Andrew wrote: >which is why so many of us are looking for an alternative built into OOo.
Once upon a time, I would have agreed with you. However, given that the FLOSS equivalent to Outlook is no longer being developed, due to lack of interest, I suspect that claims of no alternative to Outlook is nothing more than an excuse to not migrate. [And no, the Outlook equivalent I am talking about is not Mozilla/ thunderbird-firefox-sunbird, but a single program that performs all of the functions of Outlook.] > OOo either needs to make it's own PIM that is as good or better than M$, I'll point out that Google is working on an integrated web office that promises to be better than Microsoft. The current version includes a calender function. >Without a PIM, it is too cumbersome to replace M$ Office in the workplace environment IF that environment is already using and reliant on Outlook I can convert your Office to FLOSS overnight, with calender/PIM functions that make Outlooks seem like the stone age. There will be a slight learning curve, in how to use the program, but more because the users never learned how to use their software in the first place, than because it is "difficult" to use. > The good news is many of them will switch if OOo has a PIM equivalent to > Outlook. Why do they insist that the same program that provides their PIM function, also provide their office suite function? Especially since that is _NOT_ the case with Microsoft? I'd suggest that it is sheer unwillingness on the part of those people to switch. They are much happier to pay for the MS Licences, than use currently available FLOSS equivalents. xan jonathon -- Ethical conduct is a vice. Corrupt conduct is a virtue. Motto of Nacarima.
