Hi Michael,

Michael Weghorn wrote:
> In my opinion (and from own experience at the City of Munich),
> LibreOffice (and other FLOSS software) is often not suitable for many
> large enterprises "as is", so a good way of managing the lifecycle and
> getting issues addressed (i.e. professional support of some kind) is
> required to make it work well and users happy.
Seconded. And it's one of the greatest advantages of FLOSS in the
enterprise - people can absolutely tailor it to their _specific_ needs
and requirements, by adding the features & fixes they need.

That's particularly appealing to larger-scale deployments (where
economies of scale offer good value-for-money on a per-user

Would be great to market this better.

> The problem is that if management was persuaded it was a good idea
> to introduce LibreOffice just because it's "free as in free beer",
> you won't have (and will have a hard time getting) the resources to
> handle issues appropriately, so it's better to avoid wrong
> expectations.
Quite. This situation is bad for the company, bad for the users, _and_
bad for us in the project. And it's sometimes ~impossible to change
minds after the fact. So for LibreOffice, past mistakes of
"overselling" to the enterprise (though I believe we inherited many of
those wrong expectations from OOo) are coming back to haunt us now.


-- Thorsten

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to