During testing and roll out, don't do it all at once. That's a bad habit
introduced by MS to create crises. Find one or two early adopters who are
interested and have them run a short pilot. Then phase it in one group at
a time. As things go well, the pace can be accelerated. Once you're
Lars D. Noodén wrote:
I think the biggest obstacle is that many people confuse a single brand
with a class of product. Just like many, at least in the US, call all
tissue kleenex and photocopiers xerox, many also call all word
processors Word. I've even heard individuals refer to WordPerfect
Quoting Daniel Carrera [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Jonathon Blake wrote:
All the rest is FUD.
If a business is not dependent upon spreadsheets, then OOo is good.
_If_ a business is dependent upon spreadsheets, then OOo is not a good tool.
[I'm ignoring that most spreadsheets are actually very badly
Most companies that use MS products have not paid fully the licenses
for the number of machines they have.
Simple case: my wife's ex-company has decided yesterday to check every
computer for unpaid licences and remove all the illegal stuff (which
includes of course a huge amount of copied MS
Have you by any chance ever come across a slim little volume titled Let Stalk
Strine by Afferbeck Lauder?
It has as part of its introduction, the discovery Monica Dickens made, that
Emma Chisit isn't a woman's name, it's actually a request in Strine for the
price of a book.
An example of his
I think more companies will be taking that approach, especially since BSA
and probably FAST give the appearance to be working on behalf of MS and
not any other closed source vendors:
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1998/01/burstein.html
Using OOo allows companies to keep the
...
The likely costs of the
complete conversion of say 4000+ seats worth of documents will no doubt
exceed the MS licensing costs
That depends on the nature of the use and it will be different in
different circumstances. Even if in the short term the cost exceeds the
license fees, in
Hi Chuck,
On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 12:06:21 -0400, Chuck wrote:
Does OOo have this ability
No, neither 1.1.4 nor 1.9.x do, there is a request for enhancement
http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4040
pending in the requirements queue.
Eike
--
OOo/SO Calc core developer. Number
Hi Caleb,
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 10:56:08 -0400, Caleb Marcus wrote:
When will OOo 1.9.101 be out?
You missed it ;-) No, honestly, the next snapshot probably will be m104.
Eike
--
OOo/SO Calc core developer. Number formatter bedevilled I18N transpositionizer.
GnuPG key 0x293C05FD:
Oh, I'm not familiar with the numbering. I just want to know about when
it should be out.
Eike Rathke wrote:
Hi Caleb,
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 10:56:08 -0400, Caleb Marcus wrote:
When will OOo 1.9.101 be out?
You missed it ;-) No, honestly, the next snapshot probably will be m104.
Eike
Maria Winslow a crit :
There can be a lot of guessing here, so having a realistic assessment of the
costs of migration is very important. If you take the time to investigate how
many macros you actually have and what it would cost to transition, then you
can show management a cost per seat of
For some reason no help seems to exist when I press F1 i writer:
»The requested document does not exist in the database !!«
And that's when requesting the index-page of the help-files...
Neither are any files found when I search for some arbitrary thing..
The 'content' and 'index' panes are
On 5/18/05, Maria Winslow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
for example:
- 200 licenses for Office at a cost of $66,000 (approximate OEM cost)
- 10 macros that will cost a total of $20,000 to transition
- A necessary upgrade that will cost just slightly more to deploy OO.o vs.
Office (internal
Chad Smith wrote:
You leave out the re-education process. Going from MS Office XP to MS
Office 2003 does require a slight readjustment period (some icons look
different, more buttons on the screen, a few menu choices may have
moved) but not as much as it would to go from Office XP to OOo 2.0.
What OS are you running Philip?
Would it be possible to download the install package and grab the help
files from there if they aren't included in the source package?
Is there any reason the help files wouldn't be included in the help
package, or is there a specific procedure to compiling the
on 05/18/05 15:07 'Chad Smith' wrote:
On 5/18/05, Maria Winslow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
for example:
- 200 licenses for Office at a cost of $66,000 (approximate OEM cost)
- 10 macros that will cost a total of $20,000 to transition
- A necessary upgrade that will cost just slightly more to deploy
Chad wrote:
You leave out the re-education process. Going from MS Office XP to MS Office
2003 does require a slight readjustment period but not as much as it
would to go from Office XP to OOo 2.0.
_If_ they were trained properly in the first place, the cost of
teaching them how to use
Actualy Caleb. The developers don't release every snapshot to the
servres. The way it works, is that a set of tasks are set up to
complete. Each integration task marks a building step, and when it's
done they're all bundled together. Ex. .89, .95, .97, and so on. The
next consecutive build isn't
On Wednesday 18 May 2005 04:07 pm, Chad Smith wrote:
On 5/18/05, Maria Winslow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
for example:
- 200 licenses for Office at a cost of $66,000 (approximate OEM cost)
- 10 macros that will cost a total of $20,000 to transition
- A necessary upgrade that will cost
On Wednesday 18 May 2005 04:45 pm, Chad Smith wrote:
On 5/18/05, cono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Chad,
I train people in groups of 4 to 6 persons. That takes them 4 hours.
After that, they not only know where the differences between MsO and OOo
are, they also have learnt:
a - how to
On Wed, May 18, 2005 17:00:42 PM -0400, Maria Winslow
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I forgot to mention that out of all the case studies I've written...
Maria (and everybody else on list)
please do NOT repost every time screens and screens of text that we
have already received (sometimes paying
on 05/18/05 16:18 'M. Fioretti' wrote:
I think that you have no exact idea of how most big companies and big
public administrations work. I'm *not* saying the list above does
always make sense, but it *is* how many big organization decide.
Private individuals and small businesses are an entirely
Chad wrote:
so they'd have to pay you for your time.
a) When a company does a systemwide upgrade, they do it by department.
b) If they are smart, the contract will not be on hours worked, but on
people trained.
so their lost productivity doesn't start going down until they get to
be with you.
You need to factor in the costs over time with licensing/training and such.
A snap shot look at the initial switch isn't the whole picture. What are
the cost differences over a single year, maybe not much but, how about over
a 3 year stretch, or 5 years. The benefits really start to add up the
On Wed, 2005-05-18 at 17:29 +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
Hi Chuck,
On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 12:06:21 -0400, Chuck wrote:
Does OOo have this ability
No, neither 1.1.4 nor 1.9.x do, there is a request for enhancement
http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4040
pending in the
Hehe.. very funny though it's outdated
On 5/18/05, Nicu Buculei [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Anton Danilov wrote:
Not a very funny joke and a total trademark copyright violation.
Incidentally, I think it's really funny. :-)
I also considered it funny the first
-Chad Smith :
OOo is no where near ready for corporations. Not ones that aren't in
direct competition with Microsoft anyway. That's the only reason IBM,
Sun, and Novell use OOo - they don't want to use Microsoft.
.
And Microsoft being in competition with Apple would certainly not use
Came across this today:
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/4a3db4d0-c6f1-11d9-a700-0e2511c8.html
SW patents in Europe face a rocky road. Good!
Rod
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL
that's not what I said. I didn't say that MS would never use OOo.
What I said was the only major companies that *do* use OpenOffice.org
are in direct competition with Microsoft. (at least the only ones
that people talk about.)
On 5/18/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Chad
Chad Smith wrote:
that's not what I said. I didn't say that MS would never use OOo.
What I said was the only major companies that *do* use OpenOffice.org
are in direct competition with Microsoft. (at least the only ones
that people talk about.)
There are a lot of large corporations that use
And I think your analysis is wrong.
THe key word is alternative, option.
What matters is not so much the box you use but the fact that it is
able to communicate and share data with other boxes. This is the
network paradigm. Now people have the ability to opt MS out of the
process necessary to
Came across this today:
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/4a3db4d0-c6f1-11d9-a700-0e2511c8.html
SW patents in Europe face a rocky road. Good!
Rod
Same from XML.org:
Dramatic Changes Proposed for EU Patent Proposal
Matthew Broersma, eWEEK
European parliamentarians have put forward a list of more than
Well, thanks anyway though :-)
On 5/19/05, Rigel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately Philip. I don't know much about Free BSD. :( I know
windows. Some Mac, a little linux, some palm stuff, and that's about
it LOL. I'm an amateur programmer. Perhaps someone else can help :)
Rigel
On
Chad wrote:
that's not what I said. I didn't say that MS would never use OOo.
Slight off topic, but did you that the most popular browser at 1
Microsoft Way is Firefox? And the number 1 email client is
Thunderbird? [This includes everybody from the filing clerk to board
room.]
Which leads me
On Wed, May 18, 2005 16:30:54 PM -0500, Steve Kopischke
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I don't agree. I have seen organizations toss GroupWise and Lotus Notes
out the door in favor of Microsoft Exchange in close to a hearbeat, in
spite of Gigabytes of messages that got munged in the process
35 matches
Mail list logo
