> I've yet to find an MS product that isn't in competition with something cheaper, less buggy and generally better. WordPerfect (even after Corel turned it into bloatware) is vastly superior to Word, and so on and so forth.

The problem is compatibility. Let me give an example:

In my job search, a lot of companies accept applications by email. When they do, they sometimes specify the required file format for documents like resumes (maybe 50% of the time). When a format has been specified, I can remember one time when the format was text only, and the rest of the times, about 30% specify text or MS Word, and the remainder specify MS Word only. Doing the math, about 35% of the jobs I have applied to require use of MS Word to complete an electronic application. (Of course, snail mail and fax are usually options as well, but that's irrelevant, in my opinion.)

My point here is that I could personally choose to use something like Wordperfect (which I remember being an excellent product back in the day when I used it) but I would still need MS Word to do the majority of my electronic applications. It was not an omission that I did not specify any percentage as allowing Wordperfect format for electronic applications; I honestly can't remember a single one.

I do realize that any decent program (word processor or otherwise) can save in the format used by the competition (at least, these days they can) but my experience with these kinds of file transfers is that some formatting is usually lost and a quick touchup is often necessary in the new program--but I'm not about to send a potential employer a copy of my resume and hope that they can overlook any formatting problems that may be present.

What this all comes down to is that I basically need to have MS Word to feel confident in applying for jobs electronically. I'm not saying that this makes MS superior in any way; I just think that this is the real reason why they maintain a dominant position in the marketplace. They got into that position, and now convenience dictates that most people need to use their products to do business. I think the same thing would have happened to any company that got the jump on all the others, and I don't really see any reasonable way for anyone to change the situation right now, short of enhancing the compatibility between product to the point where thay can all save to a common file format with NO noticable differences. I don't see that one happening, though. Even files types that have a standard (like HTML) are interpreted differently from reader to reader (browser to browser).

> winter"MS stuff is OK, but there's better stuff out there"mute

Don "I have been working with outdated information on some of the stuff I have said. Feel free to tell me how wrong I am" Monkey