Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Cheaper To Use Than Open Source Software, UK CIO Says
colinneagle (2544914) writes "Jos Creese, CIO of the Hampshire County Council, told Britain's 'Computing' publication that part of the reason is that most staff are already familiar with Microsoft products and that Microsoft has been flexible and more helpful. 'Microsoft has been flexible and helpful in the way we apply their products to improve the operation of our frontline services, and this helps to de-risk ongoing cost,' he told the publication. 'The point is that the true cost is in the total cost of ownership and exploitation, not just the license cost.' Creese went on to say he didn't have a particular bias about open source over Microsoft, but proprietary solutions from Microsoft or any other commercial software vendor 'need to justify themselves and to work doubly hard to have flexible business models to help us further our aims.'"
One of the main reasons (or THE main reason) for why MS is still leading in the end-user environment is the Office.
Even though it may be hated by a lot of people for any number of reasons it is the standard. Why? Because FOSS simply is not compatible enough with it. If it's because of the fact that MS uses proprietary formats or because FOSS solutions could not be bothered to be compatible enough does not matter at the end of the day. If I can not use Libre Office or Open Office (or anything else) to edit Word-generated documents and return them without formatting disasters, I cannot use anything else than MS Office products.
End of story.
You may argue that others should switch to FOSS as well. Well, until they do, my livelihood depends on whether or not they will accept my products (documetns, presentations, spreadsheets,...). And if they don't then I simply don't have the alternative.