On September 23, 2005 04:32 pm, Brian Tipton wrote: > Charles Marcus wrote: > >>> ... I really wish the MS Word export with password protection was > >>> there! > >>> I was hoping to convert my organization over to OOo, but they are used > >>> to using MS Word passwords to "protect" sensitive documents. Not that > >>> the protection is any good, but that's what OOo would have to > >>> interoperate with in order to get management approval. > >> > >> Well i think you have answered your own question, move to a more secure > >> encryption system and implement Open Office while at same time leaving > >> the MS Word in place just as a legacy app for reading old docs. > > > > Oh, come on!! > > > > His request is perfectly reasonable. I too am happy to see OOo able to > > open MS password protected files. How [EMAIL PROTECTED] hard would it be to > > add > > support for their lame password in the 'Saved As' version of a .doc > > file too? Sometimes it seems to me that (some of) the OOo devs go out > > of their way to be difficult, just to make some kind of political > > 'point' similar to the one you tried to make above. > > > > Sheesh. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > If OOo (and some other OpenSource projects that have a strong anti-Gates > bias) every hopes to make the splash it is capable of doing, it needs > to quit fighting MS as its core mission and move its core mission to > simply be the best Office environment in the world. If a user needs a > capability, and it sounds like this would be an easy one to do, why not > do what opensource does best and give it to them. It could only open > doors down the road... Vision! We desparately need Vision. > > Brian
I think there is more to it than that. <anti-microsoft_rant> From a developers point of view, why would you incorporate a known flawed feature into a new product? The entire concept of "microsoft security" is an oxymoron. My background is in what is called "Good Laboratory Practice" and "E-Record Compliance". What we find is that there is no possibility of ever having your Microsoft Office documents secured - nor proving that the author is who they claim to be - using Microsoft technology. There are standards for encryption (such as even my signature) that are free to the entire world. These standards are open-sourced and they WORK. <killer_irony> To duplicate the Microsoft password system (which does not, nor has it ever, protected a document) would be a copywrite violation. </killer_irony> Your entire company is about to change everything they know about office apps anyhow because even if you stick with Microsoft - Version 12 is a complete change, is not backwards compatible with old versions (of course) and you're gonna have to relearn everything anyhow. So why not encourage your I.T. department to go ahead and bite the bullet now and make the switch to GpG encryption and signatures for all users. It works for OpenOffice as well as Microsoft Office, it's free and like Wilfred Brimley says about oatmeal: "It's the right thing to do". </anti-microsoft_rant> -- James White GpP: DB56 8EF6 If this helped you, please take the time to rate the value of this information: http://rate.affero.net/frozenJim/ResolutionIT.ca/
