least not always blatantly hostile to the customer's wants and needs.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Yes, I see it here in my city. There are many cases of Union shops and non union shops. The non union shops make less, dont pay dues, tend to enjoy a more family like atmosphere with fewer problems with management and many still wind up with paid insurance, reasonable vacation, tolerable policies and safe environments. The difference is; if you work non union, you arent contributing to inflation or driving jobs away from your area.
For instance, here, we had many major aircraft manufacturers, unions kept demanding more , because, thats what they do. The factories left town and took thousands of jobs with them, leaving only the support industries intact to continue shipping parts to the new locations in distant cities. Property values dropped as the rats fled town, following the work to distant cities where they would be paid less for their efforts that were destructive to all in the end. The crime rate has climbed , many jobless who didnt move, turn to crime.Big surprise. These are only some of the symptoms of unions. Problematically, it takes people who have brains and actually think to see the problem.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Problematically unions raise the cost of living, drive work out of town and another side effect of working union that I didnt mention in other posts above *i just posted, you havent read them., is you end up screwing yourself out of ANY other work if you should be laid off . No one wants to hire someone laid off a union job. They will return to the union job and waste any time and training invested in them. So... you can take those extra wages and put them in the bank so you can survive a 3 to 12 month layoff. I guess you could pawn all the toys you bought with the extra money and try to get by. Now we see there is NO advantage to being union and you DONT really make more money, but you do fuck up everything for everyone else. Stop unions and watch the cost of living stabilize.
Unions are a fucking joke.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
I actually do tutoring and can see the problem from my vantage point, thank you.
Again unions and teachers organizations have ruined public education, there is no point to argue with that and retain credibility.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Sorry ,gramatically , it is early, no coffee and no apostrophe that works on this keyboard.
At some point, responsibility needs to be taken by individuals who can see farther than their own selfish desires.
If you wanted to teach, you knew you wouldnt be driving a Mercedes.
Private schools and home schooling is growing by leaps and bounds due to the ineptitude and feeble excuses of do-nothing-say-nothing public teachers. I have NO empathy for their self inflicted problems.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
So if I hire a piano teacher for my kids, and he agrees to accept payment in, say, fresh oranges instead of cash, he then becomes a customer even if I'm not selling those oranges to anybody else?
Don't be daft. Dealing with Google is not such a transaction. Getting your information and providing services to you is a cost to Google. They have to spend money to build services and technologies that they provide to you so the direction of cash flow to Google is outward. Technically it could be considered Cost of Goods Sold or more likely it would fall under SG&A. Google quite properly does not consider you their customer from an accounting perspective because you (probably) do not bring in cash to them. If you send money to someone (even indirectly) then they are a vendor. If you get money from someone then they are a customer.
Sorry, but that's not how it works.
I'm a certified accountant and I assure you that it very much IS how it works when you are talking about a for-profit company. The nature of your relationship to Google is that of a vendor from Google's perspective.
The form of payment is not what determines the relationship.
I didn't say the form of payment. I said the directionality of cash flow. HUGE difference.
If I was a vendor in this relationship, I would be the one setting the price.
How much control a vendor has over pricing depends on the product they are selling and who they are selling it to. If you are selling a commodity product like oranges then the vendor has little control over the price. If you are selling a customized proprietary product like an Oracle database then the vendor has a significant amount of control over the price. In this case you have limited control over the price because most of Google's costs are fixed. They have to pay for their datacenters and staff whether or not you are a customer and they have lots of other customers. You can elect not to provide them any information but that's about as far as it goes. Your information and attention is a commodity to google.
That is true but in no case is Google getting paid by you. You are a COST to Google and that is how their relationship with you will show up on their financial statements. Google has to spend money on datacenters and programmers to get information from you that they can then use to sell advertising products to their customers for cash. To Google you are a vendor because the directionality of cash flow towards you is outward. I'm a certified accountant and I'm telling you how Google will see the nature of your relationship.
Now it is possible to be both a vendor and a customer of a company for different transactions. In my company we make wire harnesses. We have some customers who we also buy products from to sell to other customers. But you cannot simultaneously be both a customer and a vendor to the same entity at the same time.
If I go to a fair and buy a bunch of tokens that I then use to play some games, then the people that run the games turn those tokens in for cash - are they token sellers? They're game providers and the tokens are just a medium, similar to how I go to Google, to search and pay them with a bit of my screen space to show ads - Google then turns that screen space in for cash with advertisers.
The fact that you use a different form of currency doesn't change the nature of the financial relationship as far as Google is concerned. To Google, you are a vendor and you are most definitely NOT a customer unless you are paying them in cash money.
If you're looking at things from a pure "where do the USD come from?" point of view, then sure they're an advertising company - so are TV stations, newspapers, the sides of highways, buses, etc.
That is the perspective that matters here because it is Google's perspective. To Google you are a vendor because they (indirectly) pay you for a product that they then sell to others for cash. And you are correct, newspapers and TV stations ARE advertising companies because that is where the money comes from. Take away what brings in the money and the company will disappear.
Because you must milk a cow.
A friend of mine works on most of the documentation for it, and she does it for free too.
Without all the IP rights being given away to someone whose corporate motto is "First Do Evil".
Why not that?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
If something like LibreOffice is the solution, that means we already have something like the solution. Does it not?
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
all this apple fanboy crap in this thread makes me want to puke.
Microsoft milk might make better blue cheese?