On 03/31/2010 01:12 PM, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...As start I created
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Smp_status_2010 for collecting
a status of the recommendation done in 2004.
Some interesting question are coming up:
* should we update the plan ?
Yes. It should also be reviewed to see how well it turned out.
S
+ ODF has since arrived and been established, so the compatibility
questions no longer should reference MSO, but ODF instead.
+ The ability to read legacy MS-Office file formats is another
advantage. OOo should be on all desktop machines that need productivity
software, either solo or primary, or as reserve in case a vendor sticks
it to their customers:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/01/137257
+ The ability to support modern hardware architectures: sparc, arm, mips
+ There is a chance to break with antiquated paradigms. With the new
markets, there are very good opportunities to get ideas from and study
how users with *no computer experience* approach productivity software.
T
+ Encouragement or tolerance of MS products and systems needs to be
strongly de-emphasized and focus on migration away for stragglers. I
hope the economics of that do not need to be explained anymore.
+ Entryism is now an established problem and frequently used. Openness
and encouragement of participation must be bolstered by mechanisms to
prevent entryism and correct in a kind but irrepressible manner it when
a slip does occur. Examples of entryism include what has happened to
the Yahoo! Board of Directors, Ubuntu, various standards bodies
(National Institute of Standards and Technology NIST, Standards Norge,
Suomen Standardisoimisliitto SFS, and so on), the W3C HTML5 incident,
and so on.
+ Revisionism is continual problem in blogs and articles. The same
disinformation needs to get swatted down periodically. Hoeger's post
would be an excellent foundation for one such series of articles:
http://marketing.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=dev&msgNo=29754
+ With Oracle now in the equation, there is a short period of more
awareness of OOo, so these messages will get more attention if we take
advantage of that window of opportunity.
+ OEMs are a harder nut to crack because of the significance the OEM
monopoly has for M$. We have a lot of illegal methods to struggle
against. However, something can be learned from Asus and OLPC.
+ Need to increase the awareness that even in cases where OOo is not the
primary productivity package, it can be installed parallel to any
existing ones. This would be especially valuable in dealing with sites
wishing to be able to migrate to OOo.
* Is the discussion wrt OOoLite still an issue ?
Yes, the heavy system requirements of OOo are mentioned fairly regularly
as an obstacle. A leaner, more modular system would make using OOo on
netbooks, tablets and smart phones a no-brainer. Nokia apparently sees
this and is pumping resources in to Koffice. That will have results if
the executives can first identify and roust from their staff any
"kotiryssä" like the ones that got into HTML5. (See entryism above)
OOo needs to have viable presence in the low-end market.
Regards,
/Lars
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org
