On 11/12/05, Alexandro Colorado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You can buy outlook for 100 instead of MSO for 300+ dls, this means you > save 200 per desktop.
Individuals can buy a Retail copy of MSO for $150. Busineses can get it for cheaper if they buy in volume and/or buy it OEM. As both prices decrease (MSO and just OL) the differences also decrease, to the point it would be wasteful to buy Outlook and *not* by the complete suite. Make sure you are asking for an email client Outlook is not just an email > client and if OOo end up having an email client you might be criying that > you mean a whole PIM-app. Yes, I think most people mean an Outlook replacement, not just an email client. To them, Outlook is email, just like Excel is spreadsheet. Having never used Outlook, I can't say, personally, what they want. But I want an email client and a PIM. I'd like to reitterate that I think a partnering with Mozilla would be the best answer, but if that isn't possible, building an OOo version would be good. > 2. This idea that OpenOffice only concentrates on applications that are > > not available from other packages is completely bogus. Look at > OpenOffice > > Draw for example and compare it to packages like Inkscape. > > That's because OOo is not a clone to MSO > What you said has nothing to do with what he said. So because MSO has something, OOo can't? Does that mean we're getting rid of Writer, and Calc, and Impress, and, well, heck, everything but Draw and Flash export? I understand (truly I do, I've been preached at enough about this) I *REALLY* understand that OOo is not an MSO clone. I get it. I know. I dig it. I comprehend. BUT Using that line as an excuse for why OOo doesn't have this useful feature that MSO does, (like, oh, say, WORD COUNT - yes people actually told me OOo wasn't a MSO clone when defending it's lack of, or burial of, a decent word count feature), does not explain it. It doesn't even come close. It doesn't even excuse it. If Competitor A is doing something right, or providing a service that people need, and Competitor B isn't, and Competitor B sees Competitor A doing it. It does not make Competitor B a clone of A to do it. It makes them a smart business person. Learning from others is a sign of intelligence. Being able to say, "Hey, that guy did this, and people liked it. Maybe I should do that." doesn't make you a clone. I learned how to talk by listening to others, and if you can talk, that's how you learned too. People like Outlook. People buy Outlook. People use Outlook. People want to do things that Outlook lets them do. It might be nice if we were able to help them do that. Because, we don't want them to use Outlook. Outlook has a lot of problems. OOoEmail (which I use to mean the email client and PIM/calendar thing that doesn't exist yet) would solve a lot of those problems. Outlook uses ActiveX, which is bad. OOoEmail would use Java, which is good. Or it wouldn't use either, which is better. Outlook is MS, which is bad (most on this list would say).. OOoEmail would be open source, which is good. Outlook is Windows only, (the Mac thing is called Entourage now, and it's different), which is not good if you don't use Windows. OOoEmail would be cross-plarform, which rocks. Outlook costs $100, which is horrid. OOoEmail would be free, (and Free), which is excellent! OOoEmail could, potentially, provide the features and services Outlook users want, and solve the problems that Outlook has. I don't see why people who claim to support Open Source more devoutly and purely than they claim I do aren't all over this one. Those anti-HTML-email people should be all about getting people off of OutBreak, or Lookout!, or that evil-virus/spam=spouting mouth of hell that is Outlook. -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ Because everyone loves free software!
