Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Glyn Moody's article
Hi :) Added to the http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice_In_The_Press page already. I think that is my fastest update yet. Regards from Tom :) --- On Mon, 17/10/11, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > From: Charles-H. Schulz > Subject: [libreoffice-marketing] Glyn Moody's article > To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" > Date: Monday, 17 October, 2011, 16:17 > Glyn was invited in Paris at the > Libreoffice conference, and here's his > article: > http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2011/10/libreoffice-openofficeorg-and-open-standard-office-suites/index.htm > > Best, > > Charles. > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.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.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived > and cannot be deleted > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.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.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Glyn Moody's article
Comments to the article - at their online site - seems to bring out the point that users of OOo had issues with MSO format compatibility [like .docx and .pptx]. It seems that they think that LO has the same issues, when it does not. I worked with Word, Excel, and Power Point files [the ones that are not super complex with heavy micros] and I have very little with compatibility issues. I no longer use MSO and the last one was MSO 2003. Every MSO file I have received in the past 6 months opened 100% using LO. Some of MS's online templates are too complex with micros and such to work 100% but MS does not want non-MS users to be able to use them any more. So, in these articles that talk about OOo and LO together, many times the writer assumes that they both have the same abilities. This is no longer true. OOo has not put out a version in a year and how many releases have LO made since then? 3.3.0 - 3.3.4 and 3.4.0 - 3.4.3. How much improved is LO's code and performance over OOo's version now? So, I wish the writers would try out LO and know about its improvements over OOo BEFORE that call them the same software, but under different "ownership". Maybe someone should make a chart with a side-by-side comparison of features/functions of the current LO packages compared to the last OOo package released. Then keep it up as the newer version come out. Then people can see a check-mark chart with many, many check-marks on LO side and not as many on OOo's side. . On 10/17/2011 02:21 PM, timofonic timofonic wrote: Hello. There's seems to be another issue and is that ASF seems it has been obsessed with Java in an extreme way. They preferred to code their projects in that computer language and has been quite friendly with SUN and IBM, but it seems the relationship got a bit broken in 2010 as they abandoned JCP (Java Community Process) and Apache Harmony (their Java runtime) seems abandoned. I'm not sure if they will glue Java even more on "Apache Office" or not, but that can be an issue if it happens. Despite the corporate-like ASF PR, there seems to be indicatives of their relationship with IBM and Oracle getting more broken in certain ways (the Apache Harmony were part of the issue). And those were some of their most important promoters in certain ways, so they are weaker than ever. I just hope LibreOffice code gets streamlined without losing functionality, so the project can be lightweight enough to run on low computer processing power platforms (embedded devices and outdated computers). This would mark the difference with most of the competition: rich and robust features on lots of platforms (as most lightweight projects unfortunately are unable mix both in a successful way). About the license way, this is an "old" war in the Open Source world. This is more complex than it seems, but the results are quite simple. I divide them in two , as this world is "binary": - BSD/MIT type licenses benefit private software. Any Open Source license with copyright assignment benefit private software too (with notable exceptions like GPL and FSF), despite being copyleft or not. Examples on the last one is CUPS from Apple. I think lots of corps consider this as the "cheap labor" way, so they promote it proactively in all possible ways. - Copyleft licenses without copyright assignment benefit the Free Software ecosystem, they promote sharing and modifing without bureaucratic stuff while feeling you don't own your work. Corps needs to adapt their internal cultures to this, or feel friendly externally and do all kind of nasty stuff internally (like Google, until recent Android 3.0 controversy). I consider the license fragmentation even in the copyleft world is a serious problem these days, I think in a large future the patent and copyrights should be abolished or heavily modified to promote knowledge instead of limiting it, but that's a different topic. There's an issue, as both FSF and ASF consider all versions of the Apache License to be only compatible with GPLv3 but incompatible with GPL v1 and v2. I wonder if the Apache License is compatible with LGPLv3, the license of the LO source code. Subversion was quite used as a replacement of CVS in software development, but these days it's getting deprecated by superior technologies known as "distributed version control systems" or DVCS. Two very successful examples are Git and Mercurial (the first one getting more popular, as being user by giant projects in terms of development complexity like the Linux kernel), getting a very massive adoption not only in the Open Source development but private too. SpamAssassin is a known email spam filter. Competitors include ASSP, DSPAM, Bogofilter and others. This software was quite popular for spam filtering, but competitors have risen lately too. Despite Apache being a Foundation, they work like a standard corporation. Tons of PR stunt, tons of comittees with acronyms, bureaucracy and buzzwords everyw
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Glyn Moody's article
Hello. There's seems to be another issue and is that ASF seems it has been obsessed with Java in an extreme way. They preferred to code their projects in that computer language and has been quite friendly with SUN and IBM, but it seems the relationship got a bit broken in 2010 as they abandoned JCP (Java Community Process) and Apache Harmony (their Java runtime) seems abandoned. I'm not sure if they will glue Java even more on "Apache Office" or not, but that can be an issue if it happens. Despite the corporate-like ASF PR, there seems to be indicatives of their relationship with IBM and Oracle getting more broken in certain ways (the Apache Harmony were part of the issue). And those were some of their most important promoters in certain ways, so they are weaker than ever. I just hope LibreOffice code gets streamlined without losing functionality, so the project can be lightweight enough to run on low computer processing power platforms (embedded devices and outdated computers). This would mark the difference with most of the competition: rich and robust features on lots of platforms (as most lightweight projects unfortunately are unable mix both in a successful way). About the license way, this is an "old" war in the Open Source world. This is more complex than it seems, but the results are quite simple. I divide them in two , as this world is "binary": - BSD/MIT type licenses benefit private software. Any Open Source license with copyright assignment benefit private software too (with notable exceptions like GPL and FSF), despite being copyleft or not. Examples on the last one is CUPS from Apple. I think lots of corps consider this as the "cheap labor" way, so they promote it proactively in all possible ways. - Copyleft licenses without copyright assignment benefit the Free Software ecosystem, they promote sharing and modifing without bureaucratic stuff while feeling you don't own your work. Corps needs to adapt their internal cultures to this, or feel friendly externally and do all kind of nasty stuff internally (like Google, until recent Android 3.0 controversy). I consider the license fragmentation even in the copyleft world is a serious problem these days, I think in a large future the patent and copyrights should be abolished or heavily modified to promote knowledge instead of limiting it, but that's a different topic. There's an issue, as both FSF and ASF consider all versions of the Apache License to be only compatible with GPLv3 but incompatible with GPL v1 and v2. I wonder if the Apache License is compatible with LGPLv3, the license of the LO source code. Subversion was quite used as a replacement of CVS in software development, but these days it's getting deprecated by superior technologies known as "distributed version control systems" or DVCS. Two very successful examples are Git and Mercurial (the first one getting more popular, as being user by giant projects in terms of development complexity like the Linux kernel), getting a very massive adoption not only in the Open Source development but private too. SpamAssassin is a known email spam filter. Competitors include ASSP, DSPAM, Bogofilter and others. This software was quite popular for spam filtering, but competitors have risen lately too. Despite Apache being a Foundation, they work like a standard corporation. Tons of PR stunt, tons of comittees with acronyms, bureaucracy and buzzwords everywhere. They are the few ones that make other non-foss corps very happy, as their ways are very friendly to them (code that can be used in non-open source software, for example). They seem too focused on showing the quantity of projects managed by them constantly, getting proud of it in every press release they publish. Even if their products are quite friendly to private code companies, that's not the big issue here in a pragmatical way. Their products are focused to business and mostly as a framework or foundation to develop final products or solutions (mostly targeted at website and software development) in most of them developed under the Java programing language, so they have ZERO experience on developing end user product solutions and they will need to create the necessary infrastructure from scratch if they want to make it work. Regards. On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 6:34 PM, webmaster for Kracked Press Productions wrote: > > The big thing about "The Apache Way" is they want to own the code our > volunteers have worked on for the past year. > > I wonder how many of these people are willing to hand over their copyrights? > > Also, since there is a move to replace Java coding with Python coding as the > code base is cleaned out of unneeded and "bad" coding. Does that mean that > Apache's OOo project will not be able to us the code LO people create, even > if they will allow the code owners to keep their copyrights? > > What happens to all the open-source code that was part of OOo before it was > converted to The Apache Way? Since they s
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Glyn Moody's article
The big thing about "The Apache Way" is they want to own the code our volunteers have worked on for the past year. I wonder how many of these people are willing to hand over their copyrights? Also, since there is a move to replace Java coding with Python coding as the code base is cleaned out of unneeded and "bad" coding. Does that mean that Apache's OOo project will not be able to us the code LO people create, even if they will allow the code owners to keep their copyrights? What happens to all the open-source code that was part of OOo before it was converted to The Apache Way? Since they seems to say that all that code no longer is owned by those who wrote it, but now are the propriety of Apache? Will it be still allowed for LO to use that code base, until we modify it with the Python and other new coding standards LO are working towards? I do not like the idea that a company could take open-source copyrighted code by others, and state that they now owe the code and the copyrights to it. The software listed in the linked article, that are Apache products touted to be successful with The Apache Way, are once I never heard of. I use to look for every free software out there for Windows users. I still do some times. I never heard of these in all my searches, so their success is something that I cannot agree with. You search for free software and LO comes up many places. Those I never found. On 10/17/2011 11:17 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Glyn was invited in Paris at the Libreoffice conference, and here's his article: http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2011/10/libreoffice-openofficeorg-and-open-standard-office-suites/index.htm Best, Charles. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.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.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-marketing] Glyn Moody's article
Glyn was invited in Paris at the Libreoffice conference, and here's his article: http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2011/10/libreoffice-openofficeorg-and-open-standard-office-suites/index.htm Best, Charles. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.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.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] IT Certification
On 17 October 2011 00:29, webmaster for Kracked Press Productions < webmas...@krackedpress.com> wrote: > > I know a kid locally that is working on getting ready for as many > certifications as he can BEFORE he goes off to college. His main system is > Linux of some type and like LO and OOo a lot, according to his mother a used > book store owner. > > He may be interested in getting a Certification in LO, when it becomes > available. He helps his teacher out now and he hopes to have as many > college credits from high school going into his first sememster of college > as others get after their second or third semester only from college. The > kid is smart. He is about to take the A1 or something that costs $300+ to > take. The main issue with getting individuals certificated is having an administration infrastructure. At $300 you are going to have a fairly small market in the whole scheme of things because most people on the planet don't earn that sort of money. Economies of scale can reduce the costs a lot, especially if supported by the right technology and strategies to use existing resources but you still need ways to get the assessments to the students with credible quality assurance. In many countries, qualifications have to be related to national standards frameworks to be delivered through public sector organisations. The most significant framework in recent years is the European Qualifications Framework announced about 3 years ago. It provides a referencing system for all vocational qualifications (not just IT) so that employers in different countries know the level and typical period of study for any qualification. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.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.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] What about Real-time collaborative editing (RTCE) in LibreOffice? A simple user POW proposal
Hello Tim, Le 17/10/2011 01:24, timofonic timofonic a écrit : > Hello. > > It's just an idea I want to promote, because I think it can be more > interesting than some people think. Anyone can foorward the idea I > expressed to anyone that can help to make it reality, I just want to > become reality as an user of Libreoffice and other text editors. OASIS > seems a good candidate for this, even other office suites or advanced > text editors. > > The point of RTCE is not just for office applications, but any text > editor targeted at not just very simple functionality. So this can be > a wide standard in terms of possible adoption, and maybe even add > interoperability with online projects like EtherPad. > > Regards. thanks for the idea... let's see whether it's possible to work wifor th it for LOOL. Best, Charles. > > > On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Tom Davies wrote: >> Hi :) >> I think it might be good to forward this to OASIS. THey already have >> collaboration between various projects to produce OpenDocument Format >> specifications. I think that is part of what is being called for here? A >> specification that can be shared by the various existing OpenSource office >> applications? >> Regards from >> Tom :) >> >> >> >> --- On Fri, 14/10/11, timofonic timofonic wrote: >> >>> From: timofonic timofonic >>> Subject: [libreoffice-marketing] What about Real-time collaborative editing >>> (RTCE) in LibreOffice? A simple user POW proposal >>> To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org >>> Date: Friday, 14 October, 2011, 16:04 >>> Hello to everyone. >>> >>> I'm just an user of LibreOffice, no developer at all. But I >>> think >>> maybe this can be an interesting discussion with the more >>> skilled >>> people involved into the project. >>> >>> Since the apparition of SubEthaEdit for Macs, the >>> real-time >>> collaborative editing (from now on referred as RTCE) >>> started to rise >>> from these days. The Web 2.0 phonomenom made RTCE even more >>> known with >>> Writely and EtherPad, then Google bought both (but EhterPad >>> now >>> remains as a FOSS project) to integrate resources to the >>> Google Docs >>> online Office suite. >>> >>> There are editors that already support RTCE, like AbiWord >>> (by using >>> AbiCollab extension), ACE, Emacs (by extensions like Rudel >>> or others) >>> and Gobby. Unfortunately there aren't a strong open >>> standard protocol >>> shared among them, so interoperability is a big issue >>> there. >>> >>> RTCE is something thinked before in OpenOffice and seems >>> also taken in >>> account in LibreOffice as future ideas to develop, but the >>> approach >>> and ideas behind it were primitive or their importance is >>> still not >>> enough considered. >>> >>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Crazy_Ideas#Simple_server-based_collaborative_editing >>> >>> There's an open RTCE protocol named Infinote ( http://infinote.org ), >>> a redesign of the Obby protocol that is part of Gobby and >>> implemented >>> in libinfinity. There's a server implementation named >>> Infinoted and >>> the protocol is already user by some third party >>> applications but the >>> popularity is quite low at this moment. >>> >>> There's "jarn.xmpp.collaboration" >>> (http://pypi.python.org/pypi/jarn.xmpp.collaboration), a >>> XMPP protocol >>> extension targeted at RTCE. The protocol is still quite >>> young, but >>> still actively developed. >>> >>> The use of an open protocol standard would not just help >>> interoperability between different projects, but also >>> improve the >>> protocol for being more flexible and powerful over time in >>> the same >>> way of ODF. >>> >>> While interoperability with existing projects is very cool >>> and nice, >>> this isn't going to resolve the issue in the long term. >>> Those projects >>> will stay incompatible between them, and each new project >>> may choose a >>> new protocol that LibreOffice developers would need to >>> implement it. >>> >>> I understand an initiative like this isn't easy at all, >>> because it's >>> not only developing a powerful and well documented RTCE >>> protocol. Like >>> in the example of Infinote, that means nothing if the >>> protocol isn't >>> adopted and promoted widely by other related projects. >>> >>> This is a proposal from the user point of view, but I hope >>> to make >>> some people think about it. In my opinion this could be a >>> "killer app" >>> for LibreOffice and also gain popularity in >>> education/business/government environments too. >>> >>> I'm supossing this concept would require developer efforts, >>> lots of >>> PR, contacting with other organizations and such. Make >>> people agree on >>> standards seems not easy, but I think is possible if people >>> do the >>> necessary effort (as showed in ODF). >>> >>> With a bit of research from my illiterate perspective, I >>> already found >>> other theorical and practical proposals and experiments on >>> RTCE. So I >>> think more skilled peopl
