Louis, Thank you for the prompt response.
Where is the problem then? I work on both an openSuse desktop and XP desktop with OOo, and believe that OpenOffice.org and an opendocument format is the way forward. Were MS to adopt the odf then surely the OpenXML would be less of a potential headache? My main problem is the lack of interoperability of the small things between MS office and openoffice.org, such as the track changes and comments. >From a business perspective this lack of interoperability is a block to migration. Were MSO to adopt the odf it would enable their code writers to force the interoperability, not ours. Surely that makes sense for the promotion of OOo? I also want to know how I can contribute more offline to the OOo cause in the UK. I have spoken to Ian Lynch who happens to live not too far from me, but I would like to know if there are any conferences/expos at the NEC that I could work on a booth for .etc. Please give me your guidance. I would also like to contribute more online, especially once my exams are over in 4 weeks. Please also siphon some work my way. Cheers, Andy -----Original Message----- From: Louis Suarez-Potts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07 May 2006 17:55 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Marketing] Publicity strategy HI Andrew, I'm not sure I've had the pleasure of communicating with you--howdy :-) On 2006-05-07, at 12:35 , Andrew Loughran wrote: > I would > appreciate a reply from both Ian and Louis on this issue. For the record, as my blog,[0] interviews,[1] and presentations, etc. indicate, I'm quite happy to shame Microsoft for being a stick in the mud and flinging fud not solutions when it comes to open standards and open source and to spend a lot of time nuancing how MSFT's Open XML differs from ODF. Simon Phipps and I had a lot of fun in Denmark on this score and left the hapless MSFT rep. pretty much nonplussed and muttering to himself. I do promote OOo on its strengths, but one of those strengths is the ODF. And I'm on the ODF Adoption Committee and a member of the ODF Alliance and write and speechify on the value of the ODF because I think it important--but not as important as coupled with OOo, which is open source and uses open standards. The coupling is key here for a lot of markets, esp. public sector ones, which want to move to OOo but seemingly cannot just on the basis of OOo being free, open source, good: they need a powerful vehicle like ODF; that was Peter Quinn's discovery: the ODF bypassed a lot of the issues perceived in open source (eg, GPL license effects) and also allowed proprietary vendors to weigh in on the basis of something other than services and support: products. (The anxiety we feel is that time is panting down our necks, for if Open XML is approved as an open standard, then ODF is less of an attactor for a lot and our task is more difficult; there is urgency in all of this.) But I tend to believe that the real solution is of course open standards plus open source. And as I've discussed, OOo marries the virtue of open standards with the virtue of open source. It's a nice marriage :-) -louis [0] http://homepage.mac.com/luispo/blog/index.html [1] http://homepage.mac.com/luispo/docs/conferences.html __________ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __________ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com _____________ NOD32 EMON 1.1523 (20060505) information _____________ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system http://www.eset.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
