Re: [tdf-discuss] Word Count Icon

[Florian Reisinger]

Am Dienstag, 29. November 2011 22:56:05 schrieb Pad Ster:

I made this word count icon a while ago, and someone suggested I send it
in.
Now I know LibreOffice doesn't have a word count icon in the toolbar by
default, but I added one myself, since I was using it often, back with
OpenOffice.
Well, anyway, see what you think, it's attached.


Dear Pad,

Every mail you send to the mailinglist doesn't have an attachment
Please upload it somewhere and post a link.

Florian R.



--
--
Tschüss!

LibO 3.4.4
Windows 7 SP1 64-bit

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[tdf-discuss] Re: overall communication guidelines and reply-to mangling

[NoOp]

On 11/25/2011 02:19 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> FYI: It was not me asking for that change, nor Friedrich, but I'd like 
> to reply to this:
> 
> NoOp wrote on 2011-11-25 23:11:
>> Why not experiment with the moderators or test list instead? Why the
>> discuss list?
> 
> Because a real test can only work on a larger list, where we see the 
> impact...
> 
> Florian
> 

I disagree. The moderators list is active, you guys post there regularly
- try it on yourselves before creating a "why is this happening" panic
on this list? Keep in mind that this list is also used by general users:

http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/
"discuss@documentfoundation.org: Mailing list for general discussions
about The Document Foundation."

Better yet, try it on the dev list as this seems to be where the request
is originating from.




-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[tdf-discuss] Re: overall communication guidelines and reply-to mangling

[NoOp]

On 11/28/2011 08:23 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> On Fri, 2011-11-25 at 22:19 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote:
>> From my point of view, the mailing list is the sender.
>> When I hit the "Reply" button, this has to go back to the sender,
>> who sent that to me, which is the mailing list and not Regina.
> 
>   Sure sure. But you must get mail every day that is CC'd to several
> people. Surely you get to understand the difference between "Reply" and
> "Reply to all" ? the latter will keep the CC.
> 
>   At the end of the day, IMHO all this comes down to a simple choice:
> 
>   * make it easy for established list users to avoid having to
> think whom they want to reply to, and needing to press
> ctrl-shift-r vs. ctrl-r (or whatever)
> or
>   * make it easy for new and peripherally involved users to get
> replies to their casual E-mails without doing a long list of
> operations.
> 
>   Where by a long list of operations, I mean, that in order to get a
> reply to your mail/question, first you need to:
> 
>   a) be clueful and know you havn't a chance of getting a reply
>   b) send a mail to subscribe-foo@a.b.c
>   c) wait for the reply
>   d) confirm acceptance of mailing list
>   e) while (time < max_time_wait_for_any_reply) {
>   f) recieve mail, delete uninteresting messages
>   g) read & respond to tiny minority of messages that
>  are a reply to your query.
>   h) } send a mail to unsuscribe-foo@a.b.c
>   i) confirm un-subscribe from unsubscribe-foo@a.b.c
> 
>   In my view, most people fall down at a) - they just never appear to get
> a reply to their message. To ask someone to do steps b->i in order to
> interact with us is one that strangles community IMHO.
> 
>   HTH,
> 
>   Michael.
> 

You've obviously never spent time on the OOo user & discuss lists...

I recommend leaving as is *and* requiring users to register when posting
to lists. We went through the 'non-registered' users issue on the OOo
user & discuss lists for years. Feel free to browse the OOo archives for
all the time wasted on attempting to respond to non-registered users
(including header filters w/bugs filed accordingly etc., etc). If you'd
like non-registered users to post on the dev list feel free to ask that
the change be made there (and use as a test bed), but please do not
modify the other lists.

I subscribe to over 80 lists (via gmane.org) and respond regularly to
10-15 daily. Were I required to adjust my standard 'Reply' to
specifically reply to the list rather than the individual poster I'd
have to make major modifications to my client (SeaMonkey). I view and
respond to a list, not to individual posters.

Further, the changes that you are requesting (if I understand them
correctly) would mean that I'd then have an additional, direct email in
my inbox from each list poster when I've specifically chosen to view &
respond via an nntp source (gmane.org) rather than list email. Your
request now places the burden on each list user to make changes in order
to avoid responding to the list poster and instead reply to the list in
general.

The simple solution is to require *all* posters to register/subscribe
prior to posting. In the process the prospective poster is warned that:
1) the post is public and subject to viewing by *anyone* with internet
access, 2) explain what an email list actually is, 3) how to view and
reply via alternate means instead of email (nabble, gmane.org, forums
etc), and 4) how to unsubscribe should they find that 'lists' aren't for
them.  This helps to eliminate the "please remove my post from the
internet", "I'm going to sue you for posting my personal information",
"why am I getting flooded with these emails from you people", etc.,  and
the aggravation of those of use who do attempt to assist users on such
lists trying to figure out if the poster is registered/subscribed or not.

If you wish to reply to each poster individually, then perhaps you can
modify Evolution 3.0.2 to conform to Reply and 'Reply All' to suit your
requirements.

-1



-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[tdf-discuss] Word Count Icon

[Pad Ster]

I made this word count icon a while ago, and someone suggested I send it
in.
Now I know LibreOffice doesn't have a word count icon in the toolbar by
default, but I added one myself, since I was using it often, back with
OpenOffice.
Well, anyway, see what you think, it's attached.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] overall communication guidelines and reply-to mangling

[Friedrich Strohmaier]

Hi Michael, *,

thanks for describing a scenario, where reply-to mangling hurts..

Am 28.11.2011 17:23 schrieb Michael Meeks:

[..]

>   * make it easy for established list users to avoid having to
> think whom they want to reply to, and needing to press
> ctrl-shift-r vs. ctrl-r (or whatever)
> or
>   * make it easy for new and peripherally involved users to get
> replies to their casual E-mails without doing a long list of
> operations.

or boil it down to: keep it simple (KISS). That does not necessarily
mean: serve each one's habits (which is known *not* to be a simple thing
;o)) ).

The most simple thing is to offer email as the plain information medium
and let the sender and recipient handle the rest.

Since starting this thread my approach is to improve the  way to give
advice, how to do so in a convenient fashion.

"reply-to" is intended a means for the sender to decide where she wants
the answer to be sent. To set it from a central place requires asking
*every* member for approval to not disregard the posters freedom of
choice to do so.

The clean solution for a mailing list then was to provide the choice for
each poster, whether she wants reply-to: $list set for the mails sent to
her. We don't have this possibility for now, but maybe we have some day.
(well, then the question rises whether it continues to be simple) ;o)).

This topic (is|was) causing discussions over discussions because people
try to rise weigth of their annoyance's degree by calling numbers or
argueing about "in general" or "logical" expected behaviour.

My assumption is: it was introduced, because it's a cheap cheat for the
administrator to get rid of grief, kind of "this is not a behaviour I'm
used to" whatever this was wrapped in.

The question now is how to handle that situation. Should we consider to
go the KISS way - not only with this issue but rather with other
decisions within the project as well?

And again: anyone interested in joining to improve the source of advice?


Gruß/regards
Friedrich
-- 
Friedrich Strohmaier
- Admin team -
The Document Foundation
http://www.documentfoundation.org/

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Is Microsoft getting worried about free Office suites?

[lj]

Libreoffice just needs step by step work with constant maintenance and
fresh ideas for consumers that work. Microsoft and apple have a limited
resource in finding ideas and to testing there office suites.

On Tuesday, 29 November 2011, lj  wrote:
> It is very difficult for libreoffice to be cloud based. Libreoffice is
doing the right thing with fixing bugs. But they need to stick with one
code base in the cloud. Such as html5 or java. I would use html5.
Libreoffice writer desktop suite is really good because it is fast. Speed
is a priority for people wanting to get work done. It needs to be
incorporated in all the apps including the start up of libreoffice. It is
fast but it must be the fastest. Clear and simple to getting a document
spreadsheet power point created. That is the problem that I find in
Microsoft office it freezes sometimes and the ribbon makes dialogue boxes
complicated not simple for power users and more random errors. Libreoffice
must create a cloud based app. The key for libreoffice and most likely for
apple and especially Microsoft is updated fixes and maintenance and lastly
releases.  It is something that libreoffice does and communicates well with
the use of schedules and wikis. The cloud will need to have constant
support and maintenance and releases for it to work effectively with users
and their different desktop environments. It is a lot of hard work. But if
it worked libreoffice would defanitely not go under or in strife like
Internet explorer on Mac or openoffice. At the end of the day. There is a
way to bridge the cloud and the desktop. Some people do not like working in
the cloud because of security. Some people like to work on the cloud
because of collaboration. If libreoffice could incorporate both, it would
be something that google apple and Microsoft would need to think about.
> Lj.
>
> On Tuesday, 29 November 2011, Ian Lynch  wrote:
>> On 29 November 2011 10:39, lj  wrote:
>>
>>  Libreoffice has one thing. It's for free. You can't beat
>>> that price. Consumers will use a product like google docs because it's
free
>>> and easy to use.
>>
>>
>> Yes, people expect to get stuff like this for free from the internet so
it
>> is difficult for MS or Apple to charge extra for office software in this
>> environment and if they offer it for free they run the risk of killing
>> their own cash cows on the desktop.
>>
>>
>>> It's the exact same for libreoffice they just need mobile
>>> and cloud adoption and a little more advertisement in marketing to stay
in
>>> the game.
>>>
>>
>> Cloud is one area where features do tend to be light so a cloud based
LibO
>> would be a killer app, especially if there was a compact version that
could
>> run on a cell phone, locally. But the big problem is that this is a
massive
>> amount of work and by the time it is done, it might well be too late.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Lj.
>>> On Tuesday, 29 November 2011, Ian Lynch  wrote:
>>> > On 28 November 2011 20:16, Robert Derman >> >wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Olav Dahlum wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> On 28/11/11 13:13, Pedro wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>>  Ian Lynch wrote
>>> 
>>> 
>>> > Google should do a version of Office based on the
>>> > OOo/LibO code base and embed ads and search links, make it
available
>>> > freely
>>> > and brand it Google Office.  Given their brand strength and
>>> marketing,
>>> > that
>>> > would probably do more to frighten MS than anything we can do.
>>> Slightly
>>> > surprised they haven't already done it.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>  Interesting concept. But I think they are investing a lot on the
>>> "Cloud"
>>>  with the Chrome Book laptops that investing time on an offline
suite
>>>  doesn't
>>>  make much sense...
>>> 
>>>  In the same line of thought: Google Docs is fine in the "Developed"
>>>  countries where working in the "Cloud" is a reality. This is not so
>>> for
>>>  more
>>>  than 2/3 of the world's population
>>>  (http://www.**internetworldstats.com/stats.**htm<
>>> http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm>
>>>  )
>>> 
>>>  I do believe that currently LibreOffice is the leading alternative
to
>>> MS
>>>  Office (but would love to see some numbers :) )
>>> 
>>> 
>>> >>> Just a couple of observations here.  First, most businesses do not
and
>>> >> probably will not in the near future,  go to cloud computing.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I sort of hope not, gives us competitive advantage but realistically,
>>> most
>>> > businesses are SMEs employing less than 10 people so I should think
>>> "most"
>>> > will migrate at least to partial use of cloud services. Like us, it
>>> doesn't
>>> > have to be all one thing or another.
>>> >
>>> >  there are several reasons for this, foremost, security.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > If cloud security was an insurmountable problem, I doubt we would have
>>> > on-line banking.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>  Companies do not want important documents with proprietary informa

Re: [tdf-discuss] Is Microsoft getting worried about free Office suites?

[lj]

It is very difficult for libreoffice to be cloud based. Libreoffice is
doing the right thing with fixing bugs. But they need to stick with one
code base in the cloud. Such as html5 or java. I would use html5.
Libreoffice writer desktop suite is really good because it is fast. Speed
is a priority for people wanting to get work done. It needs to be
incorporated in all the apps including the start up of libreoffice. It is
fast but it must be the fastest. Clear and simple to getting a document
spreadsheet power point created. That is the problem that I find in
Microsoft office it freezes sometimes and the ribbon makes dialogue boxes
complicated not simple for power users and more random errors. Libreoffice
must create a cloud based app. The key for libreoffice and most likely for
apple and especially Microsoft is updated fixes and maintenance and lastly
releases.  It is something that libreoffice does and communicates well with
the use of schedules and wikis. The cloud will need to have constant
support and maintenance and releases for it to work effectively with users
and their different desktop environments. It is a lot of hard work. But if
it worked libreoffice would defanitely not go under or in strife like
Internet explorer on Mac or openoffice. At the end of the day. There is a
way to bridge the cloud and the desktop. Some people do not like working in
the cloud because of security. Some people like to work on the cloud
because of collaboration. If libreoffice could incorporate both, it would
be something that google apple and Microsoft would need to think about.
Lj.

On Tuesday, 29 November 2011, Ian Lynch  wrote:
> On 29 November 2011 10:39, lj  wrote:
>
>  Libreoffice has one thing. It's for free. You can't beat
>> that price. Consumers will use a product like google docs because it's
free
>> and easy to use.
>
>
> Yes, people expect to get stuff like this for free from the internet so it
> is difficult for MS or Apple to charge extra for office software in this
> environment and if they offer it for free they run the risk of killing
> their own cash cows on the desktop.
>
>
>> It's the exact same for libreoffice they just need mobile
>> and cloud adoption and a little more advertisement in marketing to stay
in
>> the game.
>>
>
> Cloud is one area where features do tend to be light so a cloud based LibO
> would be a killer app, especially if there was a compact version that
could
> run on a cell phone, locally. But the big problem is that this is a
massive
> amount of work and by the time it is done, it might well be too late.
>
>
>
>
>> Lj.
>> On Tuesday, 29 November 2011, Ian Lynch  wrote:
>> > On 28 November 2011 20:16, Robert Derman > >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Olav Dahlum wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 28/11/11 13:13, Pedro wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>>  Ian Lynch wrote
>> 
>> 
>> > Google should do a version of Office based on the
>> > OOo/LibO code base and embed ads and search links, make it
available
>> > freely
>> > and brand it Google Office.  Given their brand strength and
>> marketing,
>> > that
>> > would probably do more to frighten MS than anything we can do.
>> Slightly
>> > surprised they haven't already done it.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>  Interesting concept. But I think they are investing a lot on the
>> "Cloud"
>>  with the Chrome Book laptops that investing time on an offline suite
>>  doesn't
>>  make much sense...
>> 
>>  In the same line of thought: Google Docs is fine in the "Developed"
>>  countries where working in the "Cloud" is a reality. This is not so
>> for
>>  more
>>  than 2/3 of the world's population
>>  (http://www.**internetworldstats.com/stats.**htm<
>> http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm>
>>  )
>> 
>>  I do believe that currently LibreOffice is the leading alternative
to
>> MS
>>  Office (but would love to see some numbers :) )
>> 
>> 
>> >>> Just a couple of observations here.  First, most businesses do not
and
>> >> probably will not in the near future,  go to cloud computing.
>> >
>> >
>> > I sort of hope not, gives us competitive advantage but realistically,
>> most
>> > businesses are SMEs employing less than 10 people so I should think
>> "most"
>> > will migrate at least to partial use of cloud services. Like us, it
>> doesn't
>> > have to be all one thing or another.
>> >
>> >  there are several reasons for this, foremost, security.
>> >
>> >
>> > If cloud security was an insurmountable problem, I doubt we would have
>> > on-line banking.
>> >
>> >
>> >>  Companies do not want important documents with proprietary
information
>> >> flying back and forth on the internet where they could be intercepted.
>> >
>> >
>> > That misunderstands Cloud. We have content types that are secure to the
>> > people that need to see them. Some pages on the web site can only be
>> viewed
>> > by people with certain permissions - eg the qualifications regulators
and
>> > us. If th

Re: [tdf-discuss] Is Microsoft getting worried about free Office suites?

[Ian Lynch]

On 29 November 2011 10:39, lj  wrote:

 Libreoffice has one thing. It's for free. You can't beat
> that price. Consumers will use a product like google docs because it's free
> and easy to use.


Yes, people expect to get stuff like this for free from the internet so it
is difficult for MS or Apple to charge extra for office software in this
environment and if they offer it for free they run the risk of killing
their own cash cows on the desktop.


> It's the exact same for libreoffice they just need mobile
> and cloud adoption and a little more advertisement in marketing to stay in
> the game.
>

Cloud is one area where features do tend to be light so a cloud based LibO
would be a killer app, especially if there was a compact version that could
run on a cell phone, locally. But the big problem is that this is a massive
amount of work and by the time it is done, it might well be too late.




> Lj.
> On Tuesday, 29 November 2011, Ian Lynch  wrote:
> > On 28 November 2011 20:16, Robert Derman  >wrote:
> >
> >> Olav Dahlum wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 28/11/11 13:13, Pedro wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
>  Ian Lynch wrote
> 
> 
> > Google should do a version of Office based on the
> > OOo/LibO code base and embed ads and search links, make it available
> > freely
> > and brand it Google Office.  Given their brand strength and
> marketing,
> > that
> > would probably do more to frighten MS than anything we can do.
> Slightly
> > surprised they haven't already done it.
> >
> >
> >
>  Interesting concept. But I think they are investing a lot on the
> "Cloud"
>  with the Chrome Book laptops that investing time on an offline suite
>  doesn't
>  make much sense...
> 
>  In the same line of thought: Google Docs is fine in the "Developed"
>  countries where working in the "Cloud" is a reality. This is not so
> for
>  more
>  than 2/3 of the world's population
>  (http://www.**internetworldstats.com/stats.**htm<
> http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm>
>  )
> 
>  I do believe that currently LibreOffice is the leading alternative to
> MS
>  Office (but would love to see some numbers :) )
> 
> 
> >>> Just a couple of observations here.  First, most businesses do not and
> >> probably will not in the near future,  go to cloud computing.
> >
> >
> > I sort of hope not, gives us competitive advantage but realistically,
> most
> > businesses are SMEs employing less than 10 people so I should think
> "most"
> > will migrate at least to partial use of cloud services. Like us, it
> doesn't
> > have to be all one thing or another.
> >
> >  there are several reasons for this, foremost, security.
> >
> >
> > If cloud security was an insurmountable problem, I doubt we would have
> > on-line banking.
> >
> >
> >>  Companies do not want important documents with proprietary information
> >> flying back and forth on the internet where they could be intercepted.
> >
> >
> > That misunderstands Cloud. We have content types that are secure to the
> > people that need to see them. Some pages on the web site can only be
> viewed
> > by people with certain permissions - eg the qualifications regulators and
> > us. If there is something that is really, really top secret we can make a
> > special arrangement for it but sending as an e-mail attachment is
> probably
> > worse security. In fact, Cloud enables us to authenticate certificates
> > directly on-line without a charge so it increases security in our most
> > important business activity. If we change our policies and procedures,
> the
> > regulators get them immediately, we don't have to remember to send them
> an
> > updated file and they don't have to have a management system for
> different
> > file versions.
> >
> >
> >> Second, reliability.  Remote servers and the infrastructure between
> local
> >> computers and them have been known to go down.  Most companies don't
> want
> >> to have to rely on vulnerable remote connections.
> >>
> >
> > We all have 3G mobile phones here. In the rare occasion of an outage, we
> > can still access all our files via wireless. Ok, its a bit slower but its
> > certainly good enough. It also means I can access everything when abroad.
> > Its a bit like saying relying on electricity is relying on vulnerable
> > remote connections. If its critical you have back up batteries or a
> > generator, if it isn't you live with the odd power cut because overall
> the
> > benefits outweigh that.
> >
> >>
> >> Another thing, most companies would like to own the resources that they
> >> depend on for day to day operation.
> >>
> >
> > We own all our resources. Cloud does not mean you have to give up
> ownership
> > of your resources, it means you are buying a hosting service.
> >
> > I hear a lot of people talking about how tablets are taking over, but
> >> somehow I just don't see a corporate steno pool using tablets or
> >> smartphones to produce their importan

[tdf-discuss] Unable to configure toolbar display in LibreOffice 3.4.3

[M Henri Day]

I recently had occasion to install LibreOffice 3.4.3 on 32-bit Ubuntu 11.04
via the Ubuntu ppa. Unfortunately, toolbars are displayed in text-only
mode, despite my attempt to configure them to display in icons-only mode by
selecting «Icons only» via Tools → Customize → Toolbar, as shown in this
screenshot from Writer (
https://picasaweb.google.com/100679967346308558745/LibreOffice?authkey=Gv1sRgCKGo4OqCoNeqnAE#5680365438639662466
). I find the text-only mode unusable ; any suggestions as to how to get
the toolbars to display in icons-only mode ?...

Henri

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Is Microsoft getting worried about free Office suites?

[lj]

I think libreoffice needs to create or adopt cloud technologies. Microsoft
will most likely try to go into the cloud area. With sky drive. My scary
thought is what apple might do with iWork if it were to turn its code base
into the adoption of cloud technologies like or better than google docs.
The problem I think consumers are dealing with are inconsistency of
features in cloud based technologies which are in normal office suites.
Such as having a default font for text. Which Microsoft office and
libreoffice have. But not google docs. Microsoft have to contribute their
code only to the windows os. With google they have the power of making
changes that suit apple windows and Linux users. With libreoffice I believe
it has the real advantage of being cross platform. At the end of the day.
Microsoft do have office on apple computers. It won't last for long because
Microsoft and apple are two different companies with different objectives
and goals. Office on the Mac will most likely become Internet explorer on
the Mac. Because IWork I believe will be heavily marketed by apple over the
next two years. Libreoffice has one thing. It's for free. You can't beat
that price. Consumers will use a product like google docs because it's free
and easy to use. It's the exact same for libreoffice they just need mobile
and cloud adoption and a little more advertisement in marketing to stay in
the game.
Lj.
On Tuesday, 29 November 2011, Ian Lynch  wrote:
> On 28 November 2011 20:16, Robert Derman wrote:
>
>> Olav Dahlum wrote:
>>
>>> On 28/11/11 13:13, Pedro wrote:
>>>
>>>
 Ian Lynch wrote


> Google should do a version of Office based on the
> OOo/LibO code base and embed ads and search links, make it available
> freely
> and brand it Google Office.  Given their brand strength and marketing,
> that
> would probably do more to frighten MS than anything we can do.
Slightly
> surprised they haven't already done it.
>
>
>
 Interesting concept. But I think they are investing a lot on the
"Cloud"
 with the Chrome Book laptops that investing time on an offline suite
 doesn't
 make much sense...

 In the same line of thought: Google Docs is fine in the "Developed"
 countries where working in the "Cloud" is a reality. This is not so for
 more
 than 2/3 of the world's population
 (http://www.**internetworldstats.com/stats.**htm<
http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm>
 )

 I do believe that currently LibreOffice is the leading alternative to
MS
 Office (but would love to see some numbers :) )


>>> Just a couple of observations here.  First, most businesses do not and
>> probably will not in the near future,  go to cloud computing.
>
>
> I sort of hope not, gives us competitive advantage but realistically, most
> businesses are SMEs employing less than 10 people so I should think "most"
> will migrate at least to partial use of cloud services. Like us, it
doesn't
> have to be all one thing or another.
>
>  there are several reasons for this, foremost, security.
>
>
> If cloud security was an insurmountable problem, I doubt we would have
> on-line banking.
>
>
>>  Companies do not want important documents with proprietary information
>> flying back and forth on the internet where they could be intercepted.
>
>
> That misunderstands Cloud. We have content types that are secure to the
> people that need to see them. Some pages on the web site can only be
viewed
> by people with certain permissions - eg the qualifications regulators and
> us. If there is something that is really, really top secret we can make a
> special arrangement for it but sending as an e-mail attachment is probably
> worse security. In fact, Cloud enables us to authenticate certificates
> directly on-line without a charge so it increases security in our most
> important business activity. If we change our policies and procedures, the
> regulators get them immediately, we don't have to remember to send them an
> updated file and they don't have to have a management system for different
> file versions.
>
>
>> Second, reliability.  Remote servers and the infrastructure between local
>> computers and them have been known to go down.  Most companies don't want
>> to have to rely on vulnerable remote connections.
>>
>
> We all have 3G mobile phones here. In the rare occasion of an outage, we
> can still access all our files via wireless. Ok, its a bit slower but its
> certainly good enough. It also means I can access everything when abroad.
> Its a bit like saying relying on electricity is relying on vulnerable
> remote connections. If its critical you have back up batteries or a
> generator, if it isn't you live with the odd power cut because overall the
> benefits outweigh that.
>
>>
>> Another thing, most companies would like to own the resources that they
>> depend on for day to day operation.
>>
>
> We own all our resources. Cloud does not mean you

[board-discuss] BoD call tomorrow

[Florian Effenberger]

Hello,

as a quick reminder: The next scheduled BoD call will be tomorrow,

Wednesday, November 30th,
at 1600 UTC

Please add your agenda items in time to

http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/BoD_Meetings

where you can also find the dial-in details.

Looking forward to hearing you,
Florian

--
Florian Effenberger 
Board of Directors at The Document Foundation
Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108
Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Is Microsoft getting worried about free Office suites?

[Ian Lynch]

On 28 November 2011 20:16, Robert Derman wrote:

> Olav Dahlum wrote:
>
>> On 28/11/11 13:13, Pedro wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Ian Lynch wrote
>>>
>>>
 Google should do a version of Office based on the
 OOo/LibO code base and embed ads and search links, make it available
 freely
 and brand it Google Office.  Given their brand strength and marketing,
 that
 would probably do more to frighten MS than anything we can do. Slightly
 surprised they haven't already done it.



>>> Interesting concept. But I think they are investing a lot on the "Cloud"
>>> with the Chrome Book laptops that investing time on an offline suite
>>> doesn't
>>> make much sense...
>>>
>>> In the same line of thought: Google Docs is fine in the "Developed"
>>> countries where working in the "Cloud" is a reality. This is not so for
>>> more
>>> than 2/3 of the world's population
>>> (http://www.**internetworldstats.com/stats.**htm
>>> )
>>>
>>> I do believe that currently LibreOffice is the leading alternative to MS
>>> Office (but would love to see some numbers :) )
>>>
>>>
>> Just a couple of observations here.  First, most businesses do not and
> probably will not in the near future,  go to cloud computing.


I sort of hope not, gives us competitive advantage but realistically, most
businesses are SMEs employing less than 10 people so I should think "most"
will migrate at least to partial use of cloud services. Like us, it doesn't
have to be all one thing or another.

 there are several reasons for this, foremost, security.


If cloud security was an insurmountable problem, I doubt we would have
on-line banking.


>  Companies do not want important documents with proprietary information
> flying back and forth on the internet where they could be intercepted.


That misunderstands Cloud. We have content types that are secure to the
people that need to see them. Some pages on the web site can only be viewed
by people with certain permissions - eg the qualifications regulators and
us. If there is something that is really, really top secret we can make a
special arrangement for it but sending as an e-mail attachment is probably
worse security. In fact, Cloud enables us to authenticate certificates
directly on-line without a charge so it increases security in our most
important business activity. If we change our policies and procedures, the
regulators get them immediately, we don't have to remember to send them an
updated file and they don't have to have a management system for different
file versions.


> Second, reliability.  Remote servers and the infrastructure between local
> computers and them have been known to go down.  Most companies don't want
> to have to rely on vulnerable remote connections.
>

We all have 3G mobile phones here. In the rare occasion of an outage, we
can still access all our files via wireless. Ok, its a bit slower but its
certainly good enough. It also means I can access everything when abroad.
Its a bit like saying relying on electricity is relying on vulnerable
remote connections. If its critical you have back up batteries or a
generator, if it isn't you live with the odd power cut because overall the
benefits outweigh that.

>
> Another thing, most companies would like to own the resources that they
> depend on for day to day operation.
>

We own all our resources. Cloud does not mean you have to give up ownership
of your resources, it means you are buying a hosting service.

I hear a lot of people talking about how tablets are taking over, but
> somehow I just don't see a corporate steno pool using tablets or
> smartphones to produce their important documents.


I don't see corporate steno pools at all. We all do our own admin because
its quicker and more efficient than hiring typists. Personally I don't use
a tablet but then maybe I'm just a bit set in my keyboard ways. I/o devices
is a whole different issue, but cloud enables you to choose any that suits
you irrespective of the OS, hardware or local apps.


>  Desktop (tower case) computers will continue to dominate all serious
> corporate computing applications.  That means MS Office or suitable
> substitutes will continue to be the most important applications in the
> business world.
>

Actually laptops are already taking over. Once Android starts saturating
mobile devices that massively out number conventional computers now, I can
see it moving up and displacing most of the existing Windows desktops. So
for Linux domination, its most likely to come via Android. But that will
take time - after all some people still use typewriters. I'd be surprised
though that if in 5 years we don't see some radical changes in dominant
apps. Look at web browsers who would have guessed IE would be down around
50% of the market 5 years ago?

The biggest reason, as far as I can see it that MS Office will continue to
> dominate is not because of file format tie up, at least not from 2014 on,
> but 

Re: [tdf-discuss] overall communication guidelines and reply-to mangling

[Florian Effenberger]

Hi,

Michael Meeks wrote on 2011-11-28 16:45:


Cool ! :-) having said that, I'd prefer it to be tried on a less
high-volume list, where we could see the utility of attracting more
participants (personally).


I wanted to start on a high-volume list to see the impact. But looking 
at the replies, I think we should indeed vary from list to list. For 
discuss@ maybe it is not desired...


Anyways, which lists would you like to start trying it on?


To me a huge benefit of not reply-to mangling is to allow new people to
interact with the list (and get replies to their mail) without being
subscribed; that provides an easy on-ramp into the project, and


IMHO that causes lots of problem. I see myself purging files from the 
archive because people did not know they were posting in public. And I 
see moderators moderating lots of messages... both not desirable. ;-) 
But maybe I'm exaggerating here, and giving it a try definitely shows 
the results, so let's do it.



Of course, I would expect it to be opposed by people who are already
members of a given community, and like not getting personal replies to
messages in threads they start.


I will adjust my filters soon, because getting replies in the inbox 
instead of in the list folder is annoying. But, ah, I think there is no 
real ideal solution to things. :)


Florian

--
Florian Effenberger 
Board of Directors at The Document Foundation
Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108
Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted