Rick wrote:

> On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 19:28:36 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

>

>> On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:21:27 -0800, Julie wrote:

>>

>>> Rick wrote:

>>>> On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:55:41 +0200, Hadron wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> writes:

>>>>>

>>>>>> Hadron wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> dennis@home wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> How much would OO cost if there wasn't a choice?

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> That's a non-sequitur. There's always "a choice" of word

>>>>>>>> processors and such. Word processors and spreadsheets are a

>>>>>>>> very mature technology, and should be very inexpensive if not

>>>>>>>> free (at least for light- or medium-duty products sufficient

>>>>>>>> for the vast majority of users).

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Should standard cars and bicycles be free too you tight fisted

>>>>>>> f@ck up?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> The reason OO is "free" is because hardly any one wants it.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>> Oh, so it has nothing to do with being licensed under the GPL,

>>>>>> Mr. non-COLA Linux Advocate? You are one sick puppy.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Cheers.

>>>>>

>>>>> What part of my post confuses you? The fact is that hardly anyone

>>>>> wants it.

>>>>

>>>> The fact is, very few people know about it.

>>>>

>>>>> Almost no one (% wise) uses it. This is a fact.

>>>>

>>>> Quite true, However, if vendors could be convinced to start

>>>> bundling it, the % would increase.

>>>

>>> That would only increase the % of people who had it, not the % of

>>> people who actually use it.

>>

>> Yea, like the Eee pc which comes loaded with Linux. Most people are

>> dumping Linux and installing Windows. The new versions will come with

>> Windows as well.

>>

>> Face it, average people just don't like Linux and it's applications.

>> They would rather pay money for Windows and it's software.

>

> You're now saying "average people' can wipe the OS from the EEE and

> then install Windows with no problems?

 

Millions have formatted a disk and installed Windows without problems. Your

continuation of your argument is getting ridiculous.

 

 

 

--

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

NoStop, the sheep-fukker wrote:

 

 

Thanks! It's available here ...

 

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx?ofcresset=1

 

Cheers.

 

Good job nothepot!

Thanks!

Frank

On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:54:05 -0800, Julie wrote:

> Rick wrote:

>> On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 19:28:36 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

>>

>>> On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:21:27 -0800, Julie wrote:

>>>

>>>> Rick wrote:

>>>>> On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:55:41 +0200, Hadron wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> writes:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Hadron wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> dennis@home wrote:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> How much would OO cost if there wasn't a choice?

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> That's a non-sequitur. There's always "a choice" of word

>>>>>>>>> processors and such. Word processors and spreadsheets are a

>>>>>>>>> very mature technology, and should be very inexpensive if not

>>>>>>>>> free (at least for light- or medium-duty products sufficient for

>>>>>>>>> the vast majority of users).

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Should standard cars and bicycles be free too you tight fisted

>>>>>>>> f@ck up?

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> The reason OO is "free" is because hardly any one wants it.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Oh, so it has nothing to do with being licensed under the GPL, Mr.

>>>>>>> non-COLA Linux Advocate? You are one sick puppy.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Cheers.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> What part of my post confuses you? The fact is that hardly anyone

>>>>>> wants it.

>>>>>

>>>>> The fact is, very few people know about it.

>>>>>

>>>>>> Almost no one (% wise) uses it. This is a fact.

>>>>>

>>>>> Quite true, However, if vendors could be convinced to start bundling

>>>>> it, the % would increase.

>>>>

>>>> That would only increase the % of people who had it, not the % of

>>>> people who actually use it.

>>>

>>> Yea, like the Eee pc which comes loaded with Linux. Most people are

>>> dumping Linux and installing Windows. The new versions will come with

>>> Windows as well.

>>>

>>> Face it, average people just don't like Linux and it's applications.

>>> They would rather pay money for Windows and it's software.

>>

>> You're now saying "average people' can wipe the OS from the EEE and

>> then install Windows with no problems?

>

> Millions have formatted a disk and installed Windows without problems.

 

Millions have formatted a disk and installed Linux without problems. And

yet Moshe seems to think average people cant do it.

> Your continuation of your argument is getting ridiculous.

 

Don't read it.

 

--

Rick

"Moshe Goldfarb" <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1xfutjmn8aw9u$.qdnkd17nw0uw.dlg@40tude.net...

> On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 22:36:53 GMT, Matt wrote:

>

>> Ezekiel wrote:

>>> http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/04/01/Office-2007-winning-converts-survey-says_1.html

>>>

>>> The survey also showed that 43 percent plan to deploy Office 2007 in the

>>> next six months and that 29 percent plan rollouts within the next 12

>>> months.

>>>

>>> In addition, 43 percent said those rollouts were tied to upgrades in PC

>>> hardware, 32 percent said their rollouts would be broad and

>>> enterprise-wide,

>>> while 25 percent said they would be project-by-project.

>>

>> 32% of 72% is 23%. So 23% are planning "broad and enterprise-wide"

>> changes to Office 2007 in the next year.

>

> How many are planning to move to Open Office?

 

Likely more than 28%, my company has a no-go-not supported on Office 2007.

You send it, so bad. I/T is going to support it. You want it, your cheap

assed manager is going to have to pay for it out of his cheap budget. Worse

yet, support it.

 

LOL.

 

Me, OpenOffice for over 3 years. MS-Office, you still use that? OMG...

"Rick" <none@nomail.com> stated in post

T5qdne1NBvacoWnanZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@supernews.com on 4/2/08 7:08 PM:

>>> You're now saying "average people' can wipe the OS from the EEE and

>>> then install Windows with no problems?

>>

>> Millions have formatted a disk and installed Windows without problems.

>

> Millions have formatted a disk and installed Linux without problems. And

> yet Moshe seems to think average people cant do it.

 

If so many millions have done it then why is it that Linux has yet to hit

over 1% of the desktop market? So much for your idea that people don't want

to try something different!

 

 

--

"Uh... ask me after we ship the next version of Windows [laughs] then I'll

be more open to give you a blunt answer." - Bill Gates

<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/gates/>

"Rick" <none@nomail.com> stated in post

T5qdnfBNBvaQrWnanZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@supernews.com on 4/2/08 6:17 PM:

>>> That would only increase the % of people who had it, not the % of

>>> people who actually use it.

>>

>> Yea, like the Eee pc which comes loaded with Linux. Most people are

>> dumping Linux and installing Windows. The new versions will come with

>> Windows as well.

>>

>> Face it, average people just don't like Linux and it's applications.

>> They would rather pay money for Windows and it's software.

>

> You're now saying "average people' can wipe the OS from the EEE and then

> install Windows with no problems?

 

A lot of people likely have *others do it for them.

 

 

--

"Innovation is not about saying yes to everything. It's about saying NO to

all but the most crucial features." -- Steve Jobs

"Rick" <none@nomail.com> stated in post

T5qdnfRNBvbOjGnanZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@supernews.com on 4/2/08 4:05 PM:

>> M$ file formats are open in case you didn't know. Anyone can use them

>> for non profit.. if you want to make a profit from them then buy M$

>> office, otherwise wait for OO to support them properly. It is only a

>> matter of time unless the OO writers decide not to support the published

>> M$ formats. If OO doesn't support the formats you can't say M$ didn't

>> tell them what they are.

>

> Microsoft didn't tell them what they are.

 

They have now.

 

 

--

The answer to the water shortage is to dilute it.

"Rick" <none@nomail.com> stated in post

T5qdnfpNBvZ4jWnanZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@supernews.com on 4/2/08 4:04 PM:

>> What part of my post confuses you? The fact is that hardly anyone wants

>> it.

>

> The fact is, very few people know about it.

 

Rick 1:

Millions have formatted a disk and installed Linux without problems.

 

Rick 2:

The fact is, very few people know about it [Linux].

 

Which do you *really* believe?

 

 

--

When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how

to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not

beautiful, I know it is wrong. -- R. Buckminster Fuller

* caver1 peremptorily fired off this memo:

> dennis@home wrote:

>>

>>> No its not me being stupid. If 2007 wasn't about MS's bottom line then

>>> why make it not compatible with their previous versions? Because then

>>> eventually most all businesses would upgrade to be compatible with

>>> every one else instead of by choice or need.

>>> OO is no threat to MS so 2007 is costly.

>>

>> It is compatible.

>> If you think it isn't then I suggest you try it before you pass judgment.

>

> Obviously you don't know because it ain't. There are the same problems

> between 2007 and 2003 as there is between 2007 and OO, in a business

> environment. This I know as a fact and first hand.

 

dennis never heard of *.docx, apparently.

 

--

The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead

all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that

it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in the

first place.

-- Douglas Adams

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 17:54:05 -0800, Julie wrote:

> Rick wrote:

>> On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 19:28:36 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

>>

>>> On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:21:27 -0800, Julie wrote:

>>>

>>>> Rick wrote:

>>>>> On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:55:41 +0200, Hadron wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> writes:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Hadron wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> dennis@home wrote:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> How much would OO cost if there wasn't a choice?

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> That's a non-sequitur. There's always "a choice" of word

>>>>>>>>> processors and such. Word processors and spreadsheets are a

>>>>>>>>> very mature technology, and should be very inexpensive if not

>>>>>>>>> free (at least for light- or medium-duty products sufficient

>>>>>>>>> for the vast majority of users).

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Should standard cars and bicycles be free too you tight fisted

>>>>>>>> f@ck up?

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> The reason OO is "free" is because hardly any one wants it.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Oh, so it has nothing to do with being licensed under the GPL,

>>>>>>> Mr. non-COLA Linux Advocate? You are one sick puppy.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Cheers.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> What part of my post confuses you? The fact is that hardly anyone

>>>>>> wants it.

>>>>>

>>>>> The fact is, very few people know about it.

>>>>>

>>>>>> Almost no one (% wise) uses it. This is a fact.

>>>>>

>>>>> Quite true, However, if vendors could be convinced to start

>>>>> bundling it, the % would increase.

>>>>

>>>> That would only increase the % of people who had it, not the % of

>>>> people who actually use it.

>>>

>>> Yea, like the Eee pc which comes loaded with Linux. Most people are

>>> dumping Linux and installing Windows. The new versions will come with

>>> Windows as well.

>>>

>>> Face it, average people just don't like Linux and it's applications.

>>> They would rather pay money for Windows and it's software.

>>

>> You're now saying "average people' can wipe the OS from the EEE and

>> then install Windows with no problems?

>

> Millions have formatted a disk and installed Windows without problems. Your

> continuation of your argument is getting ridiculous.

 

It's totally cookbook.

 

Those machines are being sucked up, at least initially, by geeks anyway.

That's changing though as the Windows versions are being released.

 

--

Moshe Goldfarb

Collector of soaps from around the globe.

Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:

http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Snit wrote:

> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> stated in post

> T5qdnfRNBvbOjGnanZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@supernews.com on 4/2/08 4:05 PM:

>

>>> M$ file formats are open in case you didn't know. Anyone can use them

>>> for non profit.. if you want to make a profit from them then buy M$

>>> office, otherwise wait for OO to support them properly. It is only a

>>> matter of time unless the OO writers decide not to support the published

>>> M$ formats. If OO doesn't support the formats you can't say M$ didn't

>>> tell them what they are.

>> Microsoft didn't tell them what they are.

>

> They have now.

>

>

 

 

Only because they were force to.

caver1

dennis@home wrote:

>"chrisv" wrote:

>>

>> dennis@home wrote:

>>>

>>>M$ file formats are open in case you didn't know.

>>

>> No, they are not "open". What kind of an idiot are you?

>>

>> If M$ were to "open" their document formats, competitors could easily

>> create similar products that really "nail" the compatibility with M$

>> Office. Right now, there's enough uncertainty regarding compatibility

>> that most companies will not switch.

>

>You are wrong.. they are open, you can download the spec if you want.

>So now go away and learn something useful.

 

I'll give you that you referenced a document that appears to support

your case. However, I remain deeply suspicious - I have a feeling

that those who would accept that M$ is "open" with their document

formats would be good candidates to sell bridges to.

dennis@home wrote:

> M$ file formats are open in case you didn't know.

 

Oh, please, tell me where I can get a specification of WMA and WMV, so I

can finally write a player for these formats and give it away to the

FOSS people for free.

Most likely I can get it from Microsoft at a "reasonable" fee after

having signed some NDA. Or the licensing agreement is non-compatible

with the GPL.

 

--

These are my personal views and not those of Fujitsu Siemens Computers!

Josef Möllers (Pinguinpfleger bei FSC)

If failure had no penalty success would not be a prize (T. Pratchett)

Company Details: http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/imprint.html

dennis@home wrote:

>"Christopher Hunter" wrote:

>>

>> Mushy Goldfart dribbled:

>>>

>>> To me, that says it all.

>>

>> It would. You're just as clueless as the majority of slack-jawed Windoze

>> point-n-click-n-drool morons.

>

>Yet again you endear linux to potential users.. you really are paid by M$ to

>ensure linux is dead aren't you.

 

Maybe you would understand why the "Mosha" troll is not treated with

patience and understanding, if you knew his history. "Moshe" is the

latest of HUNDREDS of nyms of the "Flatfish" troll. This

mentally-unbalanced loser has trolling the Linux group for MANY YEARS.

He has repeated his "Linux must be bad, because it's free and people

still shoose to pay for Windows" idiocy HUNDREDS OF TIMES. He has had

the fallicy of this argument explained to him HUNDREDS OF TIMES. Yet

he keeps repeating it, seemingly, in stretches, on a daily basis.

Year in and year out. Again and again and again and... You get the

idea.

>You should be more direct and start saying what you mean "Come on you

>windows morons come over here and install linux so we can laugh at your

>antics trying to make it work.

>Come on we want a good laugh."

 

Why would he do that? Just because many of us get frustrated at the

constant trolling and lying from the anti-Linux crowd, does not mean

that we would not gladly give aid to someone who is earnestly trying

to learn about the Linux alternative, and wish them success in doing

so.

 

Don't confuse the mayhem of an advocacy group with real life.

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message

news:j0gdc5-9br.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...

 

> They've also been hacked six ways from Sunday, as well -- OO in

> particular can read proprietary Word files from various versions

> without difficulty.

 

I would hope so.. the formats have been public knowledge for ages.

 

Now M$ even state they won't try and stop you (conditions apply).

"Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message

news:T5qdnfFNBvYuj2nanZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@supernews.com...

> So, no updates for you. Ever. Then you don't have to worry about any

> retraining.

 

So what.. why do you think constant updates are a good thing?

Ubuntu's rolling six month releases are one of the stupidest ideas yet.

>>>>>> If they don't have a word processor then OO is fine, but I don't see

>>>>>> the benefit of moving to OO from something you have and are using.

>>>>>

>>>>> OO.o doesn't cost money to upgrade. OO.o is much closer to the

>>>>> "previous"

>>>>> MS Office interface than 2007, so training, at worst, is a wash. You

>>>>> don't have to track licenses. Those are some fairly good reasons to

>>>>> move to OO.o, as long as it does what you need.

>>

>> But can I trust what you say when you have already stated that you hate

>> M$ and that alone is enough to use OO.

>

> I said I hate Microsoft, and any movement to other software is good.

> There's a difference.

>

>> It may be totally unsuitable but you would still recommend it to get

>> back at M$.

>

> Are you making a mistake, or outright lying?

 

You said you hate M$, I can't trust you after that.

You made your bed, you lie on it.

>>>> And no reason to do so if you already are doing what you need. This OO

>>>> is better than what you already have is a dead loss.

>>>

>>> ... in your opinion.

>>

>> In fact, in this case.

>

> ... in your opinion.

 

In fact.

BobF. illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

> <snip>

>> Are you kidding! I just shuttled them over to the competition. That's

>> where I want them to be. I hope they do well there. I got to go. This

>> is too easy. You guys are a big easy target and I'll let others have a

>> chance. I can't stand this much fun at my age. Have a good night.

>> --

>> Regards, BobF.

>

> I forgot to add that I like to move these people over to the competition

> because it raised the average IQ of both companies. Great improvement since

> you asked.

 

Ladies and Gentlemen....

Put your hand together please for...

 

The Prime Minister of Cuckoo Land.

 

--

Moog

 

"If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the

mashed potatoes"

Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

> <snip>

> What part of my post confuses you? The fact is that hardly anyone wants

> it. Almost no one (% wise) uses it. This is a fact.

 

Actually. I've removed MS Office and installed OOo cross network,

and none of the staff have said a word.

 

I can only assume that they didn't actually use MS office at all.

 

Oh and...because of that, how will the machines I administer fall into

your %ge?

 

--

Moog

 

"If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the

mashed potatoes"

"Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message

news:MO3Jj.28763$r76.7016@bignews8.bellsouth.net...

> * caver1 peremptorily fired off this memo:

>

>> dennis@home wrote:

>>>

>>>> No its not me being stupid. If 2007 wasn't about MS's bottom line then

>>>> why make it not compatible with their previous versions? Because then

>>>> eventually most all businesses would upgrade to be compatible with

>>>> every one else instead of by choice or need.

>>>> OO is no threat to MS so 2007 is costly.

>>>

>>> It is compatible.

>>> If you think it isn't then I suggest you try it before you pass

>>> judgment.

>>

>> Obviously you don't know because it ain't. There are the same problems

>> between 2007 and 2003 as there is between 2007 and OO, in a business

>> environment. This I know as a fact and first hand.

>

> dennis never heard of *.docx, apparently.

 

You don't understand what you say.

 

Have you put the fixes on M$ office so it works?

Obviously not!

Do you keep your OSS up to date? Why?

dennis@home wrote:

>

>

> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message

> news:T5qdnfFNBvYuj2nanZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@supernews.com...

>

>> So, no updates for you. Ever. Then you don't have to worry about any

>> retraining.

>

> So what.. why do you think constant updates are a good thing?

> Ubuntu's rolling six month releases are one of the stupidest ideas yet.

>

Yep, we all know how SLOW you are Dennis. But really, doing it the

Microsoft-way of rolling out releases every 6 YEARS is a bit lame, isn't

it? Then again, maybe that's all a dimwit like you can handle.

 

Cheers.

 

--

The world can't afford the rich.

 

alt.os.linux.ubuntu - where the lunatic Hadron is a "Linux advocate"

 

Francis (Frank) adds a new "gadget" to his Vista box ...

Download it here: http://tinyurl.com/2hnof6

"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message

news:lfk9v3pdq2nbjduviqjmnkg9k7hf4rqjul@4ax.com...

 

> I'll give you that you referenced a document that appears to support

> your case. However, I remain deeply suspicious - I have a feeling

> that those who would accept that M$ is "open" with their document

> formats would be good candidates to sell bridges to.

>

 

Would you like the one for excel 2007?

http://download.microsoft.com/download/0/B/E/0BE8BDD7-E5E8-422A-ABFD-4342ED7AD886/Excel2007BinaryFileFormat(xlsb)Specification.xps

 

Its the xps version.. I was bored with pdf.

"Moog" <efcmoog@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:65kshdF2g1kt1U4@mid.individual.net...

> Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

>

>> <snip>

>> What part of my post confuses you? The fact is that hardly anyone wants

>> it. Almost no one (% wise) uses it. This is a fact.

>

> Actually. I've removed MS Office and installed OOo cross network,

> and none of the staff have said a word.

>

> I can only assume that they didn't actually use MS office at all.

 

Its probably also true that many installs of OO aren't used.. it is

installed by default on many distros even if the user doesn't know it

exists.

> Oh and...because of that, how will the machines I administer fall into

> your %ge?

 

The same as any other stats. -)

dennis@home illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

>

>

> "Moog" <efcmoog@gmail.com> wrote in message

> news:65kshdF2g1kt1U4@mid.individual.net...

>> Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

>>

>>> <snip>

>>> What part of my post confuses you? The fact is that hardly anyone wants

>>> it. Almost no one (% wise) uses it. This is a fact.

>>

>> Actually. I've removed MS Office and installed OOo cross network,

>> and none of the staff have said a word.

>>

>> I can only assume that they didn't actually use MS office at all.

>

> Its probably also true that many installs of OO aren't used.. it is

> installed by default on many distros even if the user doesn't know it

> exists.

 

So. If the estimated 100 million users of Office and the thirty users of

OOo aren't actually users at all (as my experiment suggests) then

that also means that 0% of statistics are actually accurate.

>> Oh and...because of that, how will the machines I administer fall into

>> your %ge?

>

> The same as any other stats. -)

 

87.6% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

 

--

Moog

 

"If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the

mashed potatoes"

Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 22:36:53 GMT, Matt wrote:

>

>> Ezekiel wrote:

>>> http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/04/01/Office-2007-winning-converts-survey-says_1.html

>>>

>>> The survey also showed that 43 percent plan to deploy Office 2007 in the

>>> next six months and that 29 percent plan rollouts within the next 12 months.

>>>

>>> In addition, 43 percent said those rollouts were tied to upgrades in PC

>>> hardware, 32 percent said their rollouts would be broad and enterprise-wide,

>>> while 25 percent said they would be project-by-project.

>> 32% of 72% is 23%. So 23% are planning "broad and enterprise-wide"

>> changes to Office 2007 in the next year.

>

> How many are planning to move to Open Office?

>

 

Quite a large number I should think. First, the survey only covered

North America and Europe, population about 600 million or about 10% of

the world population. But of course most of the African continent uses

Ubuntu, then there's a few billion people in China where Yellow Dog

Linux rules not to mention South America where Mandrake dominates. I am

pretty certain that worldwide. OO outstrips M$ Office by a handsome margin.

 

Cheers

 

Ian

"Julie" <invalid.@nospam.invalid> wrote in

news:47f42d41$0$23618$88260bb3@free.teranews.com:

>>> Face it, average people just don't like Linux and it's applications.

>>> They would rather pay money for Windows and it's software.

>>

>> You're now saying "average people' can wipe the OS from the EEE and

>> then install Windows with no problems?

>

> Millions have formatted a disk and installed Windows without problems.

 

And after the problems started....installed again....and again....and

again....and again.

 

Usually, under the direction of a first level phone tech employed by

(insert your favorite big OEM here).