On 30-Nov-2013, at 17:15, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts <lui...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On 30-Nov-2013, at 16:56, Alphonso Whitfield III <awhitfi...@vital-inet.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Good points Louis., thanks. but we still need a "maven" or two to crack the >>> larger corporate environment. >> >> Done that, in previous instance of my role at OOo. It's not easy and does >> require persistence. Then, I was also salaried by Sun/Oracle, though my hot >> efforts on behalf of the community as such were sometimes met with cool >> water. >> >> But I do not think the tactics of yore are the ones to pursue now. >> > > Keep in mind that corporate successes are not necessarily > publicly-known. I can say from first-hand knowledge that we're > getting a good reaction to IBM's recently-announced service offering > for AOO. But these corporations are unlikely to issue a press release > announcing this fact. This is different from public agencies where > their choices are a matter of public record.
Yes. I know. I was many times asked to itemize which companies were using OOo. I could have cited several. But to a corporate lawyer, they insisted that to speak of their usage was to speak my last public sentence.. > >> I think that emphasizing, as I did, QA, innovation, and mobile options, as >> well as the robust community that is reality based, is more important. >> > > 1+ > > We're in a very different time than say, 2002, when open source was a > new concept to many companies. The question is no longer, "Should we > use open source?" but "How should we use open source?". We already > won that first war, making open source a legitimate option. What > remains is a more conventional kind of technology use decision, which > considers price, of course, but also features, interop, migration, > training, etc., costs. > > In any case, the thing to keep in mind is that we are in no way > diminished if someone decides to use LibreOffice. We should feel > good whenever anyone uses our code, whether in the original Apache > OpenOffice or whether in the winPenPack verison, the BSD port, the > OS/2 port, the Solaris port or in LibreOffice fork. It is all good. +1. > > -Rob Cheers, Louis > >> Louis >>> >>> Plan Your Work and Work Your Plan >>> with The Vital Portal >>> >>> Alphonso Whitfield >>> i...@thevitalportal.com >>> Vital >>> 912-816-2595 >>> Skype: vital.i.net >>> >>> Visit us at: >>> The Vital Portal >>> >>> The Vital Portal On facebook >>> >>> Visit our Google Community >>> >>> Join our Vital Portal Webinars at: >>> The Vital Portal WebEx Meeting Center . >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From: "Louis Suárez-Potts" <lui...@gmail.com> >>> To: market...@openoffice.apache.org, "Alphonso Whitfield III" >>> <awhitfi...@vital-inet.com> >>> Cc: dev@openoffice.apache.org >>> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2013 4:08:52 PM >>> Subject: Re: 80 million downloads >>> >>> >>> On 30-Nov-2013, at 15:47, Alphonso Whitfield III >>> <awhitfi...@vital-inet.com> wrote: >>> >>>> The Libre Office is getting acceptance because of its affiliation with the >>>> Ubuntu desktop and server operating platform. . >>> >>> It is claiming to be getting acceptance. It is being touted by a few >>> supposedly prominent organizations, such as the South Tyrol org. But a few >>> things. >>> >>> 1. We have IBM as a far more powerful and important contributor than LO has >>> Ubuntu and Canonical. We do not trumpet that affiliation as much as we >>> could, no doubt because we do not want to be too tightly affiliated with >>> IBM and be seen as an appendage of IBM. I don't think we are. But I >>> understand the concerns. >>> >>> 2. We need to use actual facts related to actual usage by enterprise-class >>> users. Download numbers indicate, usually, individual users. These are >>> important. But they do not persuade a lot of larger entities. (The Bring >>> Your Own Device phenomenon is growing and is related to individual download >>> numbers; but in the case of support, etc., one does, usually, need to have >>> an enterprise buy it or enable that market; and support is often the point >>> of decision for many.) >>> >>> And more on this tangent. The main point: facts and actual evidence. >>> >>> louis >>>> >>>> >>>> Plan Your Work and Work Your Plan >>>> with The Vital Portal >>>> >>>> Alphonso Whitfield >>>> i...@thevitalportal.com >>>> Vital >>>> 912-816-2595 >>>> Skype: vital.i.net >>>> >>>> Visit us at: >>>> The Vital Portal >>>> >>>> The Vital Portal On facebook >>>> >>>> Visit our Google Community >>>> >>>> Join our Vital Portal Webinars at: >>>> The Vital Portal WebEx Meeting Center . >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> >>>> From: "Louis Suárez-Potts" <lui...@gmail.com> >>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org >>>> Cc: market...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2013 2:35:54 PM >>>> Subject: Re: 80 million downloads >>>> >>>> >>>> On 30-Nov-2013, at 14:15, Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 13:56:19 -0500 >>>>> Louis Suárez-Potts <lui...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 30-Nov-2013, at 13:01, Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 18:44:13 +0100 >>>>>>> Hagar Delest <hagar.del...@laposte.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Le 27/11/2013 20:23, Rob Weir a écrit : >>>>>>>>> Yesterday we reached 80,072,389 downloads. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, I also saw this: >>>>>>>> https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=62425 >>>>>>>> (South Tyrol government to standardise on LibreOffice) and especially >>>>>>>> the quote from last post: "We opted for LibreOffice over OpenOffice >>>>>>>> because we think this gives us more guarantees. It has a more >>>>>>>> consistent and constantly growing community of developers and by >>>>>>>> statute has to be independent from corporations," Pfeifer said. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> LibO is getting more and more momentum (French referential uses LibO >>>>>>>> too, something that will be implemented in more and more >>>>>>>> institutions). I wonder why AOO doesn't report similar successes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Are we lacking marketing power? Or key people? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hagar >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> We are perhaps too polite. We don't indulge in 'slanging matches' with >>>>>>> the LibreOffice camp, unlike many of their proponents, who may not be >>>>>>> as connected with the main LibreOffice core group, as (for example) >>>>>>> list members here are with the Apache setup. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We should emphasise AOO's stability; unfortunately any argument for >>>>>>> stability or almost anything is very much an 'ad hominem' argument and >>>>>>> can be shot down by a vociferous and technically incompetent user (we >>>>>>> hae seen many such, both on this list and on the Forum(s)) who 'knows' >>>>>>> that a computer is a 'magic box' and expects it to accomodate his >>>>>>> incompetence. >>>>>> >>>>>> That said, and I agree with Rory, I also think that emphasizing AOO's >>>>>> use by enterprises and other large-scale entities, would only help. And >>>>>> calling out South Tyrol's claims wouldn't be bad, either. After all, >>>>>> they do not seem to be based on anything like fact. >>>>>> >>>>>> louis >>>>> >>>>> It would be good to start by always refuting the claim that "OO is dead"; >>>>> our (AOO) claims must always be based on facts, not on the unsupported >>>>> assertions of ill-informed journalists. In the computer press one cannot >>>>> (unfortunately) insist on "right of reply", which one usually can get in >>>>> the newspapers of record. >>>> >>>> >>>> One of the things I did during Ye Olde OOo Days, that I would rather not >>>> re-do, was use a rhetoric putting MSFT in the role of Bad Guy—in this >>>> case, the analogue would be replacing MSFT with LO. >>>> >>>> I think we are in agreement not to do that. >>>> >>>> What I did that was more positive was create the Major Deployments page. >>>> That was then taken to levels far above my initial frame and maintained >>>> for a long while. It showed those enterprise users we knew about, and did >>>> so per region, etc. >>>> >>>> I'd think something like that would be useful, again. My interest is not >>>> to critique others, exactly, but to make it easier for journalists to get >>>> the facts. >>>> >>>> And that leads me then to: What facts do we want to emphasize? >>>> >>>> The ones I generally point to: >>>> >>>> * QA excellence >>>> * Innovations—especially those that would be of interest to enterprises. >>>> (That is: it's nifty to have other sorts of innovation but if the >>>> innovations are not actually useful or of only limited use, then the >>>> quality of the innovation is diminished. Of course, myopic journalists can >>>> still—and will still—simply point to the numbers, in the abstract.) >>>> * Ease of use and support: How hard is it is for AOO to be adopted? To >>>> drop in as a replacement for whatever is there? To integrate with mobile >>>> ambitions? What languages? >>>> — regarding each of these, a key point is expected production not just by >>>> a vague claim of community but by a more identifiable body of >>>> stakeholders—that is, companies that have staked significant business on >>>> the development and distribution and also upkeep of AOO. >>>> — and in regards to languages, as I learned with OOo, it's one thing to >>>> have a gazillion localizations but it's quite another to maintain them. >>>> The more that can be said about the groups maintaining the localizations, >>>> the better; the more information, yes, but also the more that can be >>>> revealed about their fragilities. >>>> * mobile integration: nearly everyone associated with enterprises wants a >>>> mobile version of AOO. Such are coming into being. The Android AOO version >>>> is, from what I can gather, more a proof of concept than a really usable >>>> thing, though the developer is working to change that. He sees what he has >>>> to do but is just one guy. >>>> >>>> The iOS UX Write, with which I am associated, is more usable. It's to be >>>> able to read/write ODT files (note: .odt) and also MSFT .docx files; but >>>> not the full suite's formats. (At some point.) >>>> >>>> It also can work with the "cloud" storage services, e.g. Box. >>>> >>>> No doubt, LO can also point to some things like this. But these that we >>>> would point to would be factually present and would be identified as >>>> clearly as possible, that is, without any misleading claims. Identifying >>>> these, too, would illustrate the persistent and very much growing strength >>>> of the real community. >>>> >>>> louis >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>>> >>>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-h...@openoffice.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
