Maybe then, Jonathan, we should re-name it to a Desktop Publishing, suite, instead of an Office Suite. Office suit implies everything you would use commonly ever day in your office. An office suite typicaly includes e-mail, an address book, and schedule, as well as a project management application, which hasn't been mentioned. Rigel
On 11/7/05, Jonathon Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Chad wrote: > > > Why? - WHY? > > Because it makes *SENSE* to, that's why. > > It makes absolutely no sense to include an email client in an office > suite. > > >spell-checker should draw from the same list of words. > > That is what elm is for. > > > It makes sense that since email is mostly words, and text documents are > mostly words, the interface should be similiar, if not identical. > > But email and docuemtns are two completly different crittters. They > might have words in common, but that is _all_ they have in common. > > It makes much more sense for OOo to be functionally equivalent to a > Dekstop Publishing Program, than to be functinally equivalent to an > email client. > > >contact information (Names, emails, addresses, phone numbers, > birthdays, relationships, > > Those datapoints belong in a databse. How many email client can > reaed a _true_ database --- something thaty can be created and edited > using SQL? > > > For these, and I am sure dozens of other reasons, > > How many email clients can read MySQL, Oracle, FireBird, SQLite or > similar databases? > > > it makes sense to have an email client as a part of your office suite, > whether that suite is > > How can it make sense to include something, which is incapable of > using the tools it _needs_ to perform its function? > > xan > > jonathon > -- > Does your Office Suite conform to ISO Standards? >
