Why would someone buy Microsoft Office?

[blastus]

Why would the average person spend hundreds of dollars on MS-Office when there are powerful free alternatives? Even if you work for a company that uses MS-Office exclusively, I can't imagine that if you need to do work at home, that they wouldn't give you a laptop or at least buy MS-Office for you. Sure, MS-Office has things that OpenOffice.org doesn't, but I can't see any feature that is important enough that would justify spending hundreds of dollars on.

The only reason I can think of is to have 100% compatibility with proprietary MS-Office file formats, because only MS-Office can read/write MS-Office file formats. There are cases where this may be important. For example, if you are a contractor and need to do business with clients that use MS-Office. Actually, if they use MS-Access you are forced to use MS-Access also.

Without the efforts of the open source community (which has reverse engineered the MS-Office binary file formats), most of us would have to buy MS-Office for trivial but necessary things like submitting resumes online (Wordpad is absolutely no substitute for MS-Word when it comes to creating and reading .doc files so I don't consider it a viable choice--further it only runs on MS-Windows.)

[NeoChaosX]

The only reason I can think of is to have 100% compatibility with proprietary MS-Office file formats, because only MS-Office can read/write MS-Office file formats. There are cases where this may be important. For example, if you are a contractor and need to do business with clients that use MS-Office. Actually, if they use MS-Access you are forced to use MS-Access also.

That's pretty much it. 90+% of all documents are done in Microsoft Word format, so full compatibility is necessary. Plus, I think it's the same reason people don't want to switch from Windows - it's pretty much all they know, and it's been established many times that most people would rather deal with the devil they know and are familiar with, so to speak, rather than learn what they percieve to be new.

It's so sad we humans are, by nature, creatures of habit. That's the way life works, I guess.

[bored2k]

Besides the fact that they need to be 100% compatible with whatever they get their hands on, sometimes the sys admin just doesn't want the extra work. Getting all the employee's who have used MS Office since forever would take time and a lot of teaching to do.

I happen to like Microsoft Office. If I had a company I would definitely use the free alternatives to every application I can, but that's just me. Not everyone even know such things as free GOOD software exists on computing.

[blastus]

So we have three reasons why someone would buy Microsoft Office:

1. Because they need 100% compatibility with MS-Office file formats
2. Because they need MS-Access to do business with someone else who uses MS-Access
3. Because they are not aware of the alternatives

[xmastree]

Because it's the industry standard. If you email someone your CV, sending it in MS Word format pretty much guarantees the recipient can read it. If you're a company putting in a tender for a job, again MS Word will be the preferred format.
Other apps can read/write it, but not 100% compatible. Ever opened a MS word document containing wordart <spit!> with OO? Even tables can become fubar.

My sister emailed me an excel spreadsheet once. Most of it was ok but she'd done some fancy thing with the date in some of the cells which just gave errors in OO.

Just today, someone sent me a ppt file, it didn't work in OO... :(

If you just want to use it to keep your own records, type and print letters etc, then the many free alternatives are fine. But once you want to be compatible with the rest of the world, your choice of which software to use is much narrower. :(

They should call it Hobson's (http://en.wikipedia.org/Hobson%27s_choice) office! :rolleyes:

[aysiu]

So we have three reasons why someone would buy Microsoft Office:

1. Because they need 100% compatibility with MS-Office file formats
2. Because they need MS-Access to do business with someone else who uses MS-Access
3. Because they are not aware of the alternatives For home users, I'd say it's almost always reason #3. Home users don't need to worry that much about #1 and #2.

[jeremy]

More reasons:

4. Because they do not trust free products (FUD, FUD, FUD!)
5. Because the money they use to buy it is not theirs (expenses account, whatever)

[RawMustard]

They don't, most everyone I know have a pirate version and if they had to pay the drug money it costs to buy it, they'd all die in the butt! Too many times I've seen people get a copy with a new computer, and then scour the net for a patch to install it on multiple computers. Sad, but they'd rather break the law than to install OpenOffice, most complaints I've had with OO is compatibility and the speed. on windows, OO is a pig and sadly on linux it's only marginally better :(

[aysiu]

on windows, OO is a pig and sadly on linux it's only marginally better :( That's why I use GnomeOffice or KOffice. I find them much better (in terms of functionality that matters to me) and faster (to launch).

[DimaIL]

People use MS-Office because they had been buying it already!
I think that the new offices will use OpenOffice and anothers alternatives(better for them!).

Dima.

[egon spengler]

One of my bosses just recently bought MS office the reason being that for Mac it seems (I am unsure how accurate this is) that the only alternative is NeoofficeJ, a hulking molasses slow java version of OO. Neoofficej was just proving to slow to be any practical use and so bullets had to be bitten and MS office was purchased.

I think we'd all agree it is actually a good product, imo it's better than any of the competition. Of course it isn't THAT much better than any of them to merit the gargantuam price difference

[Sykil]

Personally, I can't stand MS Office. It has the most unintuitive interface ever, and I don't think OFFICE VISTA (or 12 or whatever you want to call it) much of an improvement, if any---it just seems like they're doing it to be "new" or "different," rather than actually doing something for the benefit of the user. It's just stupid.

OO.o isn't tons better, really. The Gnome-Office apps are alright, just... not greatly integrated or feature-complete. But they're simple and easy to use.

As for KOffice, I kind of liked it for a while, but then it just felt weird.

[Salane]

Because I am a Crossover office beta tester and I was able to buy MS Office 2003 for $7.23 student licenced version at my School bookstore..

[xequence]

I posted this awhile ago and someone twisted it into me saying that they were stupid or something, if I remember correctly :P

And MS Office just annoys me. Its not accually a bad product, until you see the price, but the fact that at school I am using a product that costs so much and the school board payed so much for all the school computers to use, which takes up alot of tax money...

[Cufishing]

5. Because the money they use to buy it is not theirs (expenses account, whatever)
Yes, this is a very true fact, and for the most part, can be written off for "Office Expenses" as well.

Personally, I can't stand MS Office. It has the most unintuitive interface ever, and I don't think OFFICE VISTA (or 12 or whatever you want to call it) much of an improvement, if any---it just seems like they're doing it to be "new" or "different," rather than actually doing something for the benefit of the user. It's just stupid.
At the place where I spend at least 40 of my awake hours fiddling with PCs, I can say the new package has earned the reputation as, "Not backwards compatable". I have yet to experience it, 'not my job', :p but this could create a big opportunity for Open Source if it ships in it's current configuartion.

[tikal26]

because they just don't know better
MOst people in my school buy office becuase they need to write their 5 essay and really never use itfor anything else. They but the academic version that still cost alot and never really use most of it. The don't know that most of their needs can be met by open office. unless your bussiness have specific macros or stuff like that you don't need office. The average home user should be fine using open office. I personally like koffice and I am amazed at the pace in which they are improving their procuct in the last year

[lotusleaf]

Why would someone buy Microsoft Office?

Why do some dogs drink from toilets?

[dueyfinster]

We can get people to change, we just need to make it as easy as possible, like double click installing mentioned in a previous thread.

[newbie2]

My sister emailed me an excel spreadsheet once.
just curious...was it from a legal copie? :p :p ;)

[poofyhairguy]

10 (or whatever): Because thats what they were taught. Every BCIS class I have seen is basically a Office Training Class.


Plus...for some people its just not there yet. My mom has had OO.org's 2 beta for a while- months. But the other day she said she is willing to buy a copy of Word.

[xmastree]

just curious...was it from a legal copie? :p :p ;)I expect so. she bought the computer from Tiny, and it came pre-installed. Probably.

[Stormy Eyes]

Why would the average person spend hundreds of dollars on MS-Office when there are powerful free alternatives?)

People are easily manipulated, that's why.

[Baricom]

I happen to think Microsoft Office is superior to OpenOffice.org.

No, really, I do.

It may just be my unique experience, but Office starts faster (with preloading turned on and off at the same time in both Office and OO.o), is more stable, and has a more intuitive user interface.

OpenOffice.org is gearing up to be a potential challenger, but as somebody earlier said, it's simply not there yet. I have found two missing features that I relied on often in Office but are either not present or so well hidden in OO.o Writer that I couldn't find them. First, you can't vertically center pages automatically. Second, you can't specify paragraph spacing in lines. (If anybody who knows better reads this, I'd be ecstatic if you could prove me wrong.)

There are numerous minor rendering glitches, as well - things like fragments of text sticking around when you scroll, lines appearing randomly on documents, and other things like that. Stuff one could live with, but I haven't seen in Office.

I have had Office crash on me six times in four years of use, and it has never corrupted a file. In contrast, OpenOffice.org has crashed twice and corrupted two files to the point where it refused to open them, in less than a month. (To be fair, this was version 1.9.129, so I understand that it was a pre-release version.)

I would like nothing more than OpenOffice.org to kick some Microsoft butt, but it's not ready yet.

(For the record, the basis of my comparisons are Office XP, and I'm not paid by Microsoft or, to the best of my knowledge, anybody they pay to shill for them. I also think Windows sucks and plan to move to a Mac just as soon as I collect enough pennies...)

[aysiu]

I think most users honestly would not be able to tell the difference between Microsoft Office and Open Office. And most users just type and do basic formatting (bold, italics, bullet points, font sizes). Most users do not need to shell out the money for Microsoft Office.

[rattaro]

The only reason I can think of is to have 100% compatibility with proprietary MS-Office file formats, because only MS-Office can read/write MS-Office file formats.

Please don't believe the propaganda. DIFFERENT MS OFFICE VERSIONS ARE NOT 100% COMPATIBLE WITH EACH OTHER!!!! Anyone who tells you otherwise is simply repeating what they are told, or else spreading FUD. I have found that OO.o is BETTER at opening .doc files than another version of MS Office is. If you like MS Office, then ok, but everyone please remember that newer MS Office versions do NOT open your old files 100%.

[aysiu]

I remember one time, when I was an English teacher, I had trouble exchanging Word documents with another teacher. We tried opening each other's attachments, and it just wasn't happening. We had the same version of Microsoft Office, and we both were using Windows PCs.

Eventually, the other teacher and I were able to successfully exchange files when he used Microsoft Office from his Macintosh computer (I was still on Windows). Weird.

Yeah, 100% compatibility--whatever.

OpenOffice has done just fine with my .doc files. Actually, for home use, I don't even use .doc. I use .rtf.

[`GooZ´]

For me, the compatibility is not a problem, I just export all of my documents to pdf files. Nowadays, almoast everyone has downloaded a pdf reader (or clicked on a fancy window in IE that stated they needed it), and mostly people don't need to modify my documents, they just need to view/print 'em.

[welsh_spud]

For me, the compatibility is not a problem, I just export all of my documents to pdf files. Nowadays, almoast everyone has downloaded a pdf reader (or clicked on a fancy window in IE that stated they needed it), and mostly people don't need to modify my documents, they just need to view/print 'em.

Thats my aproach exactly.

My I.T teacher was surprised yesterday when I brought in some coursework in PDF. He was determined to think you needed an expensive copy of Adobe-something to write to PDFs

Also, I think there is a kind of security benifit to using PDF, as (im not sure about this..) PDFs don't utilize the macros in Word documents that can be harmful to your computer

[`GooZ´]

The only problem I have is when other people mail me their .docs they want me to print for them (like for a work in group for school :))
Then I have to go to the Windows computer in house (it's a long way downstairs, and I'm lazy). For viewing those docs it doesn't disrupt me that much that one image is a bit less centered than the other...