On 3/19/06, Jonathon Coombes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Chad,
Hello. I can see why you would suggest that argument, but the issue I have > with that is that the original StarOffice which was released was very > different to the OpenOffice.org that is in use now. Before you make > the comment that is was based on the late 1990's, the case study > talks about converting to MS Office in 2005, not in 1990's, which is > their comparison. As you say, they may simply group them together, > but I would say that OpenOffice.org in 2005 was very different to > StarOffice 5.2 as a product. Yes - and MSO 2003 is different than MSO 98. But whenever you do a case study - that case study is stuck in time. You can't always predict future behavior or results on past performance - unfortunately, that's all we mere mortals got to work with. In a lot of ways, I wish OOo was more like the old StarOffice - with the browser, the email client, and all that other stuff they got rid of. -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ http://www.whatisopenoffice.org/ Because everyone loves free software! http://www.chadwsmith.com/ Because, admit it, you've got nothing better to do right now...
