Jozef Peterka wrote:
Probably, I dont understant, and you dont understand me ...
I am using opensource alternatives ( Evolution/Kontact ), and even MORE? I mean
MS office.
Please, reply my post, if you still dont understant my point.
Have a nice day all :)
I still haven't heard a convincing argument as to why anyone needs an
email client integrated into OpenOffice. Why is it so much easier to
send an email when the window title says "OpenOffice" instead of
"Evolution".
And who said, there can not be made a better mail/PIM application than
Evolution, Kontact, Thunderbird or whatever ? ? ? They are NOT far as
flawless as it is claimed to be !
If the alternatives you listed are not perfect, then this is a very good
argument for NOT starting an email client from scratch - ie it is
obviously a large task, and one that will take a long time and a lot of
resources to complete. Why not make the open-source alternatives that
have been at the game for YEARS now just a little better?
It's still just a mental barrier that people have to get over.
OpenOffice doesn't include an mp3 encoder, or a P2P client, or a game of
tetris, or an email client - and nor should it. If people still insist
on jumping up and down and insisting on one, then they only have to
actually code one to make it a reality. But the *great* majority of
people interested in writing a good email client are already attracted
to other mature projects ( relatively speaking, but particularly in
relation to OOo's email client which currently does not exist ) such as
Thunderbird and Evolution.
Keep in mind that the main goal of OpenOffice is *not* to 'compete' with
Microsoft Office. The main goal is to offer an open-source office suite.
A current requirement for a decent office package is the ability to read
& write MS Office format files, and OOo already has this covered.
'Competing' with MS Office something that happens in the marketplace for
office productivity software, but not one of the main goals of the
project. OpenOffice is not a company competing for market share, and
doesn't make a profit by selling software.
BUT how can so
"called" promoters of OOo expect to use it widely, if it has not the
same "components" as its competitor
Companies that sell software can see an advantage in creating an
almighty all-in-one monstrosity, because it means that they are
increasing their target market and reducing the need for people to use
competitors' software. Communities that release open-source software
simply don't see things like this at all - they see the 'market' as
being a very different beast. They also see other open-source projects
as being brothers-in-arms instead of being competitors. So when you say
that OOo needs to have the 'same components' as its 'competitor', I say
that it already does, as the open-source community has provided a number
of alternatives, and OOo is a member of that community.
--
Daniel Kasak
IT Developer
NUS Consulting Group
Level 5, 77 Pacific Highway
North Sydney, NSW, Australia 2060
T: (+61) 2 9922-7676 / F: (+61) 2 9922 7989
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: http://www.nusconsulting.com.au
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
