John W. Kennedy wrote: > Symphony is a beta at present. It is, however, a free product, beta > or not. > > The current beta of Symphony is based on an old version of OOo, but > has had real development done on it by IBM. Some of IBM's changes to > the UI are distinct improvements that I would like to see applied to > regular OOo. > > Only testers, etc., will normally have both OOo and Symphony on > their systems. Symphony registers the ODF file extensions because, for > Joe User, if he has Symphony at all, Symphony will be /the/ program he > uses to manage ODF files with. I don't hear anyone complaining about > OOo "stealing" the ODF formats. > > (I do wish, however, that Symphony would do it properly, during > installation, and not every time you start the program. IBM was made > aware on Day One that this is viewed as a fault.)
In OpenOffice, you're given the opportunity to leave file associations the way they were. > > Do not lose sight of the fact that there are large businesses that > now refuse to install OOo (because it's hippie-commie-nerdy > open-source) but which will happily install Symphony (because it's > from IBM). This is a Good Thing. Of course, they might consider StarOffice, from respectable Sun. > > For me, I'm sticking with OOo now, because the current beta of > Symphony has some old bugs that I was glad to bid farewell to. But > maybe I'll switch in the future. Let's see what happens. > It would be nice to see better support for older Smart Suite file formats. Perhaps I'll have to set up an OS/2 system and install Smart Suite for OS/2, so I'll have some. ;-) -- Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
