LibreOffice and OpenOffice have become as good as MS Office, they have no reason to be shy. So to me, it won't change anything. Also, these cloud apps such as Office webapp and Google doc that are OS agnostic are very useful, a lot of people can do most if not all of their work on them.
Why not Internet Explorer?!
I think Microsoft went coo coo sometime in the past three months or something. They are even funding one of the Linux Foundation collaborative projects I believe (don't take my word for that. I'm pretty sure, but not completely sure).
It's weird. Really weird. It's unlike Microsoft to have anything to do with supporting Linux publicly.
Last edited by King Dude; May 6th, 2014 at 07:39 PM.
Last edited by deadflowr; May 6th, 2014 at 09:48 PM.
Microsoft fulfills only the demand of it's users: Hyper-V vs. VMWare vs. KVM, open sourcing .Net, Office @iPhone/iPad and whatever comes - they have to adapt to gain new market shares and to satisfy the demand of it's user base - MS can not grow much larger in the Office space as they are and therefore they have to offer Office for various platforms so that Office stay it's cash cow #1. Another thing is we live and work in a linked world - it's for an end user not interesting which OS is under the desk - they want their applications on every platform they have.
Last edited by Tar_Ni; May 6th, 2014 at 10:06 PM.
reading it looks like revenue is flat and profits are declining for the Windows division whereas both revenue and profits are increasing for the Business and Server divisions. With their problems getting acceptance for Windows 8 and Windows for mobile devices, not to mention the fallout from dropping support for XP - which hasn't even been sold for ~7 years, I would guess they have to be thinking about how far they want to go with Windows down the road.
Office on the other hand, is huge for them. It's difficult to work on a collaborative project without Office. I see this from my kids' grade school to my workplace. That's pretty much where the money is. In my workplace, the license fee they charge for applications on the Apple platform is virtually the same as the fee for applications plus Windows on pcs. If they can charge a similar fee for their applications on Linux as they do for Apple, I don't see why they wouldn't want to do it. Any user who moves to Chrome OS is a dead loss. With Office for Linux, users moving to Linux would potentially still be a win for Microsoft, with similar revenue but without the overhead of support for the OS, and keep them away from Google.
I'm pretty much a casual observer, so this isn't the product of any deep analysis, but I think it would be a smart move to develop Office for Linux.
Last edited by zeke2135; May 7th, 2014 at 12:23 AM.
One doesn't need to work in a corporate environment to have a need for MS Office. In the scientific field, publishers will almost universally ask for a DOCX version of the manuscript. I would bet their revision and page layout applications only use this format as input.
On the other hand, I would still feel "meh" if ever MS Office was to come on Linux until it fully supports ODF. The point being, we can't accuse MS of being against standards anymore, as OOXML is, indeed, an official standard itself (I don't condone the oxymoron "de facto standard"), even if they are the only ones to implement it fully. In reverse, ODF is only properly supported by LibreOffice and direct forks, making it a de facto monopoly. Who said there was choice in the open-source world? True many times, but this one time, it's not.
I don't consider online office suite to be valid replacement. Merely lightweight alternatives, and they will never have the horsepower nor responsiveness to do anything even remotely heavy. In the end, I'd rather have MS produce something for Linux than Google.