On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 22:11:40 +0100
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Office is the more expensive and less essential component. That's an
> important factor to remember. While {Linux is not Windows}^TM, the
> same _CANNOT_ be said about Microsoft Office and OpenOffice. I would
> usually prepare my presentations in TeX or HTML, by the way, but the
> Supervisor wanted to edit easily on the laptop. I didn't even see my
> slides until a short while before the presentation.
I thought most student/lecturers used LaTeX with vengeance.
> > I think to be honest, most people will put their hands in their
> > pockets to pay for the licences, or get their company to pay, but if
> > just 5% of those people were to migrate, that'd be totally awesome.
> > OO.org would probably get enough by way of contribution to really
> > take up space on the bookshelves in the local Waterstones (not that
> > I haven't noticed their books already).
>
>
> I suspect that you underestimate what OpenOffice has got to offer.
> Don't forget that any migration to Linux will most likely involve
> getting on the OpenOffice bandwagon. And there are Mac users too (with
> NeoOffice, for those who cannot live without Aqua and some native
> Cocoa). Sadly, estimating OpenOffice use is as hard as it is when it
> comes to Web browsers (agent forging) and O/Ses, if not _much_ harder.
> It is no surprise that anti-OpenOffice FUD campaign have begun. These
> were mentioned in C.O.L.A. some months ago when OpenOffice 2 was
> released.
For people who just want to write letters and do spreadsheet things then
OO.org offers a migration route, get familiar with just one thing at a
time, whilst not costing the user anything. Migration from IE to FireFox
is just as straight forward.
> > That's a good place to target people through book sales, once the
> > books are there where we begin to see physical user base.
>
>
> I have never been keen on books. Hand-on-experience is best bar none.
> Guided tutorials with the software are another method, not to mention
> on-line books and crash courses.
When I used the train on a regular basis I would often try and read html
in the carriage, but that required getting my laptop out and powering it
up, starting the browser and stuff (this was before hibernation). But a
book I can open up anywhere and get reading. Other people might have a
difference view, and maybe things have changed somewhat. It can
represent a portion of people. For example, if OO.org books were
outselling the MS related books that might mean something, if nothing
else it would prove a huge dent in the market place. You are right
though, it does not prove anything substantial though.
> > Of course rumours are that the open document format will be junk and
> > a total bastardisation of the proper format, my only hope is (I've
> > not read the spec) that the spec will include enough mandatory
> > fields to make even the most bastardised document perfectly readable
> > and portable.
>
> I have explored the structure by decompressing the ODF/ODP files. It's
> as open as it can be. And it's neatly organised, so it encourages
> reuse,, indexing, and search. The files can be interpreted even
> without the (free) software that assembles all the pertinent pieces
> together.
Never having looked, I assumed a XML style format, any open format is
good, providing there is a standard though.
If the standard includes something like a <object> or <embed> tag that
the writer can put arbitrary activex controls in then that would suck
loads.
--
Regards, Ed :: http://www.gnunix.net
proud python hacker
Mr. Tâ??s diet consists entirely of rocks and milk. He shits out
cheese and gunpowder.
|
|
