We should not consider what microsoft says. Openoffice.org is certainly a better option now.
On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 09:27 +0100, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > Hello, > > > Le 16/12/08 19:43, Lars Noodén a écrit : > > John McCreesh wrote: > > > >> "Microsoft wants the world to believe that in these enlightened days it > >> operates an open Office policy to all comers... sort of. > >> > > > > Ouch. The "sort of" part there refers to the DRM'd, MS-only, clunky PDF > > imitation XFS. It looks like MS will try to piggyback an attack on > > Adobe via the demand for ODF. > > > > We can use the announcement of course, but the trick will be to at the > > same time jettison MS' plug-in. OOo still has the beats in ODF support, > > legacy format support, MSO document repair. > > > > So those interested in experimenting with SP2, if or when it arrives, > > can prepare by adding OOo to their loadsets. > > > > > > We ought to be more cunning here. As far as we know, Microsoft, through > Dough Mahue and the "DocumentInteropInitiative" or whatever they call it > already announced substantial limitations and drawbacks in their > implementation of ODF (see for instance the support of tables in Word). > Without even crying fool, we should spread a message about quality. At > least now, we know who among the two is the best office suite! > > Best, > > Charles. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
