Microsoft Writes Off Corel 409
PizzaFace writes "Microsoft resuscitated Corel two and a half years ago, paying $135 million for a quarter of Corel's equity ownership. Corel talked then about bringing its products to .Net, and even hinted that it might use its Linux expertise to port .Net to Linux. Since then, Corel gave up on the Linux business and isn't talking anymore about .Net, but is instead riding its XML hobbyhorse. So Microsoft is selling its stake in Corel to a VC firm for $13 million, taking a 90% loss on the investment."
Well, duh (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Well, duh (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Well, duh (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Well, duh (Score:2)
Wow, what news... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Wow, what news... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Wow, what news... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Wow, what news... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Wow, what news... (Score:4, Funny)
90% Loss? (Score:5, Interesting)
-Thalen
Re:90% Loss? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:90% Loss? (Score:2)
Every lunchtime overweight division execs can be seen waddling along to McDonalds with large bills fluttering away from every cash stuffed pocket.
Citizen Bill (Score:3, Insightful)
Charles Foster Kane: You're right, I did lose a million dollars last year. I expect to lose a million dollars this year. I expect to lose a million dollars *next* year. You know, Mr. Thatcher, at the rate of a million dollars a year, I'll have to close this place... in 60 years.
I'm not really sure what I mean by posting this, but it seems appropriate somehow.
Re:90% Loss? (Score:3, Insightful)
Before pushing the standard MS lines, try to provide some proof, as I have never read (becides from slashdot) that MS loses money on everything but Win/Office. I don't love MS, but I hate posts pushing "facts" which make little logical sence when there is little proof to back them up. Just becuase we may not like MS dosen't mean they don't have a lot of products making a lot of cash.
Re:90% Loss? (Score:4, Informative)
> loses money on everything but Win/Office.
Abrahams, Paul. "Microsoft Shows 85% Profit Margins for Windows," Financial Times. November 17, 2002. (Sorry, but the URL [ft.com] is for subscribers only).
Here are some choice quotes from the article:
The Register also has an article [theregister.co.uk] based on Microsoft's public SEC filings:
Of course, you don't have to take their word for it; just check out Microsoft's recent SEC filings. It seems that Windows and Office pay the rent for all of Microsoft's other endeavors. I guess that's one of the hundreds of perks of illegally abusing your monopoly!
Missing the point (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Missing the point (Score:2, Insightful)
for a company (and owner) that are worth rediculous amounts of cash....what is the price of eliminating the competition.
A 90% loss over 2.5 years...122 million...
thats only 50 million a year...
wish i could throw away money like that
Re:Missing the point (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Missing the point (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Missing the point (Score:3, Insightful)
Consider what would happen even if Microsoft did make Palladium (or some similar technology) mandatory on all of its software, and furthermore windows would only run on hardware designed for so-called trusted computing (Remember the scare a year or two ago, whenever the hell it was, about DRM-enabled hard drives?) so that copyrighted digital media, once loaded onto your computer, was more or less inviolate.
The answer: More and more people would be fed up with the layers of crap and they would be ripe for a new solution. An entirely new player would then have a good shot at entering the market.
Of course, even if we DO get to that point and the public DOESN'T rebel, we will still have several avenues of approach available to us. First, there are various other CPU designs which we can use which are unlikely to be forced-DRM any time soon. China's Longxin processor (or whatever it's called this week) is a prime example. China will control people through legislation and fear and not through computer hardware because they know that if you have more than a billion people running around your country, someone is going to figure out how to defeat your protection. So their CPU and its eventual descendants may provide us a way out of hell.
But again I really don't think we will ever get near that stage. Also Microsoft plain and simply will not exert a reign of control over the internet for a variety of good reasons. First, none of it really belongs to them now. Second, companies which are as large and maybe as powerful as Microsoft who are currently in control of the internet, or at least large portions of the infrastructure, have too much to lose by letting them get ahold of it. And finally, if Microsoft did end up "owning" the internet, another internet would rise up. By that hypothetical time it should be even easier and cheaper to do something like that because as technology marches on it makes things cheaper.
So... Stop spreading FUD, you reactionist weenie. There is no danger whatsoever that microsoft will take over the world.
Re:Missing the point (Score:5, Interesting)
And that is just the kind of evil plan that seems to make big American companies drool!
-Derek
P.S. This started out as a whimsical post, but the more I think about it, the more it scares me how powerful 10 billion dollars really can be!
Re:Missing the point (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, until the next generation, eager to code cool stuff and maybe get a huge payoff to stop, replace them.
Oh and BTW, what do you mean by a bounty?
Re:Missing the point (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Missing the point (Score:3, Interesting)
Also - this is purely speculation - a lot of investors may drop Microsoft. Microsoft's adopting Linux could be seen as "caving in" to the competiton, which some may interpret as a weakness. More realistically, as the Joe Schmoe's start to become comfortable with Linux and begin trying new distributions, the investors may follow those users to another Linux company.
It seems to me that Microsoft would have way too much to lose by adopting Linux. Though the way things are going right now, Microsoft's loss is inevitable. One way is just quicker than the other.
Explain logic? (Score:2, Insightful)
What *does* make sense is wanting another major software developer to use
Not everything Microsoft does is pure evil.
Re:Explain logic? (Score:2)
Microsoft needed Corel for a couple of reasons. 1) to help convince other developers to go
Not everything Microsoft does is pure evil.
I don't equate this issue with good or evil as those words have other implications. However, what I do feel is that Microsoft's dominance of the personal computer industry is a bad thing if you feel that competition breeds better products. I certainly feel that way. I mean all you have to do is examine what it costs Microsoft to develop Windows versus what Apple's investment in OS X is. There are orders of magnitude differences and another example of wasted energy and inefficiency maintaining an environment that is not as good as it could be.
Re:Missing the point (Score:2, Insightful)
From then on they tried just about anything Cowpland could dream of, including moving to Linux (yeah, there's a core business focus for you). They practically killed Wordperfect by themselves, even before Microsoft took equity in them. By the time Word 6.0 was out, WP was dead in the water anyway.
But, I like your FUD. It's poetic.
Re:Missing the point (Score:5, Informative)
They practically killed Wordperfect by themselves, even before Microsoft took equity in them.
WordPerfect had been on its deathbed long before Corel came into the picture. Novell mismanaged it into the ground and dumped it on Corel in January 1996. By that time, Word had already supplanted WordPerfect as the word processor of choice for most professionals (with lawyers steadfastly refusing to leave their beloved WordPerfect 5.1). Corel is many things but you can't pin WordPerfect's demise on them. Novell is the culprit in that whodunit.Re:Missing the point (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Missing the point (Score:5, Informative)
Bzzzzt! You could not be more wrong. By late 1999, Corel had a Linux distribution and had ported Word Perfect and Correl Office to it. They were giving away "personal" versions of Word Perfect, the Word Processor that ruled the PC world untill Microsoft dumped Word on business students. As Word Perfect format was still the only officialy accepted private document format at most government agencies and business, Word Perfect still represented a significant threat to M$ and combined with a non M$ operating system M$ had no power to mess with it. Word Perfect 2000 came Windows only and the Linux version used Windoze emulation. Was this a co-incidence? I think not. Crappy management wimped out and took their little M$ bribe when they could have made something new and useful.
Re:Missing the point (Score:2)
Re:Missing the point (Score:3, Interesting)
No, this has nothing to do with Corel Linux.
If you remember, Corel was porting it's flagship applications - namely the CorelDraw suite - to Linux. Not to mention investing heavily in WINE.
At one time, CorelDraw was the only thing keeping my Windows partition around. I would have dearly loved to have a native Linux version, and I know I'm not alone.
It wasn't about the OS, it was about the apps.
Re:Missing the point (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Details of Price Hike (Score:5, Funny)
Sure, Microsoft's cost works out to
Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Couldn't that be the real reason that they invested in the company? Microsoft always gets its fingers into the competition when they feel that they could be a threat.
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Corel attemts at a database tool seem laughable though. Their spread sheet is nice and their presentation package is respectable though it could use a little intuition.
lets hope now that they have squandered all the M$ money the lazy execs will be fired and some people that actually care will be inserted in their place.
WP has not grown, but its still better than word...
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Considering what fact? Your opinion? MS invested in Apple too - is that why Apple is doing so well?
I appreciate a good discussion on the issues at hand, but you lose all credibility when you spout off conspiracy theory's as "fact".
MS didn't kill Wordperfect. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
It's called "running a business". It's a time-honored tradition that companies all over the world tend to follow, much to the delight of the people who own shares in said companies.
Microsoft antitrust case... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the heart of the issue, right there. So ironic.
Re:Microsoft antitrust case... (Score:2)
Apple and Borland were able to use their new leases on life to focus on profitable market niches. It seems that Corel hasn't been able to find a niche that is sufficiently sheltered from Microsoft's dominance while being profitable enough to carry the company.
Why corel is dying (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why corel is dying (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why corel is dying (Score:2)
Version 7 wasn't great, but WAY better than Word
Version 8 was good
Version 9 (2000) was awesome.
Version 10 (2002) is crap.
Coreldraw freaking rocked.
Version 8 was great.
Version 9 hauled ass.
Version 11 is complete crap.
My office has been a Corel shop for a long time. Corel consistantly put out products that beat everybody else senseless. I don't know where they went wrong, if their loss in market share sent them into layoffs which sent out bad code which forced shops like us to go the MS way.. I don't know.
Re:Why corel is dying (Score:2)
Re:Why corel is dying (Score:2)
> Its by a far distance better than Word
I would have to agree. Word Perfect is still the bomb, and worth every penny. I started Word Processing on a computer with Word Perfect 5.0 for DOS. Good stuff.
Unfotunately, I switched to the Dark Side because my University was a Microsoft campus and it just made sense at the time (plus Office was hella cheap).
Now that I'm free from the University, though, I'm slowly making the switch to Open Office. *sigh* Word Perfect is a good product, but Open Office works great too for what I need, and its Linux version is actually updated. If I used Windows only, I'd probably consider purchasing WP 2002 off of eBay for 30 cents (50 cents + free shipping if you Buy It Now!).
Update: I just checked out their web site before hitting Submit. They only offer an upgrade for previous users of their Windows or DOS [corel.com] product! Sorry Linux users, you made us go broke and we're bitter about it! Lame. They will, however, let you upgrade to WP 2002 if you were a previous user of CorelDraw 3 or later. Now that makes sense.
Re:Why corel is dying (Score:3, Informative)
WordPerfect, WordStar and other programs which were designed for word processing rather than making memos and pretty signs for businesses are the true power programs for writers. WordPerfect 10 isn't as great with today's software as WordPerfect 5.1 was with software of that day, but it's still well worth the money.
Re:Why corel is dying (Score:2, Insightful)
By this logic, Microsoft would be dying as well.
The only reason anybody ever uses it is because it's so dirt cheap.
Hmm. I thought this was part of the appeal of lots of open source stuff and Wintel stuff in general. It's cheaper than better solutions that may or may not ultimately cost more money.
Re:Why corel is dying (Score:2)
By this logic, Microsoft would be dying as well.
Really? Inferior to whom? A spectacular OS X that requires proprietary hardware? Maybe you mean a server OS with an inhumanly kludgy GUI and vastly too many slef-righteous chefs in linux?
Could you be Yet Another Linux Troll? Looks that way.
Re:Why corel is dying (Score:2)
Really? Inferior to whom?
Take your pick. Honestly, there has been some good products that come out of Microsoft, but on the whole, when they try to leverage their products to work within the Windows paradigm, they are handicapping themselves. There are innumerable instances of products using superior technologies or implementation that would not have fit or would have competed with other Microsoft products that have been killed.
A spectacular OS X that requires proprietary hardware?
Works well for me. Exceptionally well in fact. So well that all my hardware purchases for the forseeable future will be from Apple.
Maybe you mean a server OS with an inhumanly kludgy GUI and vastly too many slef-righteous chefs in linux?
I generally use the tools that get the job done. If it only comes on a *nix with an X-windows interface, I will run it to accomplish work and push science forward. But the cool thing is that I can do this too on OS X.
Re:Why corel is dying (Score:2, Informative)
CorelDraw is a vector drawing program. They do have a Photoshop-like program, PhotoPaint, I think. But CorelDraw and Photoshop don't have anything in common. They're used for quite different things.
I wonder if we'll ever see... (Score:5, Interesting)
The win32 version is one of the few truly excellent drawing packages I've come across.
It'd be a pity to see it go to waste.
Re:I wonder if we'll ever see... (Score:2)
Very hard to come by these days, though...
Re:I wonder if we'll ever see... (Score:2)
Re:I wonder if we'll ever see... (Score:3, Interesting)
I for one would consider developing it further, if it was under an open license.
Corel Linux's best feature (Score:5, Funny)
That cool little bean bag penguin that came in the box.
You can still get one of these at your local Staples store for $4.50 on clearance, just ask if they have Corel WordPerfect Office 2000 for Linux.
Corel Killed WordPerfect a Long Time Ago (Score:2, Interesting)
Note that the people working at Corel weren't the problem; the ones I talked to were dedicated to WP. I imagine the development resources just weren't there.
Re:Corel Killed WordPerfect a Long Time Ago (Score:2, Insightful)
If Corel had jumped up and down sooner about M$'s file format shit then maybe Corel would still be triving.
On the other hand, it is more likely it would have just led to M$ destroying them a bit sooner.
This is just the tip of the ice berg for M$ (Score:2)
[nelson] HA HA! [/nelson]
Swell (Score:2, Offtopic)
in this forest no one cares
no shortage of leaves
Good News? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've got it! (Score:5, Funny)
What a great business plan (Score:2)
2) throw it at a wall and see what sticks
3) profit
Re:What a great business plan (Score:2)
Why not... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now that they don't have to worry about being punished, why continue shoring up companies like Corel? I wouldn't be surprised if they also drop their support of Apple (via Office X) for the same reason. They no longer have to prove that they're "good partners".
Frankly, after the previous round of government litigation in the mid-nineties, the same thing happened. Once they were out from under close scrutiny the loosed the dogs of war.
-David
Corel and Microsoft (Score:2)
I had written Corel off years ago. What took Microsoft so long?
Quick summary... (Score:2)
What more is there to say?
Corporate Software (Score:2, Insightful)
It seems that far too much importance is given to WHO is making a software, WHO is on-board (or in-bed perhaps), WHO is going to buy, WHO is shipping, WHO invested in WHO...
It seems corporate software is more about making market splashes than to provide a stable and sensible platform for future development of those projects. Money In, Money Out. Garbage In, Garbage Out.
If the companies involved aren't about making a better software industry (and to avoid argument, let's say "better" equals "more thought out, more stable for the future of software and the industry than a company"), then the products they create won't make a better industry, no matter WHO uses them.
Software has always been about HOW people use it. Not everything made was made for the largest audience, and not everything that is made for a niche audience hits its audience.
Corel was a graphics software development company (remember CorelDraw?). It was far more about real-world transferrable graphics, signs, tshirts, etc.
Why would anyone have expected it to get into Linux eventually, and even less would expect MS would ever buy into a company pushing Linux.
I'm not surprised Corel doesn't do Linux even more. I'm even less surprised that MS bailed out of Corel.
The history of Corel's Crazes (Score:5, Insightful)
Then a few years later it was Linux. Asked by an interviewer whether the Linux thing was just a passing obsession for Corel like Java had been, a spokesman asserted that no, this was different, Corel was really committed to Linux.
Then they got almost-bought by Microsoft, dumped Linux and started going on about
Now that too has gone and XML is the big thing? Whatever next?
Re:The history of Corel's Crazes (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as i can tell, Corel has never once followed through on any of these buzzword projects. They get *something* in the hands of consumers.. they never really *commit*.. they spend lots of money.. then they get bored, wander off, and dump the thing like it never existed sometime well before the point at which the inclusion of the buzzword would begin to make sense.
Like the java thing all those years ago. They got their office suite *working* in java. I tried it. It was buggy and it was slow, but it was beta, and it was *there*. But, from my perspective as a mac user-- well, first off, running it was a bloody mess, you had to bugger about with
So then what did they do? Well, um, nothing. After awhile they decided it wasn't worth the bother and just stopped updating, maintaining or allowing you to download it. By the time the MRJ reached a decent level of speed, which was still the EARLY days of java, you couldn't get Wordperfect for Java anymore, and if i remember right the older WPJ versions had some big incompaibilities with the later MRJ versions anyway. Had they kept developing it, they probably would have been able to come up with a reason why Wordperfect for Java is a good idea, and it would have been a usable, considerable project. Java's a big thing now, Java's everywhere, Java could probably use a wordprocessor. But they didn't bother to let that happen.
And then the linux thing. Everyone said it was a neat distro, not *very* revolutionary, but that it needed more work. Did they do the work? Did they develop the product until it lived up to its stated goals? Did they even maintain it long enough for it to take hold? No, they just went "hm, this isn't taking over the world overnight, it probably isn't worth the bother". Then they ran out of money.
I don't know what's up with this
This is, of course, just my perception of things, and i could be wrong, but *shrugs*.
Re:The history of Corel's Crazes (Score:5, Interesting)
Amen. I remember trying it out on a P200 and it sucked mightily. It was slow. It was buggy. But it worked. And TODAY it would be just fine. Java is faster. Computers are faster. If Corel had stuck it out then today they'd have an office suite that ran on Macintosh, Solaris, Linux, FreeBSD, Windows NT, Windows 95, Windows CE, ... probably even bloody Palm Pilot. Instead they gave up at the first hurdle. Yes, it will always be slower on Windows than a native app written in C++ using MFC. It doesn't matter. I use interpreted applications all the time. They should have stuck to their guns. They are a victim of their own insecurity.
So long, and thanks for all the text! (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, here it may be!
I personally prefer WordPerfect as a word processor application. I feel it is more intuitive, more versitile, easier to control, what not than MS Word. I hate Word. If not for WP I'd have died trying to write my masters thesis. MS doesn't have a superior product, they have a superior suite that most people use because it is on their machines when they get them. And hence it has become a default. WP & MS are not interoperable (and MS will keep it that way) and so WP has no chance at competition.
Sorry, I rant now. WP lost and sadly I must now resort to Word because to many of my coworkers complained about all my files saved as
Carry on.
The shortest distance between to puns is a straight line.
Corel/Wordperfect (Score:5, Insightful)
In any case converting to wine was as stupid as rewriting wordperfect in java (which apparantly they tried to do). If they had gotten a decent set of coders to keep a native unix set with decent wrappers they could easily have grabbed the market. The conclusion they drew from being burned by the linux sector (i.e. non selling product) wasn't the wrong conclusion because essentially they were selling a broken, nonworking product that they had no idea how to support.
-bloo
Re:Corel/Wordperfect (Score:2, Interesting)
ack : wasn't = was
not quite (Score:5, Insightful)
No, what Corel did, back in 95 or so was simply drop WP on all platforms but Windows and started to compete with Microsoft head to head on Microsoft's own platform. We all know how well that turned out. When Linux became a buzzword and Corel was looking for a new bandwagon to jump on, they simply couldn't produce a native version of WP in a reasonable timeframe, so they just hacked it until it ran under WINE without crashing too much. When I downloaded a trial version of WP8 for Linux, my first reaction was "are they actually trying to sell this thing?". I had the same impression about their distribution: a good start, but far, far from a finished product.
Had they kept the Unix ports going, they would have been able to provide a high-quality office suite for Linux. The last version of WP I used was WP8 (for Windows), and I certainly would have paid for a Linux version. But no, I am not interested in half-assed wine hacks.
Anyway, the story of Corel is truly sad. They were an awesome graphics company back in early 90s, but they kept making one boneheaded decision after another. This is a perfect example of how *not* to run a company.
Draw! (Score:4, Funny)
A bit misleading... (Score:3, Informative)
Corel talked then about bringing its products to .Net, and even hinted that it might use its Linux expertise to port .Net to Linux. Since then, Corel gave up on the Linux business and isn't talking anymore about .Net, but is instead riding its XML hobbyhorse.
In reality, Corel wrote Rotor (the shared source version of .Net for Free BSD) and also wrote Grafigo in C# and .Net.
Half-truths are just as bad as half-lies.
Re:A bit misleading... (Score:2)
Coo, while I had my suspicions, I hadn't read that in black and white before.
Doesn't surprise me, really.
For the record, the company where I work rejected Rotor out of hand as the license is just unworkable in a commercial product. Not even worth my time to try playing with it.
Compare LGPL (for the libraries/classes), no problem.
I just hope the "Painter" product doesn't die too. (Score:2)
Rotor (Score:5, Interesting)
So it wasn't so much that they were planning to port .NET, they pretty much did. The shared libraries (which, along with the CLR constitute the .NET Framework) weren't ported or recreated for the platform which makes sense, since Microsoft wants Windows to have some sort of advantage, but armed with the CLR and the C# compiler, one could still do .NET work, and if they were careful or clever, come up with a C# program which would compile on all platforms. The lack of libraries though pretty much meant the Mono and Portable.NET projects weren't in vain.
MISSING THE POINT on Corel (Score:3, Insightful)
Mikie has some problems. Like god complex. And a show wife who wore slinky outfits and threw huge parties. He sent a postcard out to people with his blonde babe wife sprawled over his lamborghini.
Corel began as the first high-end graphics package provider for Windows 3.0 (actually it started with hardware, but graphics made Corel an international company).
If Mikie had kept his eye on the ball and stuck with graphics with an increasing emphasis on web and perhaps looking into media, streaming video, backends etc, it would never have gone down the rathole of wordprocessing suites.
The new CEO seems to be concentrating on graphics again. Maybe he can get somewhere.
Microsoft only became relevant because Mikie didn't stick with core competencies.
Re:MISSING THE POINT on Corel (Score:3, Insightful)
Finally a definitive account of the Corel's shoddy history instead of the kneejerk "It's all Microsofts fault" reaction. Michael Cowpland is the reason Corel is where they are today. He was noting but a blowhard. Corel developed one good product (Draw) and everything else they acquired from other companies, usually knee-jerk reactions to jump on the latest bandwagon at the time . Remember "thin-clients?" Remember "Corel-Linux?"
Combine that with the fact that Corel couldn't market water in the middle of the desert and it's obvious that MS isn't the main reason why they are going down the drain.
Like, ummmm, we have the gift or something? (Score:4, Funny)
As a matter of fact, didn't Nostradamus predict this? I think it was in some quatrain about the tyrant at the 45th parallel in the new world.
I'll bet you can even dick "Hister" around with numerology to make it turn out to be "Bill Gates," or at least "Borg."
Nothing to see here. It was all preordained.
KFG
VC Firm? (Score:2)
Huh?
Here's the real mystery... (Score:2)
You can make sorts of credible, Machiavellian explanations for Microsoft's maneuvers concerning Corel. But why the heck would Vector buy Microsoft's shares in Corel? Can Corel really go anywhere with its current products?
The object was... (Score:5, Interesting)
to kill WordPerfect for Linux...
At least, this was the perception that I reached. Before the M$ bail-out, you could find WordPerfect Office 2000 for Linux in a variety of markets. Heck, you could even find it for sale in the software section of the bookstore here at Texas A&M. After the bail-out, *poof!* it's gone - you can not find it anywhere.
In a similar fashion, the WordPerfect for Macintosh development was stopped (it may have stopped before this, but it certainly died as far as native OS X development was concerned) when the bail-out happened. This has given Microsoft an even larger share of the office software market for Macintoshes than they have for Windows systems. How ironic is that?
For those who think that the Corel products are junk, as I saw in several of the posts - I suggest you try them, before you post...
CorelDraw was compared to PhotoShop, which is like comparing Excel to Word (I thought I would put this in Microsoft products to make it easier to understand) - they are both useful programs, but if you use one for some a project that the other was specifically intended for, you will be frustrated.
Likewise, WordPerfect is a much more versatile word processor than Word. In my job of doing computer support, I have amazed Word users by fixing massive formatting problems in their documents in seconds by importing the document into WordPerfect, turning the "view formatting codes" on and seeing why the formatting is not working the way that the user thinks it should look. This feature alone makes WordPerfect my choice - the fact that all of its other features work better is just gravy.
the timing (Score:5, Informative)
Damn.. Microsoft escapes destiny (Score:4, Funny)
Mission Accomplished (Score:2, Insightful)
Corel's Linux products, before the Microsoft investment were great. I'm
talking about Wordperfect 7 and 8. Their Wine project had potential,
but version 1 sucked. Unfortunately they didn't stick it out and release
a 1.1 version - which would likely have ruled - due to Microsoft's
influence.
Keep in mind... (Score:2)
My two cents.
Re:similar article (Score:2)
SCO? (Score:2)
Re:Next up for Microsoft's Linux probings (Score:2)
Maybe spread rumors I have developed a way to convert office dics to my format, flawlessly, and I am thinking of oening the source.
hell, I could use 135million right now.
Re:Corel always go for the latest buzzwords (Score:2)
You know Phase 1, Phase 2, etc.
Re:Nothing that wasn't to be expected. (Score:2)
It's been awhile since I've used any vector-graphics program, but can you tell me what the competition is?
Re:Nothing that wasn't to be expected. (Score:2)
Re:Ouch (Score:2)