On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 12:57 PM, todd rme <[email protected]> wrote:
>> And for iOS (iPhone and the like, FYI)
>> http://developer.apple.com/news/ios/appstoretips/
>>
>> Technically, I would say LibO meets all (most?) the requirements needed.
>
> I don't think it meets these:
>
> - It duplicates apps already in the App Store, particularly if there
> are many of them (iWork)
IMO, LibO and iWork overlap each other in many facets but not a duplication.
Well, however, Apple may think so :)
> - It creates a store inside itself for selling or distributing other
> software (extensions)
I think you get it wrong. By "create a store", it means that, you can't
make an app that users can browse books and buy them within the app,
for example.
> - It is not packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging
> technologies included in Xcode – No third party installers are allowed
> (I thought this was a major goal of LibO)
If we mean xcode as an IDE, then libO seems not to meet the requirement.
However, if we consider xcode as a compiler (xcodebuid, gcc), libO will
be OK (but this is tricky)
--
Best Regards,
Nguyen Hung Vu [aka: NVH] ( in Vietnamese: Nguyễn Vũ Hưng )
vuhung16plus{[email protected] , YIM: vuhung16 , Skype: vuhung16plus
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected]
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
