As much as I hate to defend Microsoft...and I do hate defending Microsoft...they have
patents on their implementation of XML, not XML in general. This has no effect on
XML. It's akin to someone patenting a method of casting a die out of aluminum. That
patent doesn't affect aluminum, nor does
Ian Stuart wrote:
Firstly, the performance of OOo is really good and we have not been able
to match it with MS Office on a thin-client platform. At a customer site
we have successfully migrated 45 users onto a single Intel-based server
running Linux and OpenOffice for thin-client based users.
Thanks to Farrel for responding to my plea and for the contact
details of other users.
I don't think this is a good move...MS-Office is bloatware, and as MS
patents it's XML formats (the Patent Office is so stoopid!
Tomorrow, I will patent Air, and start charging everyone on Earth
usage
Ian Stuart wrote:
Although I have requested IBM to look at some of the issues associated
with OOo and U2 it would appear that the 'not invented here' syndrome
prevents them from doing anything constructive; this is not a criticism,
just an observation. I am surprised though that with IBM
I have been actively pursuing the use of OpenOffice.org (OOo) as an
alternative to MS Office on both Linux and Microsoft platforms with
reasonable success; from initially working with StarOffice 5.2 which
worked well with UniVerse ODBC, through the beta versions of OOo where
the developers
