Fred: Well Done! I'm archiving this one.
On 3/19/06, Fred A. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This web page is supposed to be an account of a company that switched from > OpenOffice to Microsoft office.... > > http://www.microsoft.com/malaysia/business/casestudies/linkpage4212.asp > > "Fast growing Malaysian footwear retailer JUKEBOX opted to deploy > OpenOffice > on the Microsoft Windows platform because the open source office > productivity > suite was free. However, it got less than it bargained for when it > discovered > the application had certain weaknesses such as the unreliable conversion > of > documents to Microsoft Office format. In addition, the company's IT users > spurned OpenOffice, preferring to use Microsoft Office which was installed > on > some of the company's PCs. > ... > In the late 1990's, the company opted to install OpenOffice running on the > Microsoft Windows platform for its office staff. The move to use the open > source office productivity suite was because "it was free," says Anson > Leow, > Marketing Manager of Harian Shoes. Because of the need to keep IT costs > low, > using OpenOffice seemed like a good idea, he explains. "Good enough turned > out to be just not good enough!"" > > The URL is dated May 25, 2004. Microsoft quotes JUKEBOX as claiming > that > they supposedly switched claims they migrated to OpenOffice in the late > 1990's. > > Here is the history of OpenOffice: http://about.openoffice.org/index.htm > > "Historical background > StarDivision, the original author of the StarOffice suite of software, was > founded in Germany in the mid-1980s. It was acquired by Sun Microsystems > during the summer of 1999 and StarOffice 5.2 was released in June of 2000. > Future versions of StarOffice software, beginning with 6.0, have been > built > using the OpenOffice.org source, APIs, file formats, and reference > implementation. " > > > Sun didn't release the proprietary StarOffice 5.2 source code to the Open > Source community until Oct 13, 2000 > http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/00/10/13/001013hnstaroffice.html > > On 13 December 2000, Sun's engineers released the 613 installation set > (the > latest build of Star Office) to the OpenOffice.org community, but it was a > problematic build. > > Here is the first article by the then new editor of the OpenOffice.org web > site, on Dec 19, 2000 > > http://www.openoffice.org/editorial/SunsOpenDoor.html > > "All the same, the move to open source is difficult for corporations to > make. > It's also fascinating to see in progress. In my next Editor's Column, I > look > at the problematic 613 build and trace the way the community addressed > (and > continues to address) those problems. > ... > Sun decided to release StarOffice's source code in July, less than a year > after acquiring Germany-based StarDivision for $73.5 million in August > 1999. > Beginning with Version 6.0 of the suite, Sun said, StarOffice will be > built > using the OpenOffice.org sources, application programming interfaces, file > formats, and reference implementation." > > On Oct 16, 2002, two years after its release OpenOffice was still in pre > 1.0 > beta release. > http://www.newsforge.com/software/02/10/15/1459259.shtml?tid=11 > > About May 8, 2002 OpenOffice.org 1.0 production was release. > http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reviews/4190/1/ > > > So, Microsoft is quoting JUKEBOX as "migrating to OpenOffice in the late > 90's" > OpenOffice was released by Sun until Oct 13, 2000 with build StarOffice > build > 613, at least a YEAR after JUKEBOX claims they switched to OOo!!! The > PRODUCTION version of OOo wasn't released until May 8th, 2002, THREE YEARS > after JUKEBOX claimed they migrated to it. > > Somebody is lying and I doubt it is JUKEBOX. > > -- > Paid purchaser of ALL SuSE Linux releases since 6.x > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
