Microsoft Looking At Office For Linux In 2014

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTI5MzU

 

Hmmmmm, Interesting.

 

I am quite glad to see this, actually.

My main worry is what method they'll use for DRM...

 

Yes I'm wondering that too. I guess they are seeing the success of Libra office aqnd want to cut that off.

 

Someone is having a laugh surely.

 

Yes, I do! - But dear Ballmer, you sweating maniac: - IF I some day should switch to Linux it will be because of the windows 8 disaster (as I call it) and I hope you don't think I will then use your office suite once migrated?

You force me on another platform with your arrogant policy (many things that were discussed already to exhaustion, not mentioning them here!) you lose me for GOOD, be sure of that!

 

Are they getting that desperate these days? Their products must really be selling in sh***y amounts if they're trying to get in where they're obviously not wanted. Their restrictions and license prices won't work so well on that side of the fence, not for consumers and especially not for businesses that are already on Linux and using Linux software that doesn't have a bunch of strings attached. It's more than likely a rumor that will go no further than being a rumor, otherwise they've lost their damned minds.

@guest: The day that Ballmer holds one of his standard press conferences/Keynotes on true Linux compatibility and Linux as real competition is the day I want to be in the front row waiting for him to melt like the Wicked Witch of the West.

 

Sounds a little contradictory... on the one hand they implement UEFI secure boot on all new machines sold to keep linux off of everything, and yet they supposedly want to now sell Office to all these linux users that they're trying to get rid of? I don't think so.....

 

Secure Boot doesn't have that purpose and Microsoft actually released solutions for the Linux Foundation: http://blog.hansenpartnership.com/linux-foundation-secure-boot-system-released/

 

An awful lot of people seem to disagree with you.... at best, its been a royal pain in the ass for desktop linux...

 

The number of people holding invalid arguments (fallacies) means nothing to me, besides the usual disappointment with humanity, lol.

As previously posted, Microsoft actually just released solutions for the Linux Foundation regarding Secure Boot: http://blog.hansenpartnership.com/linux-foundation-secure-boot-system-released/

 

Again, UEFI secure boot certainly hasn't and still doesn't make life any easier for linux users... a lot of people are opposed to it.

 

UEFI Secure Boot means nothing for real Linux users. Few of the very latest machines come with UEFI Secure Boot.

Besides that, the Linux Foundation now has the very same method of getting its kernel and distributions past the Secure Boot that Windows 8 has.

Saying that the very purpose of UEFI Secure Boot is to somehow keep Linux off the desktop is as ridiculous as it can get.

The numbers of those who are opposed to it don't matter. What matter is if their arguments are valid or not - and they aren't.

 

So, all the people who are opposed to UEFI secure boot are just plain wrong? And UEFI is helping linux users and making life easier and better for them?

Wow, that's great WH!

 

Or just don't buy a machine that uses it, which is pretty easy to do given that UEFI support is almost non-existent at the moment nor does it really make a huge difference in security and, as has already been said, can be worked around. The only thing keeping Linux off the majority of desktops is the state of Linux itself, not UEFI, though the Linux community was bound to use it as a defense as they are great at pointing fingers elsewhere but inward...wait, how did we get from Office to UEFI?

 

Probably, but I can only speak about what I read. So, just show their arguments and let's analyze their value or lack of value, instead of repeating the Argumentum ad populum - ad nauseam.

In some ways. For those with UEFI Secure Boot enabled machines, bootkit forms of rootkit malwares can't work.

 

From Kerodo's wrong idea of a supposed "controversy": https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=2187775&postcount=8

 

MS isn't under near enough threat from Linux for that theory to work. UEFI is nothing more than another attempt to keep malware (mostly rootkits) away, and it's already been bypassed before.

 

Yeah, I think that's a bit mean of MS to stop dual booting in Win 8.

 

It's entirely possible to dual boot with Windows 8.

IDK. From where you guys keep getting these wrong ideas and concepts?

 

Except it doesn't, UEFI isn't something MS created, nor is UEFI even a "Windows 8 thing". It's been around a long time, got dropped by Intel and was picked up by the Unified EFI Forum back in 05..a forum that includes Apple, AMD, Dell, IBM, Intel, Lenovo and of course MS.

 

Ok, guys, for the sake of the thread's topic, I'll let it go.

If MS offers Office to linux users, I think that some might bite and pay the price, but probably most would just continue to use LibO... No harm in MS trying I guess...

 

Who says? It's not what I've been told & the Linux guys have been having a hard time trying. MS haven't made it easy for those who want to dual-boot. I wonder why?

 

I stand corrected. People have been having some problems with dual-booting in 8 though right?

 

Yes.. if you read thru a lot of forums you'll find all manner of crazy stuff happening, some when trying to dual boot (horror stories), this and that issue with 8. Just glad I didn't buy into the 8 disaster and nightmare...