With a bit of luck more attention will be drawn to it over time, esp for govts.

I read somewhere that a lot of important information relating to emergency 
services leading up to the Hurricane at New Orleans was IE only. If you didn't 
use a Windows PC you had to find a phone number and get passed from dept to 
dept to get some info if you were lucky.




----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Hosking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: General Practice Computing Group Talk <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:26:12 AM
Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] OpenOffice 2.0

This is common even in the commercial world.
I tried to order some electronic components thru Farnell, whose main 
*business* is online ordering. They admitted that the only browser that 
would work was IE and had no plans to upgrade to others - didnt see the 
business need.

Richard

Neil D. McAliece wrote:

>If I looked at another commercial alternative, I would like it to be a bit 
>more cross platform. Indesign is available for Mac & Windows but not Linux. 
>
>I think we have more chance of changing to Linux than changing to Mac. I like 
>OSX. I would like it a lot more if it wasn't bound to Apple hardware.
>
>I was just hit with another annoyance. Govt departments who only test their 
>web apps against IE. One of our users was trying to get some EPC stats from 
>the Dept of Health site but all of the drop down lists were empty in Firefox. 
>The contact person at thier end couldn't shed any light on why there was 
>nothing in the lists. I asked our user to try it in IE and it worked fine :(
>
>Cheers,
>
>Neil
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Andre Duszynski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], General Practice Computing Group Talk 
><[email protected]>
>Sent: Tuesday, 29 November 2005 3:29:36 PM
>Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] OpenOffice 2.0
>
>Regarding the use of MS Publisher, this program has to be the worst of 
>the legacy MS products that somehow still exists to this day.
>
>I wouldn't bother looking for a product that offers feature parity and 
>the capability of importing MS Pub files; suggest rather that you make a 
>clean break to a proper WYSIWYG product. As a not-for-profit, the MDGP 
>should be able to afford Adobe InDesign at academic pricing. The 
>learning curve will not be too dissimilar to picking up Scribus and has 
>the added benefit of offering staff an entry point into a widely used 
>(and held) desktop publishing package; PDF, web, deadwood, whatever... 
>Quark Xpress in this regard is dead, as is Adobe Pagemaker which is EOL.
>
>And no, Indesign doesn't do clipart :-)
>
>-------------
>
>Neil D. McAliece wrote:
><SNIP>
>  
>
>>The other main problem is the few user we have who use (and are probably 
>>commited to using) MS Publisher. Scribus makes a fantastic alternative, but 
>>will require some training and it will not open Publisher docs.
>>
>>Neil McAliece
>>Murrumbidgee Division of General Practice
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Ian Cheong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: General Practice Computing Group Talk <[email protected]>
>>Sent: Monday, 28 November 2005 11:05:39 PM
>>Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] OpenOffice 2.0
>>
>><snip quote>
>>More like training a staff member to use OOO was going to cost more 
>>dollars or time than the cost of the academic edition of M$ Office.
>>
>>The network externalities effects make unseating an incumbent a very 
>>long-term project (years-decades).
>>
>>As well as that, it is general human nature to desire to learn from 
>>personal mistakes rather than the wisdom and experience of those that 
>>have gone before. It's probably a power and control thing that dates 
>>to teenagerdom.
>>
>>BTW, here's an interesting "switch" story over several weeks from an 
>>IT security consultant.
>>http://securityawareness.blogspot.com/2005/09/mad-as-hell-switching-to-mac-1-16.html
>>
>>I am amazed how bad Windows XP is. No doubt, Longhorm will have a lot 
>>of badness still bred into it, but that won't stop people forking out!
>>
>>Ian.
>>    
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Gpcg_talk mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
>
>  
>
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

Reply via email to