Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature
-
@Mario-Jakovina said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
I don't know that I would call Excel a great app. IMO it's mediocre at, while I agree it has some features other spreadsheet solutions are adding these too.
I do not see any other spreadsheet that matches (or outperforms) Excel.
In our company we use Excel and LibreOffice Calc as spreadsheets, but Excel is better for us.
We also tried Onlyoffice, but we were not satisfied very soon.We use OpenOffice Calc and Excel, and Calc is superior in handling csv files for instance.
It's also a cross platform application, which Excel is not.
So there are a number of areas where Excel clearly can't match the performance. -
@Pete-S said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@Mario-Jakovina said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
I don't know that I would call Excel a great app. IMO it's mediocre at, while I agree it has some features other spreadsheet solutions are adding these too.
I do not see any other spreadsheet that matches (or outperforms) Excel.
In our company we use Excel and LibreOffice Calc as spreadsheets, but Excel is better for us.
We also tried Onlyoffice, but we were not satisfied very soon.We use OpenOffice Calc and Excel, and Calc is superior in handling csv files for instance.
It's also a cross platform application, which Excel is not.
So there are a number of areas where Excel clearly can't match the performance.If I somehow need Excel specifically, on an unsupported platform, I use it in the web browser.
-
@Obsolesce That's not the same solution at all, even if its mostly compatible.
For instance you can't open password protected documents in Web version.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@Obsolesce That's not the same solution at all, even if its mostly compatible.
For instance you can't open password protected documents in Web version.
I didn't know that, but I assume file based password protection is lagacy compared to RBAC file access you'd use in a cloud solution linked to Excel web version.
Then you have file / link sharing and all that, and a ton more available as well.
It just comes down to people doing it wrong in all aspects. So it's not really an issue or down side.
-
@Obsolesce Yeah password protecting a document is very much a legacy process, but so many people and organizations don't migrate to cloud because of other features that don't work in the web version with their legacy password protected excel documents.
I know of at least 3 different organizations that can't effectively use the web version because of the amount of re-design they'd have to do with their Excel documents.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@Obsolesce Yeah password protecting a document is very much a legacy process, but so many people and organizations don't migrate to cloud because of other features that don't work in the web version with their legacy password protected excel documents.
I know of at least 3 different organizations that can't effectively use the web version because of the amount of re-design they'd have to do with their Excel documents.
Sounds like Excel was the wrong tool for the job.. but like so many - they likely started small, and just created more and more Excel sheets to do jobs instead of hiring a DB/app dev person to make them a better solution.... and now, at this point it would likely be several 1000's of dollars to do that or more.
-
@Dashrender yeah a lot of them are.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@Obsolesce Yeah password protecting a document is very much a legacy process, but so many people and organizations don't migrate to cloud because of other features that don't work in the web version with their legacy password protected excel documents.
I know of at least 3 different organizations that can't effectively use the web version because of the amount of re-design they'd have to do with their Excel documents.
If they already have and use Excel, then what's the issue? Obviously it not being cross-platform isn't an issue there.
-
@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
If they already have and use Excel, then what's the issue? Obviously it not being cross-platform isn't an issue there.
The issue comes from the desire to upgrade to newer versions. Microsoft, while they offer stand-alone installations of Office 2019, now require yearly upgrades if you need those new features.
Many organizations simply don't or won't pay for upgrades year after year for something that has traditionally been supported for several years at a time.
At the same time, they won't pay for O365 to just get access to Microsoft Office (ueo to the total monthly cost increase) from $0 to $12-22 per user.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
If they already have and use Excel, then what's the issue? Obviously it not being cross-platform isn't an issue there.
The issue comes from the desire to upgrade to newer versions. Microsoft, while they offer stand-alone installations of Office 2019, now require yearly upgrades if you need those new features.
Many organizations simply don't or won't pay for upgrades year after year for something that has traditionally been supported for several years at a time.
At the same time, they won't pay for O365 to just get access to Microsoft Office (ueo to the total monthly cost increase) from $0 to $12-22 per user.
Then they shouldn't have went down that path to begin with, never made the decision to go with software or platforms and services and business practices that require something that costs money.
Software company wanting to make money from subscription based services is nothing new. If they don't like it they can spend way more resources to move everything and everyone to something else.
-
@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
If they already have and use Excel, then what's the issue? Obviously it not being cross-platform isn't an issue there.
The issue comes from the desire to upgrade to newer versions. Microsoft, while they offer stand-alone installations of Office 2019, now require yearly upgrades if you need those new features.
Many organizations simply don't or won't pay for upgrades year after year for something that has traditionally been supported for several years at a time.
At the same time, they won't pay for O365 to just get access to Microsoft Office (ueo to the total monthly cost increase) from $0 to $12-22 per user.
Then they shouldn't have went down that path to begin with, never made the decision to go with software or platforms and services and business practices that require something that costs money.
Software company wanting to make money from subscription based services is nothing new. If they don't like it they can spend way more resources to move everything and everyone to something else.
Edit: Quoted for posterity.
@Obsolesce you really need to reconsider before you start smashing your keyboard. These decisions aren't mine they are simply decisions that were made who knows how long ago that I have to deal with.
Your inability to understand that past decisions affects the future is very telling.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
If they already have and use Excel, then what's the issue? Obviously it not being cross-platform isn't an issue there.
The issue comes from the desire to upgrade to newer versions. Microsoft, while they offer stand-alone installations of Office 2019, now require yearly upgrades if you need those new features.
Many organizations simply don't or won't pay for upgrades year after year for something that has traditionally been supported for several years at a time.
At the same time, they won't pay for O365 to just get access to Microsoft Office (ueo to the total monthly cost increase) from $0 to $12-22 per user.
Then they shouldn't have went down that path to begin with, never made the decision to go with software or platforms and services and business practices that require something that costs money.
Software company wanting to make money from subscription based services is nothing new. If they don't like it they can spend way more resources to move everything and everyone to something else.
Edit: Quoted for posterity.
@Obsolesce you really need to reconsider before you start smashing your keyboard. These decisions aren't mine they are simply decisions that were made who knows how long ago that I have to deal with.
Your inability to understand that past decisions affects the future is very telling.
I'm just saying it's not Microsoft's / MS Office's fault ya'll picked the wrong software for your business requirements.
-
@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
I'm just saying it's not Microsoft's / MS Office's fault ya'll picked the wrong software for your business requirements.
You're assuming that there was a plethora of choices in cases like this. For a very long time there was 1 "choice" Microsoft Office.
Hiring a developer isn't an option for a start-up plumbing business or general contractor (examples) to fulfill their needs. It's not as if LibreOffice or OpenOffice or whatever products were well known or even existed at the time these decisions were made.
The argument you're making is "Well you shouldn't have picked QuickBooks" as if other options are well known enough to work for a businesses use case.
-
And the final part to the above is that, businesses like people change. Processes change, software changes, income changes, decision makers change.
These are all things that need to be accounted for before spouting off about how bad a decision is or was and what you'd do in your perfect circle of hell that is @Obsolesce.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
And the final part to the above is that, businesses like people change. Processes change, software changes, income changes, decision makers change.
These are all things that need to be accounted for before spouting off about how bad a decision is or was and what you'd do in your perfect circle of hell that is @Obsolesce.
Then it's obvious. If everything is changing around the business, why can't the business change? That's just how it works. Business that fail to change as the world around them changes, end up failing or hurting in some way.
-
@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
And the final part to the above is that, businesses like people change. Processes change, software changes, income changes, decision makers change.
These are all things that need to be accounted for before spouting off about how bad a decision is or was and what you'd do in your perfect circle of hell that is @Obsolesce.
Then it's obvious. If everything is changing around the business, why can't the business change? That's just how it works. Business that fail to change as the world around them changes, end up failing or hurting in some way.
Change is not what you're discussing, you've clearly stated that "ya'll picked the wrong software for your business requirements."
The decisions very well could've have been the correct option at the time.
You're now attempting to change tracks when you've made your bed, so now it's time to sleep in it and realize that you've been spouting nonsense about how any business has obviously made the wrong decisions if they don't have the tools they need today.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
And the final part to the above is that, businesses like people change. Processes change, software changes, income changes, decision makers change.
These are all things that need to be accounted for before spouting off about how bad a decision is or was and what you'd do in your perfect circle of hell that is @Obsolesce.
Then it's obvious. If everything is changing around the business, why can't the business change? That's just how it works. Business that fail to change as the world around them changes, end up failing or hurting in some way.
Change is not what you're discussing, you've clearly stated that "ya'll picked the wrong software for your business requirements."
The decisions very well could've have been the correct option at the time.
You're now attempting to change tracks when you've made your bed, so now it's time to sleep in it and realize that you've been spouting nonsense about how any business has obviously made the wrong decisions if they don't have the tools they need today.
And what, now too shitty of a business to continuously improve and evolve with the rest of the world?
-
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
If they already have and use Excel, then what's the issue? Obviously it not being cross-platform isn't an issue there.
The issue comes from the desire to upgrade to newer versions. Microsoft, while they offer stand-alone installations of Office 2019, now require yearly upgrades if you need those new features.
Many organizations simply don't or won't pay for upgrades year after year for something that has traditionally been supported for several years at a time.
At the same time, they won't pay for O365 to just get access to Microsoft Office (ueo to the total monthly cost increase) from $0 to $12-22 per user.
They rarely got new features in the past without buying a new version... so I don't see the problem. They continue to pay their one time huge fee for locally installed office on one computer and be done with it.
If they want new features, they'll have to buy it again and again, or just subscribe. -
The point of bring in someone like myself, @JaredBusch or anyone else is to help facilitate those changes to a new system or process.
Again you're attempting to change tracks on what was once a decision made must be the wrong decision if today you need something else.
How many businesses start with something like QuickBooks and move to something else? Was QuickBooks the wrong decision at the time? Not necessarily.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:
You're assuming that there was a plethora of choices in cases like this. For a very long time there was 1 "choice" Microsoft Office.
That has almost never been true. There have been many office packages out there since the 80's.. sure many have come and gone, but there were always choices.
