>>
>>And these apps which are not just ported, but built for several OSes at the same time, are winning the day. Why would anyone worry about whether Office is working right, or at all, on their other machine's OS, when LibreOffice works on all of them?
>
>I can answer that question. The answer is that "better", unfortunately, is not the most important criteria. Compatibility and interchangability are. There have always been far better options that the default, be it OS or app. (Think of OS/2.) But more important is working with others.
>
>For example, I would prefer to use an alternative to MS Word. However I cannot, because my clients and virtually the entire business world expects me to send them files that are 100% usable in Word, and they expect to send me files that are 100% usable in Word. Basic docs may not be an issue, but complex docs are not interchangeable between Word and anything else.
>
>The same applies to just about everything else. OTOH, if I am an island, programming off by myself, I can do as I wish. But in the larger business world, standardization is the keyword.

Good points, Tuvia.
I'd add availability of support as a factor.
Some of the most efficient systems I ever installed were those that used Fox running on SCO Unix. Eventually, though, I had to switch them to LAN's because the users couldn't find support for SCO Unix.