Scott Balneaves wrote: > CET wrote: > > OpenOffice.org saves, by default, in the internationally recognized standard > ODF (Open Document Format). This format is recognized by many different > word processors, including WordPerfect Office X3, and a host of Free > alternatives. It's an open standard that any company may implement. > Microsoft, so far, has steadfastly refused to add ODF support natively to > their word processing products. As for why, you'd have to contact them.
Even if they don't support it natively, there are plenty of 3rd party solutions which do not mean "moving to a brand new office package". Plugins, filters, converters.. > Fear not, however, as OpenOffice.org can save natively in Word formats using > the standard "Save As" dialogues, and can even be set up to DEFAULT to saving > in Word format, saving users from the trouble of having to have a separate > "Save As" operation. http://www.sun.com/software/star/odf_plugin/ You can also have Microsoft Office load ODF documents if you like. I prefer the Sun version, there are 2 or 3 others you can try out. It's been pondered that OASIS is even considering that OpenDocument is not where they want to go and that they are embracing the Office XML formats so contentious right now (as it is better and more interoperable, something OpenDocument has absolutely failed to achieve commercially for a number of reasons). So, you can get by being interoperable however you like but it's left as an exercise to the user. This means: open source doesn't make your life easy, it makes your life harder, you need to evaluate those 3 plugins or the entire OpenOffice suite, and deal with the problems. But, if you use OpenOffice and export as Word documents, or you use Word and want to load/save ODF documents, it's all there, and for this particular functionality, it's for free, which means the cost is merely down to time and effort and not software licensing. If you already bought Office, go get the plugin, if you're looking for a new solution or to migrate.. then you have to work out how much time training and distribution of software and support around your organisation is going to cost. >> I wish somebody could correct me and tell me that open source makes life >> easy. > > Consider yourself corrected. I save roughly $650,000 CDN per year over > commercial software by using Free software. I can support it better, fix it > easier, modify it to my needs, and be actively involved in developing it > so that it more readily does the things I want it to do. I am now an > active participant in the software that I use in my business, and my > personal life. That's value. I disagree. As someone once said, Linux is only free if your time has no value. You may save money by downloading Free software (or even Free Software or even open source software or Open Source software - take your pick :) but sometimes, and most often, it takes a lot more effort to get it to the point where you can integrate it into your organisation. This is especially true if you are NOT on a Linux development team helping to code and produce the software at hand :) It goes both ways, and you have to evaluate both solutions, or a mix of the two, and see what comes out best. Commercial software is not always best and open source software is not always best, mixing the two can be problematic, but it can also be VERY successful. You may save money in the first instance, or you may lose money right away only to make it back in 10 years through long-term planning. It depends how much, how fast you want it, and how much effort you're willing to put in. I wouldn't expect it to be so easy to "correct" someone, and I think it's naive at best to assume that you could. -- Matt Sealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Genesi, Manager, Developer Relations -- edubuntu-devel mailing list edubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/edubuntu-devel
