[Marketing] why openoffice.org proposal
There is some excellent work going on in the art project to create a user-friendly "shop window" why OpenOffice.org site. If you haven't seen the latest suggestion, please click on http://wyrfel.reukauf.com/hosting/OOo/Why_1/en/index.html. Most of the tabs along the top are working. Please give them all a good clicking and post your comments to art@marketing.openoffice.org Thanks - John - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Marketing] OOo Calendar 2007 [Issue 63410]...
Hello John,
Congrats on becoming the new marketing project lead (likewise to your
co-lead Cristian).
I apologise for 'dropping the ball' on the Calendar Issue, as it has
been months since I last worked on it. My apologies also go to
Jacqueline McNally who contacted me offlist specifically to work on this
issue. Anyway, I would like to continue working on that issue if it is
still relevant to the OOo community.
AFAIK, the original target date for the calendar to be released for sale
on lulu.com is October 2006. So, 3 months is still a lot of time for me
to work out the design. If I may, I propose to include the recent
campaign efforts ("Get Legal", "Keep the Car", etc.) as themes for the
calendar. I think the calendar can be an avenue for further promoting
the great work done by the marketing project the past few months.
The Digital Pioneer, Ian Lynch, and Paul Sutton had contributed their
ideas for the calendar (thanks, guys), and, in the same vein, I would
continue to solicit more feedback from the OOo community.
I will understand if the calendar issue is no longer relevant at this
point in time (well, my inaction had a lot to do with it); in that case,
I would just work out which Art Project issues require immediate
attention and (re-)start from there.
Cheers,
Gerry
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. Sorry for the cross-post as I'm not sure in which list everyone
addressed here belongs.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Marketing] Timeout please: OOo Mac OS X port - VS - NeoOffice.org
The OOo / NeoOffice postings have contained some useful information and good advice, but I think the topic is pretty well exhausted now and I would like to encourage project members to divert their energies to other topics. Please consider these topics closed. Can I also remind people about the etiquette for this mailing list - see http://marketing.openoffice.org/servlets/ProjectMailingListList. Please review this and make sure your own postings are in line with these guidelines. Thanks - John Marketing Project Lead - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Marketing] OOo Mac OS X port - VS - NeoOffice.org
Hi, Le 3 juil. 06 à 10:58, André Wyrwa a écrit : Furthermore, does the LGPL give everyone the right to just fork off and not contribute back? No idea, but interesting question. Could that maybe one of the aspects of openness that we have to wrap our minds around as well, when we praise it? (There was an interesting discussion recently on the firefox-dev list about exactly the same topic.) I don't follow Firefox-dev mailing list, sorry A lot of workarounds to make believe the user it works. It seems that for a lot of users it actually *does* work. Technically, I'm not sure this is as good at it looks... And users are not objectives : only appearances seems to be important for them. IMHO, 10MB of code cant be anything else than appearance... Again : our work is a deep and long term work. Waiting we can stop with X11, OpenOffice.org for Mac OS X works, and we are proud it works. Native port does progress every days, and will replace X11 version asap. This is the most important for OpenOffice.org project. Yes, really, we got that you guys are working on a technologically superior (and in that sense "correct" - if you want to) mac port of OpenOffice.org. A port, as well, that contributes back, doesn't ask for money and *is* officially and in all aspects OpenOffice.org. Doesn't change the fact that *currently* a mac user who find OpenOffice.org for Mac and NeoOffice, might choose NeoOffice, because the user experience is better, no matter how crappy it is implemented. Is it so important? We only have to focus on Mac port first : a lot of very interesting work has to be done. Another important point : I (sorry, me again) as often as I can, insist to provide a complete documentation, to really *free* the code : not only comment it (already in the code), but explaining the design, the organization of the OpenOffice.org par of code we have to modify, and why. With simple words and simple diagrams. We started with vcl - obviously - and will probably continue with avmedia (player), dtrans (drag and drop), sfx2,svx (controls)...etc Maybe other. This helps twice : - this helps us to implement everything, including have a constructive opinion about what can be modified - new devs coming are happy to understand how things are organized, and are efficient faster Once I'll find some time, I'll document the bridge (the heart of OpenOffice.org), I learned it for the Mac Intel port. Not to replace the excellent documentation Daniel Boelzle already wrote, but just complete with simple sentences and make it more easy to understand. From a new comer point of view. What we need is a *real* support from marketing project : we need developers, we need communication, and users will come. "real support" means : support only one Mac port, us . Simple, stupid, but efficient. BTW, Java is Sun and is like X11 : not native on Mac OS X. Well, i really don't have a big clue about Mac OS X, but as i understood it, Java comes preinstalled with the system. Yes, but the problem is quite the same ... Hence the user doesn't need to install it separately like X11. Furthermore, Chad's explanations about that the X server being represented as a separate program is bad user experience also makes sense to me. Unfortunaly, since Mac OS X 10.4 (aka Tiger) , X11 is no more pre- installed, no more downloadable, and we pay the full price the fact we have to help Mac users for install it. This is one more thing not helping us. And BTW: in one of your other mails you blame Chad for considering people stupid and then say "what if Sun drops Java support for Mac". How likely is that? ?? If I'm not wrong with the mail you mean, I exactly wrote (simple copy paste ) : "BTW : just imagine one minute Apple decides to drop Java ..." What I want to say is "Apple always decides alone", without advertise. And the only way to stay "Apple compatible" is to use Apple API, either Carbon or Cocoa. Any other choice will very probably be a bad one, in average or long term, and OpenOffice.org choices can't be short term. e.g. integrate changes in OpenOffice.org build process, and QA process without any glitch is not short term plan, really. Please, think about all this. You are starting all these fights because you think supporting NeoOffice is bad for our community, Exactly. That's not only because "I" think, please, and yes, I won't stop to take care of that. The best thing for the Marketing project is to encourage OpenOffice.org projects first. Mac OS X porting project is one of OpenOffice.org projects, and must have priority. FYI, I already asked help from marketing project : http:// marketing.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=22189 I have even try to contact marketing project lead ... So what, we don't need such minor contributors like Chad as long as we have heros like you? Inde
Re: [Marketing] Re: Brilliant marketing campaign
> - Or would it be better to tell the people that they may have > automatically changing buttons on their websites, so they will be aware > of any new campaign (combination 1&3)? May be the better option, the other is of course easier to implement. ;-) > I don't want you to drop your ideas about symlinks or javascript for > redirection to subpages, but this would counteract our effort to > introduce the WhyOOo page as main starting place. Ok. However, i agree to a lot of what you said, as long as we have the new page in mind. But i was before talking about a solution for the temporary pages, and there a dynamically changing button would make sense. So here's my option list ;-) for the temporary pages: (1a) Dynamic campain-Button dynamically linking to current campain (2) Static campain-Buttons for each campain always linking to respective campain and for the coming page: (1a) Dynamic campain-Button dynamically linking to current campain or (1b) Static whyOOo button linking to whyOOo main page. (2) Static campain-Buttons for each campain always linking to respective campain I did put (1a) on the end here, because i find it an optional gimmic. André. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Marketing] OOo Mac OS X port - VS - NeoOffice.org
Hi Eric, >> You can't be serious. NeoOffice *IS* OpenOffice.org. > > NO, NeoOffice IS NOT OpenOffice.org; > > - license modified, not compatible with LGPL (and this is intended) > > - other name AFAIK different letters have been used > > - they fix bugs without return code > > - they ask for money and never reverse anything > > Last but not least these people "claim" they are another product. > > So, please, stop to confuse people, or yourself. NeoOffice is not > OpenOffice.org, and has nothing to do with OpenOffice.org project, simply. here we go again...did you get the notion that you quoted Chad's remark out of the context he had made it in? Did you get that that context was that technologically NeoOffice is pretty much OpenOffice.org because it is 98% (or whatever) OpenOffice.org code? Did any of your comments relate to that particular fact that Chad's remark was about or are you just once again stressing the ridiculous conflict we all are - thanks to your great efforts and the recent discussions - pretty much aware about already? So, if you want to oppose Chad's notion that the functionality in NeoOffice would be pretty much the same as OpenOffice.org because the codebase is pretty much the same, please do so. But please, next time your red alert lamp starts flickering at the notion of NeoOffice and OpenOffice.org in one sentence, please read the whole paragraph. God damned! We got it, ok? Yes, NeoOffice is a *different project* and not OpenOffice.org. Technically, though, it *is* 98% OpenOffice.org. Technically, though, it *is* a port. A lot of the program is the same. Would you otherwise be so bothered about that they let you do all the bugfixing work? Eric, please! Get sinsible, again! I really see your point in making clear that it is a different project. I really understand that you have resentments for them because of the conflicts you pointed out. I really understand that you do a lot of work there and I really, really, really admire that. I really think that a lot about NeoOffice sucks (like the way they propagate themselves in contrast to OOo and that ridiculous "Early Access Program" - I wonder if that's according to the GPL - shouldn't you make the source available as soon as you make the program available? And shouldn't you do that for free? But then I don't know the GPL in that aspects all too well). Anyway, besides all that, I really, really, really want to ask you to take some time and think about your ways of communication on that topic. Because i personally think it really sucks as well. Even though i might repeat myself: I don't like the ways of NeoOffice, either, but you are terribly starting to go on my nerves. And no, that doesn't mean i disrespect your work or you as a person or anything, but it means that i disrespect the way you take every single smallest occasion to throw your "NeoOffice IS NOT OpenOffice.org" onto the masses. And to put my own confusion into the whole topic: OpenOffice.org is about openness, right? Does that openness include openness to co-existing projects or not? Do we tolerate different approaches or do we want to be "the only one"? Furthermore, does the LGPL give everyone the right to just fork off and not contribute back? Could that maybe one of the aspects of openness that we have to wrap our minds around as well, when we praise it? (There was an interesting discussion recently on the firefox-dev list about exactly the same topic.) And i really don't think one has to necessarily agree to that joining efforts into one project is better than working side by side in different projects. It can inspire each side as well. That there is a one-sidedness about the code exchange is rather bad, of course. >> They took the source > > A lot of workarounds to make believe the user it works. It seems that for a lot of users it actually *does* work. >> code and made it run in Java instead of X11. > > We, not me alone, but a Team (Mac port), are working to a REAL** NATIVE > product : using Carbon API, and we refuse to use Java. Is that the third time you state that in the same thread? We got that, thanks. Yes, really, we got that you guys are working on a technologically superior (and in that sense "correct" - if you want to) mac port of OpenOffice.org. A port, as well, that contributes back, doesn't ask for money and *is* officially and in all aspects OpenOffice.org. Doesn't change the fact that *currently* a mac user who find OpenOffice.org for Mac and NeoOffice, might choose NeoOffice, because the user experience is better, no matter how crappy it is implemented. And this is exactly what Chad's site said from the very beginning. It is not disrespectful of your work, because it doesn't say anything about your work. If for you disrespectfulness equals not praising your work wherever NeoOffice is mentioned, ... i don't think i need to continue this sentence. > BTW, Java is Sun and is like X11 : not native on Mac OS X. Well, i really don't h
Re: [Marketing] Re: Brilliant marketing campaign
Hi Simon, all * Simon Phipps wrote: On Jul 2, 2006, at 14:04, André Wyrwa wrote: Sorry, guys, but am I talking german here? Not really - but I think I did understand you before (perhaps because I'm German?) ;-) [... symlinked image to modify the button on foreign pages automatically ...] That will lead to having a constantly updated graphic pointing at the home page of why.OOo, yes. That's certainly an option too. So now we have four options: 1. A generic "WhyOOo" button that links to Why.OOo home page; 2. A campaign-specific button that links to the campaign-specific page; 3. A symlinked redirect that displays the latest campaign graphic, that points to Why.OOo home page; 4. A more complex JavaScript that displays the latest graohic /and/ points to the sub-page of the current campaign. Of those four I regard 1 & 2 as essential, 4 as nice-to-have and 3 as having limited appeal. There are not four options: 1&2 only make sense, if they are combined - two buttons (and code snippets) on the page, so people can decide if they want link to a special campaign or to our main WhyOOo page with informations about the current campaign and links to the older ones. Option 3 is quite the same as 1, just with a different button (and this would work because the actual campaign will take more than a third of the place on the main page). Option 4 and André's updated option 3b (I'd call it option 5: symlinked button and page) direct the user directly to the subpage with the actual campaign - as I know that our main page will become great, I dislike this possibility. BTW: From my POV a symlink is easier than javascript (and can't be deactivated). If we want to use the WhyOOo main page as window for users and decision makers, there is just one question left IMHO: - Do we want to have a generic button for the whole WhyOOo theme (combination 1&2)? - Or would it be better to tell the people that they may have automatically changing buttons on their websites, so they will be aware of any new campaign (combination 1&3)? I don't want you to drop your ideas about symlinks or javascript for redirection to subpages, but this would counteract our effort to introduce the WhyOOo page as main starting place. (Again: only my personal impression!) And remember - on the main page the only larger amount of text will be about the actual campaign. Best regards Bernhard - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Marketing] OOo Mac OS X port - VS - NeoOffice.org
Ooops.. - prepared a conference about OpenOffice.org project for RMLL ( Nancy (France) 4th -11th of july 2006 ) The RMLL (Nancy, France) are in fact from 4th of july to 7th of july. Sorry - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Marketing] OOo Mac OS X port - VS - NeoOffice.org
Le 3 juil. 06 à 06:56, Chad Smith a écrit : You fail to see how it is difficult? Well, good for you. There are many people (as evidenced by OOo's own site) that have problems with it. Heck, the "Mini How-To for Installing OpenOffice.org 2.0 X11 Version for Mac OS X" is 17 pages long! It's a "mini-howto" and it's, I'll repeat that - SEVENTEEN PAGES LONG. Yeah, it's no problem to install at all! And ? Better do nothing ? Our HowTo is very appreciated. When I put it on my own website, I had more than 2 (yes) downloads in 20 days only ! That's the reason why we put it on porting/mac page : too much traffic. Remember : OpenOffice.org installs himself with Drag and Drop. X11 is the problem, and we are working to remove the X11 dependancy. Last, please stop to consider people stupid : they can read a user's guide, like this HowTo. The link *should* go to this page: http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/apple/x11formacosx.html - except that *that* page is only X11 for Panther - which is several years old now. There is no where that I've found (and I've looked) to download X11 for Tiger. You *have to* install that off the OS X DVD. If you lost the DVD that came with your MacBook Please, don't exagerate : this case is exceptional, people can borrow whan DVD to frineds .. etc : we are civilized. Or we can provide X11 on demand, I already did. Now, is it all OpenOffice.org's fault that finding and installing X11 is this complicated and confusing? No, it's not. In anything, it's Apple's fault for not putting a download for Tiger's X11 on their website. Sorry, for one time I must recognize I completely agree. BTW : just imagine one minute Apple decides to drop Java ... However, it *is* OpenOffice.org's fault for requiring X11. If two guys in their spare time can figure out how to make OOo work on Mac without X11 I disagree** IMPORTANT : If more than 5 ingineers confirm IT IS NOT TRIVIAL to provide a native version of OpenOffice.org on Mac OS X, I think we can believe them, and there is certainly a LIE somewhere with NeoOffice, something not true, hidding the reality ... Please stop to confuse people. **what you wrote is obviously wrong: they use all our work as starting point (we fixed more than 200 issues since two years), makes things easier. Remember : they just check 1GB of code, and apply 10 to 15MB (max) of bindings (using supplementary 250MB or RAM in runtime) But respecting Licenses changes of name ..etc, NeoOffice is stricto sensu not OpenOffice.org. of OOo, contribution of code to Windows installers for OOo, submitting bug reports, contributing art and screenshots, etc..) Let's talk about personnal contributions for OpenOffice.org project... This week end, I (me, Eric Bachard) have : - created two cws, and commited code - prepared QA for a third one - Fixed 4 issues (maybe more in fact) - contributed to native port (wiki) - built m173, m174 (unofficial) for both Panther, Tiger (Intel and PowerPC), including upload on ftp for testers - helped several people on IRC (buildfixes, code, simple help) - welcomed a new dev in the Mac Team - prepared a conference about OpenOffice.org project for RMLL ( Nancy (France) 4th -11th of july 2006 ) What is your contribution ? No, I think there are other reasons that OOo still needs X11, while Neo hasn't for years. First reason : X11 version does exist, works and has support Second reason ; X11 version is stable, and well integrated in the building process : we maintain it Third reason : Native port is started in parallel and gives results : let's continue ! Again; neo people use the work they other did, as starting point, confusing people who believe they did all the work. This is obviously not true. Some political, Patrick and Ed don't want their efforts to get swallowed up by the OOo project - a little vain, perhaps - but they've been able to do it on their own, and the community hasn't come close - so they have some right to be prideful. Patrick and Ed don't want to submit their code. That's their right. So, let's stop blaming them. And ignore them : We are a community project, and they refuse to respect our rules. What else ? Butwhat about the OOo community. They have no agenda against Mac, right? This is plain wrong. Please stop it. wonderland of free code and software. Except for the Mac people. They don't even get to sit with the grown ups at the big download page. Maybe soon ? They have to load some weird foreign windowing system to get a slower, older version of OpenOffice.org to even try to run on their computers. One more time, not constructive, and not credible. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Marketing] Re: [project leads] changes in leads of Marketing Project
Hello Jacqueline, Thanks a lot for all your help and hard work! I hopt to see you again at some future OpenOffice.org Conference! Cheers, Erwin Jacqueline McNally wrote: Hello I would like to formally advise that John and Cristian are the new leads of the Marketing Project, and have been for some weeks now. Cristian assumed the role of Co-Lead on 23 April (http://marketing.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=23213) and John the Lead role, on 16 May (http://marketing.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=23589). I said it in the previous notices, but I'll say it again. Cristian and John continue to contribute generously to OpenOffice.org. The Why OpenOffice.org? (http://why.openoffice.org/) campaign I'm sure will be the question that is the answer for many. Please offer your support so that OpenOffice.org may be marketed in an open and professional manner. Thank you too, to all the people that supported me in the lead roles and worked with me on the multitude of activities that participating in marketing OpenOffice.org entails. All the best and thank you for having me. Regards Jacqueline McNally OOoCon2006 in Lyon (http://marketing.openoffice.org/conference/) Are you a computer angel? (www.computerangels.org.au) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Marketing] OOo Mac OS X port - VS - NeoOffice.org
Hi, Le 3 juil. 06 à 06:18, Chad Smith a écrit : You can't be serious. NeoOffice *IS* OpenOffice.org. NO, NeoOffice IS NOT OpenOffice.org; - license modified, not compatible with LGPL (and this is intended) - other name AFAIK different letters have been used - they fix bugs without return code - they ask for money and never reverse anything Last but not least these people "claim" they are another product. So, please, stop to confuse people, or yourself. NeoOffice is not OpenOffice.org, and has nothing to do with OpenOffice.org project, simply. They took the source A lot of workarounds to make believe the user it works. code and made it run in Java instead of X11. We, not me alone, but a Team (Mac port), are working to a REAL** NATIVE product : using Carbon API, and we refuse to use Java. **real means not a binding Because a better good compromise at first step, to provide a real Mac OS X application, is use Carbon API. (for the one discovering the word, an API is a collection of functions already existing, and doing the life easyer to the coder). Current code is C++, and Carbon too, and this is the most logical choice. BTW, Java is Sun and is like X11 : not native on Mac OS X. And Sun refused since ages, to officialy help Mac port. Please, stop to propagate such wrong idea. One more time for the deafs : NeoOffice IS NOT OpenOffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Marketing] please improve the design of the open office site.
On 6/27/06, Mathew Hoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: marketing team, the current site is such a collage of elements, the page's layout is distracting and a bit confusing. for such a huge office-killer, you really get the idea that the software is written by someone in their basement. maybe it is, but does it have to look like that? that said, i'm going to try to download and install the software today. hoping that it works. i'd love to install it on my mac at home, but the x11 thing is a bit of a confusing step that i have to read into first. thanks, -- m e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Matthew, X should be in the cd that came with your mac, you can install it from there. Then install OOo. Charles
Re: [Marketing] OOo Mac OS X port - VS - NeoOffice.org
On 7/3/06, Chad Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You can't be serious. NeoOffice *IS* OpenOffice.org. They took the source code and made it run in Java instead of X11. It delievers the exact same functionality. The feature set is identical. If you are going to bad mouth NeoOffice - at least know what you are talking about. -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ http://www.whatisopenoffice.org/ http://www.chadwsmith.com/ Well Im very serious, IT SUCKS. I used it for a few days and I personally deleted it from every machine it was installed on because of all the complaints.
