Andy Brown wrote:
Robert Derman wrote:
Andrea Pescetti wrote:
e-letter wrote:
It is difficult to understand why a business
would waste time trying to use LO; if a customer uses m$, the supplier
might as well do so also and consider the m$ price as a cost of
conducting
On 20/07/2011 22:34, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
But, in almost all cases I've seen, the reasons were different, like
getting rid of dependency on a specific vendor,
I would also guess that one of the other main reasons would be to avoid
the antics of the Business Software Alliance and it's
On 20/07/2011 23:54, Robert Derman wrote:
If you want to know about one very good reason for not using M$ Google
Ball Guitar String Co.
Excellent article. Thanks for that...
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems?
On 21/07/2011 01:33, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote:
On 07/20/2011 05:02 PM, e-letter wrote:
On the users mailing list, a significant proportion of a random view
of questions seems to be with relation to using LO is some way with m$
document formats.
What should be the priority of LO
Hello,
I'd like to quote my colleague Thorsten Behrens on this:
==
With the upcoming extension website,
we'll need some kind of click-through license agreement, for someone
submitting software, and a disclaimer on the front page, refusing
liability on third-party-provided software that we host.
Hi Charles and Richard,
I have already post this suggest on the website mailing list, but with a
longer and less communicative object that is:
[libreoffice-website] Just an hint to spread the ideas in normal users
that they can post a bug and that they can easily do it
and is also on
Carlo Strata schrieb:
in Italian Libre lists we have discussed the hypothesis to add a quick
couple of links (how to post a bug and post a bug)
Hi,
please also see
Bug 35855 - Usability: Add menu item with link to Bug tracking system
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35855
as an
On 21/07/2011, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak and...@pitonyak.org wrote:
I might also conclude that there is NO reason to support any other file
format either. I mean, really, why should I support a non-ODF format?
PDF generation? Remove it! Any other office file format? Remove it! Why
single out
On 07/21/2011 08:47 AM, e-letter wrote:
On 21/07/2011, Andrew Douglas Pitonyakand...@pitonyak.org wrote
I am more comfortable in OOo than I am in MSO, so, I have created many
MSO deliverables in OOo and LO. The only time that I make an exception
is when I believe that I am not able to
On 21/07/2011 14:23, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote:
I am of the opinion that good inter-operability with MSO products
makes it easier to attract new users and that poor inter-operability
with MSO products makes it more difficult.
Interestingly, I've just received an MSO .doc document. I
Since there is still a lot of prejudice out there against open source
software based on FUD and plain old not wanting to leave the comfort
zone, ease of interoperability with M$ document formats will be necessary.
In fact I view it as a way of showing a superior attitude.
Interoperability is
Yes, don't confuse ODF compatibility with OpenOffice.org (or LibreOffice)
compatibility. I was in the room on one occasion when Microsoft was asking for
advice on their approach to ODF 1.1 Spreadsheet documents.
Unfortunately, none of us blinked about how this would work for users who are
12 matches
Mail list logo
