Neither was worth the time it took to uninstall them when they proved almost unusably inferior to the industry standards.
These things are the standard for a reason, OSS hobbyists who are not graphic designers or admin workers generally will never be able to make something that is in the same league for the exact same reason that I couldn’t build a compiler better than the industry standard one, even if I technically had the coding skills to make it, because I haven’t spent decades using one professionally, so I wouldn’t know what an industry pro would want from it.
The great thing about open source is that it’s generally developed by people who use it. Proprietary software is just developed by people who get paid by someone who’s just doing it to make a profit…
Then that’s even worse, because the design of the OSS “alternatives” to everything I use daily for work screams “hobbyist who just needed the basic functions of a word processor and spreadsheet editor for school”.
I hate that it is the way it is, but OSS “alternatives” are not serious tools for professionals. That said, I’m 100% in favor of nationalizing Adobe and Microsoft, since they’ve created a world where only their tools are good enough to do the job, but that’s not the conversation we’re having here.
Here’s a simple test: take all formatting out of a copy of Ulysses or some other doorstopper of a classic novel so it’s just a giant wall of text. Give two publishing pros each a copy of that wall of text, have one turn it in to a publishable book using the industry standard tools and one do the same task with the OSS “alternatives” and see who’s done first, and which version is the better looking final product.
Neither was worth the time it took to uninstall them when they proved almost unusably inferior to the industry standards.
These things are the standard for a reason, OSS hobbyists who are not graphic designers or admin workers generally will never be able to make something that is in the same league for the exact same reason that I couldn’t build a compiler better than the industry standard one, even if I technically had the coding skills to make it, because I haven’t spent decades using one professionally, so I wouldn’t know what an industry pro would want from it.
The great thing about open source is that it’s generally developed by people who use it. Proprietary software is just developed by people who get paid by someone who’s just doing it to make a profit…
Then that’s even worse, because the design of the OSS “alternatives” to everything I use daily for work screams “hobbyist who just needed the basic functions of a word processor and spreadsheet editor for school”.
Wow, imagine an .ml trying so hard to go to bat for corporations and proprietary software. Hilarious…
I hate that it is the way it is, but OSS “alternatives” are not serious tools for professionals. That said, I’m 100% in favor of nationalizing Adobe and Microsoft, since they’ve created a world where only their tools are good enough to do the job, but that’s not the conversation we’re having here.
Here’s a simple test: take all formatting out of a copy of Ulysses or some other doorstopper of a classic novel so it’s just a giant wall of text. Give two publishing pros each a copy of that wall of text, have one turn it in to a publishable book using the industry standard tools and one do the same task with the OSS “alternatives” and see who’s done first, and which version is the better looking final product.
Wanna place any bets?