Hi Alexandro,
Alexandro Colorado wrote:
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 22:59:28 -0500, Girish Vedpathak
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thank you for developing fantastic office suite. Are you planning to
add a tool for emailing, similar to Outlook in your suite as well?
Not really, there is also great
On Sat, 07 Apr 2007 02:48:04 -0500, Cor Nouws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Alexandro,
Alexandro Colorado wrote:
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 22:59:28 -0500, Girish Vedpathak
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thank you for developing fantastic office suite. Are you planning to
add a tool for emailing,
Alexandro Colorado wrote:
On Sat, 07 Apr 2007 02:48:04 -0500, Cor Nouws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What about OpenOffice.org 2.x and beyond ( 16:15 – 17:00 )
on http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2006/schedule/tuesday.html ??
I am not aware of any active development on this project, the
Hi
On 2007-04-07, at 05:25 , Cor Nouws wrote:
Alexandro Colorado wrote:
On Sat, 07 Apr 2007 02:48:04 -0500, Cor Nouws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
What about OpenOffice.org 2.x and beyond ( 16:15 – 17:00 )
on http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2006/schedule/
tuesday.html ??
I am not awa
On 4/7/07, Alexandro Colorado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am not aware of any active development on this project, there might be a
project like so. But that doesnt mean it will be in production anytime
soon afaik. Sunbird is a 2.5 years and Thunderbird 3.5 years is much more
mature and stable p
On 4/3/07, Muhammad Fahd Waseem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello. I am Muhammad Fahd Waseem, and I am a very experienced home user,
as
well as a student of computer studies.
I have used OpenOffice.org ever since it was launched, and I always
thought
of it as a better product than the otherwise
On 4/4/07, Lars D. Noodén <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Apr 2007, André Wyrwa wrote:
> Both links are far away from being usability reviews.
You won't find any true usability reviews. Nor is it likely that you will
find any reviews, period. The days of a real product shootout are over
On 4/7/07, Roger Markus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bloated features are one thing - long-term usability and file
compatibility
are another, not to mention that it's immoral to use products from an
immoral company like Microsoft. Are you an immoral man?
Your personal beliefs and moral judgmen
On 4/6/07, Chad Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Let's examine the facts here, shall we?
This from Microsoft-Chad? "Facts"? From Microsoft-Chad? Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
How much did they pay you to sell your soul to the devil Chad?
RM
On 4/7/07, Roger Markus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How much did they pay you to sell your soul to the devil Chad?
How much did RMS pay you to shove your head up your butt?
Maybe you should join him in another idiotic moral crusade. This time
against the "enemy of human rights" *HARRY POTTE
jonathon wrote:
>
> The stated specs are also incredbly misleading, if not outright
> fraudulent.
just look here:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sysreqs.mspx for the minimum
requirements for XP SP2 - MS are *still* saying you can run it on 64MB
RAM - the accepted normal for *normal* use
I've run Windows XP Pro SP2 on a 200 Mhz system with 64 MB of RAM, and a 4
GB HD.
It was very slow. I upped the RAM to 128 MB, and it was usable. But it did
run (AbiWord, Firefox) with only 64 MB.
On 4/7/07, Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
jonathon wrote:
>
> The stated specs are also inc
Gordon wrote:
> jonathon wrote:
>
>>
>> The stated specs are also incredbly misleading, if not outright
>> fraudulent.
>
> just look here:
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sysreqs.mspx for the minimum
> requirements for XP SP2 - MS are *still* saying you can run it on 64MB
> RAM - the a
Besides, what did MS do as a corporation that is morally wrong?
I'm not saying this because I'm a Microsoft fan (gonna delete XP and
install Ubuntu once I'm done with school this year, woohoo!), but
'immoral' is not the right word to describe Microsoft. Monopolistic and
anti-competitive? Maybe
On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 11:36 -0400, Chad Smith wrote:
> On 4/7/07, Roger Markus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > How much did they pay you to sell your soul to the devil Chad?
Huh? Might wanna reconsider your diet, mate.
> How much did RMS pay you to shove your head up your butt?
>
> Maybe
Hei,
i had given up on this, but now i feel a bit inclined to comment
again...
> > You won't find any true usability reviews. Nor is it likely that you will
> > find any reviews, period. The days of a real product shootout are over a
> > decade past. Recall that MS started a policy of prohibit
Hei,
On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 00:01 +0800, Alvin Lim Liangce wrote:
> Besides, what did MS do as a corporation that is morally wrong?
I'm generally with you, but they did in fact do some dodgy business
moves in the past (and continually keep doing) that could be seen as
"unsportive" or even betrayal
On 4/7/07, André Wyrwa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Both articles kinda say that the new MSO UI is rather unusual and hence
requires training. But we knew that already with the mere notion of that
they'd have a new interface. If you change the way something works, you
have to relearn how it works.
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007, Alvin Lim Liangce wrote:
Besides, what did MS do as a corporation that is morally wrong?
... But I will term them 'immoral' only if I hear about a special
Microsoft unit where the employees work on creating viruses to break down
competing products. ...
That's a rather nar
Alvin Lim Liangce wrote:
Besides, what did MS do as a corporation that is morally wrong?
I'm not saying this because I'm a Microsoft fan (gonna delete XP and
install Ubuntu once I'm done with school this year, woohoo!), but
'immoral' is not the right word to describe Microsoft. Monopolistic
Chad Smith wrote:
Sunbid may be 2.5 years in development, but it's not even to 0.5 status,
much less 1.0. The current release is Sunbird 0.3.1.
For FLOSS, version numbers are all but meaningless.
You probably don't want to use version 0.0.0.1 of a program.
But version 0.0.1.0 of that same pro
Chad Smith wrote:
*PRE-2.0
"We don't need a database program! It's useless bloat that takes away
choice from the end user!"
Considering that OOo 1.0.x and above contained a databse, adding a
second one can be equated to adding bloat to the program.
*POST 2.0
"The latest addition of our ne
Alvin Lim Liangce wrote:
anti-competitive? Maybe. But I will term them 'immoral' only if I hear
about a special Microsoft unit where the employees work on creating
viruses to break down competing products.
Circa 1993 Microsoft did circulate virrii that targetted competing
operating systems.
Hi,
> > We're even in the midst of a contradiction shift as we speak. Check out
> > the PIM discussion in the "[discuss] Regarding OpenOffice Suite" thread.
>
> The original code for OOo included a PIM.
> A PIM was available as an add on for OOo 1.0.
> [Guess what, it even works with 2.0!]
>
24 matches
Mail list logo
