Whenever I ever suggest to people, public or private sector, the notion of utilising free and open-source software I always receive the same response: “It’s not the industry standard”.
I do not see a single reason why people should adhere to a standard piece of software. I’m sure if you renamed the title bar of OpenOffice.org Writer to Microsoft Word, 99% of people would not notice the difference! So why do they elect to stick with the most popular piece of software?
For example, most schools will use Microsoft Office instead of OpenOffice.org, despite the expense to the tax payer. If you ask why they choose to use MS Office, they will say it’s important because businesses use Microsoft Office and that it is the industry standard.
So why do businesses, which are normally capitalist establishments, lower their profits by paying for software? Probably because their employees are only trained for Microsoft Office. Who trains them? Businesses and schools, who train using MS Office.
I’m sure 75% of people could do whatever they want to do using OpenOffice.org just through their MS Office training (we might have issues with macros etc.). They’re just scared.
It’s a vicious cycle: people get trained for Microsoft Office, business demands Microsoft Office so more people get trained through Microsoft Office.
Can the cycle be broken? Probably not but if it did, it would require bold moves. Governments would have to encourage the education system to use FOSS as well as governmental departments, forcing businesses to change. This will never happen due to vested interests and (not to be horrible) technical ignorance amongst governments (the internet’s a series of tubes according to Sen. Ted Stevens).
Tags: opensource, software, linux, openoffice.org, education


The package itself is recycled cardboard, which is recyclable, and I really can’t object to this. I doubt the flyers are, though!


