On Wed, 2006-12-07 at 19:49 -0400, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?
command=viewArticleBasicarticleId=9001713
FWIW, OOo is represented on the ODF Alliance by me. And I contacted
Google a while ago on this issue though I cannot claim credit for
Hello,
I'm having a problem with OpenOffice on thin clients.
These are thin clients for a primary school. There are only 6 user
accounts, one for each year. The head teacher really likes this idea
because it is very simple (we are talking about 3 and 5 year olds here)
and still gives the
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Now Chad, I don't know how much efforts you've invested in OO.o in the
past years, but if MS corrected today one of the small things that make
you look at OO.o in the first place, would you declare Office was the
best thing since sliced bread ?
Knowing Chad, he probably
Hello,
A common argument from MS and others is that Linux only has fewer
vulnerabilities because it's less popular. They argue that as Linux gets
more popular, more vulnerabilities appear.
The Honeynet Project (Bruce Schneier is a director) has been looking at
vunerabilities in software for
Cor Nouws wrote:
You bet ..
What I wonder more: why do (nearly) all computer vendors advertise We
advice Windows XP Professional
Free will? Or obliged when they want to sell MsWindows on the box??
How about Designed for Microsoft Windows? Since when do you design
hardware to match the
I used alien to convert the .rpm packages to *tgz* not Deb. I extracted
them and put the result in the /opt/ directory. I prefer this because I
don't want to mix my Debian system with external RPMs. I prefer to keep
my base system following the Debian release and put anything from
outside in
Henrik Sundberg wrote:
I think it is strange to be this pedantic about 0^0, and not care
about math at all when it comes to normal cases like this. Are we
looking for compatibility with Microsoft or math?
I am a mathematecian, and not exactly a Microsoft fan. So I'll vote for
math of course
Simon Hogg wrote:
Actually this is not a bug, any number[1] raised to the power zero is 1.
Simon
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponentiation#Exponents_one_and_zero
Wikipedia is not an authority on mathematics :)
I think that 0^0 should be an error. You won't reach a conclusion using
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Daniel,
actually you're right, zero to the power of zero may not be one,
but IT IS DEFINED to be one, so the calculation is correct.
This definition was made to circumvent a singularity problem.
It might be. Mathemtecians do make weird definitions some times. But
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This definition is not weired at all! if you calculate
lim x^x
x- 0
you get 1
try to calculate by hand (or use calc)
0.1^0.1
0.01^0.01
0.001^0.001
see? converging to one!
That's a very limited case. It is true that f(x)^g(x) converges to 1 if
f and g are analytic
Hello Jost,
Take a look at this site:
http://theingots.org/www/content.php?page=resources
Disclaimer: I work for this company.
Scroll down a bit and download Bronze INGOT Lessons. Notice, this
document is not intended for the kid but rather the teacher instructing
the kid (ie. it's for
Alexandro wrote:
There was this tutorial for kids:
http://so4k.kippdata.de/
What tutorial? This is an application that runs on top of StarOffice.
Daniel.
--
/\/`) http://opendocumentfellowship.org
/\/_/
/\/_/ A life? Sounds great!
\/_/Do you know where I could download
Chad Smith wrote:
I would think that Google would have some interest in ODF taking off
simply because it would be easier to parse and index than doc.
That maybe true - but I doubt it's easier to parse than MSO 2003 XML or the
next version. I mean, XML is XML.
Saying XML is XML is stupid.
Chad Smith wrote:
The point is - I doubt the difference will matter to Google's search. They
can already search docs - so I doubt searching has much to do with it.
The advantage of OpenDocument from a search engine's point of view is
that it allows more scemantics. You can search for
Chad Smith wrote:
Coolness. Writely is neat. I wonder if they'll buy iRows next?
http://www.irows.com/
I'd rather they buy WikiCalc. The guy guy who is making WikiCalc (Dan
Bricklin of VisiCalc fame) is in the OASIS OpenDocument committee,
working on the formula specification. So you can
Chad Smith wrote:
Is there a link to this WikiCalc?
Wikipedia knows all things :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiCalc
And so does Google :)
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=enq=wikiCalcbtnG=Google+Searchmeta=
The current home page is Dan's blog:
http://www.softwaregarden.com/wkcalpha
Chad Smith wrote:
WikiCalc is not very pretty looking.
I like the way it looks :)
And it's still in alpha. There's no
live online version from any of your links.
One possible drawback of WikiCalc is that it's open source. Anyone can
download it and setup their own. Maybe Google could
Chad Smith wrote:
As do I. OpenDocument has little to do with Google's business plan.
OpenDocument is bad for Microsoft. Anything that is bad for Microsoft is
good for Google. But yes, a customer base is probably more important to
Google than OpenDocument support. Especially since it's
Neither Sun nor Google have enough money to buy the other. The two
companies have similar revenue ($11b for Sun, $6b for Google). If Google
*did* have enough revenue, it doesn't seem right to buy a company with
decreasing revenue. Also, Sun's business model is diametrically opposite
to
Chad Smith wrote:
Did you read the article - or just reply based on the title?
Why I just replied to your email of course. Is it a humour article?
Daniel.
--
/\/`) http://opendocumentfellowship.org
/\/_/
/\/_/ A life? Sounds great!
\/_/Do you know where I could download
Rod Engelsman wrote:
Also, Sun's business model is diametrically opposite
to Google's.
I'm not sure what you mean here.
I mean that they are at opposite ends of the IT spectrum. Google makes
money by providing free web services and selling advertising space. Sun
makes money by selling
Chad Smith wrote:
No - it's not a humor article - it's a serious article. There is reason to
believe that Google wants to buy Sun. There are ways that Sun would add to
Google's Business plan. Both are already working together. Both are
competitors of Microsoft. Both are working with
Chad Smith wrote:
Wikicalc is vaporware. There's nowhere I can go
signup and log in. I can download an alpha-prerelease
WikiCalc is not a service, it's a product that runs on a server. I could
setup WikiCalc on the OpenDocument Fellowship website for example.
If Google wanted a
Hello Fred,
No sorry, we can't open MS works files. The files are completely
different and as usual, Microsoft won't tell us how the files work.
Note: Even Microsoft Office doesn't support MS works files. It's bad
when a company is not compatible with its own products.
Your best bet is
Robert Derman wrote:
As I understand it, the way that OOo is licensed, if Sun were to be
bought out or driven out of business, OOo would simply end up being
forked and would continue on without Sun. It would probably end up
becoming a foundation with independent developers continuing its
Daniel Carrera wrote:
If MS bought Sun they could tell 80% of OOo volunteers to work on
something else.
Stupid, stupid, stupid. I meant to say developers. That's why I
shouldn't do 5 things at once. If MS bought Sun they could tell 80% of
OOo developers to work on something else.
Cheers
Alexandro Colorado wrote:
Thin Clients will greatly welcome an office suite.
Thin clients can already use office suites. We setup a set of thin
clients at a primary school a while ago and they're running OOo.
Also a web-centric
office suite put much more push towards intgretation,
Why?
Ian Lynch wrote:
Like any disruptive technology, to start with most people won't but some
people will put up with any inconvenience for the lower cost. As the
technology improves more people will migrate (see Christensen et al for
the evidence in the past). In larger companies Google could
Ian Lynch wrote:
You need to look for customers who won't mind not being able to access
their files for one day.
Why if you provide them with a backup connection? Its about £25 a month
for our 2 meg ADSL connection so doubling that cost is not prohibitive.
...or go to a market where people
Alexandro Colorado wrote:
Thin clients can already use office suites. We setup a set of thin
clients at a primary school a while ago and they're running OOo.
Yes and is a pain to set-up,
I didn't think it was. The thin client itself might have been. But I
didn't have to do any extra work
Mathias Bauer wrote:
How many people would like to do serious
Office work in a browser despite all the possible problems (privacy,
security, user interface deficiencies, stability, performance, latency
etc.)?
And reliability. What if your internet connection goes down?
A Google Office would
If I'm not mistaken, even Microsoft Office doesn't support Microsoft
Works files.
It might be quicker and easier to give your customers free copies of
OpenOffice. It sure is superior to MS Works.
Cheers,
Daniel.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have customers that use .wdb (Microsoft Works
Anton Erasmus wrote:
I think it is the client side that need to support it. The big thing
is that with odt file support, one can generate the differences
between different versions of the same document.
*SIGH*
No one as still answer the basic question of what exactly do you expect
SVN to do
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately when subversion considers a file to be a binary file, it
does not seem to support a diff visible to the user.
Nor would I expect it to. It /is/ after all, a binary diff. If you want
to compare the files you'd use OpenOffice.
A proper .odt diff
should
I don't understand this deal about Subversion supporting or not
supporting .odt files. What support does it provide? Wouldn't it just
treat them like general binary files? I certainly don't expect any SCM
to keep patches of the XML inside the file. That would be rather difficult.
Cheers,
Paul wrote:
If they stored them as binary, then wouldn't be a little tricky to do
a diff on the document contents.
There is such thing as a binary diff. It may not be as good as a plain
text diff, but what else are you going to do when you are dealing with
images and sound files? I'd expect
Hello Pablo,
No, we're not working on flash import. Your best bet is to try to open
the PowerPoint file directly.
Cheers,
Daniel.
Pablo Cerdá wrote:
I’m very interested in Openoffice because I think it can be the solution to
give most of my clients to the open software… I have a problem
Hi Sarah,
Actually, selling OpenOffice is not illegal. I do hope that the eBay
seller makes it clear that the program can be downloaded for free. But
selling it is not illegal, and not necessarily wrong.
Cheers,
Daniel.
Sarah Barkway wrote:
I wasn't sure which email address to send this to,
Hello Erin,
I'm not sure I fully understand what you mean...
Let's see... your company is moving to a new XML file format and you
would like to open those XML files in OOo. Is that what you mean?
Yes, OOo 2.0 uses the OpenDocument format. That is the international
open standard for office
Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
http://opendocumentfellowship.org/Resources/ForWebmasters
I guess I'd better get to work and fix that on the Friends of
OpenDocument Inc's website. :-)
I must say that if it's that easy to fix a server to deal with ODT files
correctly, the one website that should
Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
I just fixed three websites using the .htaccess file method given on the
ODFellowship's page that Daniel mentioned in an earlier note:
http://opendocumentfellowship.org/Resources/ForWebmasters
This took about 2 minutes by FTP. Of course it can only be done by
someone
Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
I'm running WinXP Pro SP2. I don't normally use IE but I fired it up to
test this, and I do not see this behaviour. When I download a .odt file
using IE6, it comes down with the correct extension.
You downloaded it from the OpenDocument Fellowship website, which is
Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
You're right.
I'm always right :) j
From the FoOD website, or indeed the OpenOffice.org
website, the file extension gets changed to .zip by IE.
It's a combination of lack of support at the server and the client.
Apache doesn't know what an ODF file is so it calls
Hello,
I once wrote a macro to provide readability statistics. But honestly,
those things are not reliable and you should only take them with a grain
of sand. They are even worse than a grammar check. Readability
statistics only measure if the length of words and sentences. They can't
Mathias Bauer wrote:
(2) The completeness of the API doesn't depend on the programmming
language. I think you wanted to express something different. Could you
please elaborate?
No, what I meant is that, last time I checked, PyUNO didn't implement
the entire API. Or at least, that's what I
Charles-H.Schulz wrote:
Of course I think it is. Why shouldn't I ? The fact that the ultimate
interests of OpenOffice.org as a project and a community do not match
the one of the fellowship and even the one of the ODF community itself
are not that much of a problem. At some point we're all in
Charles-H.Schulz wrote:
The so-called ODF fellowship is an interesting place, but is one
part of the the OpenDocument Format community.
I'm glad you think our work is interesting. The OpenDocument community
(interesting term) is vast. It includes several large companies, several
open source
Hey,
None of those things are strictly necessary. You just won't be able to
know for certain that the file you're receiving is a valid .odt file.
I'm not 100% sure about the character entities, but I don't think you
need those either.
If you want to develop for ODF, I suggest you come to
Mathias Bauer wrote:
The dependency on an X-Server is indeed annoying and we hope that in a
not so far future we can drop it at least for parts of the API (others
then will refuse to work). But this is not an official goal that is
worked on permanently, just something we keep in mind when we are
Chuck wrote:
Following are in order of most to least significant.
Pros
. Free
. Reads and writes MS Office file formats
. Short learning curve for those coming from MS Office
That's very sad. It makes it sound like a free MS Office rip-off. No
wonder people see OOo just like that. How
Chad Smith wrote:
I wouldn't say those pros make it sound like a cheap MS rip-off, those
are the 3 most important reasons most people use OOo. Take away any
one of those, and you'll lose a large part of our user-base.
They are important, but if that's your list, it really does make it
sound
Jeff Causey wrote:
All that is true and sways the technical folks and power users, but I
rather suspect for your typical business person (who is the target of
Cor's project), you probably lost them after An zip compressed XML
file...
I don't expect a typical business person to understand the
Chad Smith wrote:
Easy task switching refers to the ability to open Calc from within Writer,
or to open Draw from within Impress. The drop-down menu in the top left
corner of the toolbars of each component of OOo lets the user open whatever
program he needs at the time. I don't think Word can
Jeff Causey wrote:
The problem I am trying to anticipate is the business
person who responds, Doesn't MSO use XML files now? What about their
new Office XML formats?
1) Doesn't MSO use XML files now?
No, not yet. But next version will.
2) What about their new Office XML formats.
They have
Chuck wrote:
In all seriousness, when was the last time you experienced corruption in
a compressed document?
About 3 times in the last 2 years. One of those times was when I rescued
a year's work for an Italian author. He was writing a book.
I've seen it happen more than 3 times with MS
Chad Smith wrote:
Microsoft Office 2003 has an XML format, (and has for 3 years). It's a
different format than the one they are planning to use in the next version
of MSO, but it is XML.
It's not the default though. And that format is dead. It won't be
supported in future versions. It wasn't
Jeff Causey wrote:
I think that could be persuasive if they are willing to put their name
to that and they have sufficient name recognition.
Jean Hollis weber. Yes, in tech writer circles her has good recognition.
Her most recent book got the highest awards in the Australia Tech
Writers
Daniel Kasak wrote:
Also, the basic editor / debugger leaves a lot to be desired. There's no
code-completion support, for example, which makes learning the language
and objects quite an uphill battle. In fact, you'd have to be pretty
keen to stick with it long enough to learn. I've done some
Enrique Castro wrote:
What about the -headless mode?
It still requires X.
By invoking OOo from commandline with -headless will be possible to run a
macro _without_ X being up and running? (but perhaps installed)
It certainly has to be installed. And there's no good reason why a
server
Enrique Castro wrote:
HTMLDoc? It is included in several linux distributions
Homepage is http://www.easysw.com/htmldoc/
There is a GPL license option
Thanks.
We've been discussing this on the ODF developers list. And although it
would be easier to convert HTML-PDF, we decided it wouldn't be
Daniel Carrera wrote:
1. Even when run headless, OOo needs X to install. Yes, even if you use
API calls. This is an *installation* requirement.
2. Even when run headless, OOo needs X to run. Even if it doesn't
actually display a GUI.
3. Even if the above changed, OOo alone is still a huge
Enrique Castro wrote:
I understand your point.
Ok.
If using OOo headless is *possible* just now on a server without X running,
then this opens a possibility to set up a document converter server just
now.
Yes.
I thought the topic was whether or not Aukyla should use OOo to manage
ODF
Hello Markus,
Thus my question: Is there a tool or a method which allows me to render ODT on
the commandline? The tool should not require graphical output since it is
meant to run on a system without an X-server (graphical engine)
OOo is not working on such a tool, but the OpenDocument
Henrik Sundberg wrote:
Perhaps I misunderstand the question completely.
I expect it to be easy to create a macro that exports a document in
PDF format.
I don't know how easy it is. The OOo API is not exactly straight
forward. But even if it's not hard, it would make OOo a dependency.
Would
Daniel Carrera wrote:
I don't know how easy it is. The OOo API is not exactly straight
forward. But even if it's not hard, it would make OOo a dependency.
Would you want a command-line tool to have a 300MB dependency? (all this
assuming that OOo doesn't require an X server if you provide
John Thompson wrote:
Sure. As has been pointed out elsewhere, the *nix vulnerability total
includes entries for all flavors of *nix, and dozens of linux
distributions. May are seen to be duplicates -- i.e. a specific
vulnerability will be listed and counted separately for Solaris, AIX,
*BSD,
Lars D. Noodén wrote:
To put a different spin on it, one we could promote, is that
OpenDocument is probably as widely supported, if not more so, if one
counts the different applications supporting it.
OpenDocument also has a larger market share tan MOOX.
Cheers,
Daniel.
--
/\/`)
Chad Smith wrote:
2a) MS Office can run on a Mac
You miss the point. You have to pay for the software regardless of
whether you have it on your computer or not. You have to pay for
machines that have *no* MS software on them. This has a huge lock-in effect.
3) These type of agreements
Chad Smith wrote:
I never denied the lock-in factor.
Okay, I'm glad you see that.
The point I was trying to make, though, is the school has a legal right to
install MSO on all their computers.
But that's not the point of discussion. This is not what makes the
agreement illegal or wrong.
Randomthots wrote:
In engineering school we were presented once with this scenario. A
couple decides to build a house. So they hire an architect who draws up
plans which cost them $1000. They also buy a book of house plans for
$100. Finally, they sit down with pencil and paper and draw their
Detlef Grittner wrote:
Am Freitag, den 16.12.2005, 13:14 + schrieb Ian Lynch:
In principle I beleive that Microsoft schools Agreement is illegal under
uropean Law and certainly the OFT has not said otherwise. It might be
worth someone in Norway starting a similar action with the Norwegian
Joerg Barfurth wrote:
Take a look at Tools-Options-Load/Save-General. There is an option
'optimize XML for size'. This option defaults to 'optimize' and iirc it
was introduced in an early effort to make the file load process faster.
I know about that option. I always turn it off because I
Joerg Barfurth wrote:
It'd be interesting to find out why they added that option. Whether it
speeds parsing, or to improve the file size on-disk, or if (as you
suggest) is to reduce the size on memmory.
Huh? What do you think I suggest?
I think that you suggest that the reduction in
Randomthots wrote:
I was speaking in general terms. Get away from ods and xml for a second
and consider two files, jpegs, for example. The bigger file will take
longer to process simply because it will take more cycles to work your
way through it.
In other words, since you can't accept that
John W. Kennedy wrote:
12/05/2005 10:49 PM69,999,781 test1.xml
12/05/2005 10:53 PM26,167,179 test1.zip
12/05/2005 11:05 PM 167,999,781 test2.xml
12/05/2005 11:09 PM28,641,918 test2.zip
Clearly, the size of the tagname is fairly unimportant.
Bingo. The tag
Andrew Brown wrote:
The website one is, I agree, difficult even to imagine, let alone to prove.
As for the other crimes, they are, as you say, anti-trust violations. They
were crimes, that should have been punished. But they are not the methods
of organised crime, which involve violence,
Andrew Brown wrote:
Rubbish. Microsoft is on top because Bill Gates was a trust fund baby,
and because he and his gang use the methods of organized crime. Nice
website you got here. It would be a shame if anything happened to it.
ON a mailing list filled with silly exaggerations, this is, I
Randomthots wrote:
I repeat, I am *not* making any ing assertion! I asked a question; a
not unreasonable question. If the size of the file is 11 times bigger
doesn't it make some sense that that would take longer to wade through?
You see, you just made an assertion :-) As for your
Randomthots wrote:
That's the part where you turn into an ass. If you call me silly, I will
call you an ass...
Calling you silly is mild, calling me an ass is rude. That's okay
though, I don't mind :)
But you didn't explain anything at all.
You didn't explain anything at all, I explained
Wesley Parish wrote:
I suspect Microsoft dragged over some of their programming gurus from arcane
C/C++-using projects to draft this standard, because it's got the feeling of
the Microsoft Standard variable-naming procedures that I've seen discussed in
various programming magazines here and
Henrik Sundberg wrote:
I'd say that smaller files are faster than bigger.
The slow down due to the size increase is infinitesimal. See below for
an example. It's like arguing that you should use small variables in
your python program because that will make the file faster. Anyone who
knows
Randomthots wrote:
1. Does Microsoft's XML standard now encompass all document types? Last
I knew they only had an XML format for Word.
Microsoft's FAQ says:
Currently, only Microsoft Office Word, Microsoft Office Excel, and
Microsoft Office PowerPoint will use Office XML Formats
In
Roger Markus wrote:
but don't attempt a Bang! one day swtich-over, it's not realistic.
I did it :-)
I had only used Windows for years (at home). When I got my first
computer (486) I put Slackware on it, no Windows. Never looked back.
Cheers,
Daniel.
--
/\/`) http://oooauthors.org
Randomthots wrote:
Would you be willing to spend
$0.01 per email? My idea behind the fee-bate was two-fold: make spam a
lot more expensive to send out and reimburse recipients and ISPs for the
A simpler way to achieve the same result without actually spending money
(in any way you'd
Mel Haun Sr wrote:
The only problem I see that makes this a bad move are the Thousands of
legitimate clubs and e-mail groups. This would hurt tham as much or more
than the spammaers. With little or no real gain. We would lose a
wondeful aspect of the Net by the thousands ( like this present
Chad Smith wrote:
According to Wyne, possible costs from the transition to the open document
format included:
No one doubts that there are costs involved. Indeed, Eric Kriss and
Peter Quinn estimated it'd cost $5M, so it's not cheap. But any decision
you make (whether OpenDocument, MSXML,
Chad Smith wrote:
According to Wyne, possible costs from the transition to the open document
format included:
You may be interested to know that Wyne is speaking as a representative
of Initiative for Software Choice, which is a Microsoft front. ISC was
created and funds this entity.
Just my 2 cents...
Laurent Godard wrote:
How can we build something that provides a neutral place that allow
funders but also major contributors (yes, and smaller ones too) that are
usually competitors to come and work together on their common goal : OOo
I think there should be a notion of
Chad Smith wrote:
It seems MS is more worried about Writely - http://www.writely.com/ - than
it is about OpenOffice.org.
That's not a slam against OOo, merely a suggestion that a online version of
OOo (like, perhaps, the one Google is developing) would be a good idea right
about now.
Indeed,
Chad Smith wrote:
I read it years ago, and it seems to me wrong about almost everything.
Oh no, Andrew! You are in for it now! You might as well have called Tux the
devil!
*runs and hides before the Petition to Remove Andrew flames get started*
I'd like to thank Andrew for his insight on
Alan Harris wrote:
Logotron School Office
http://www.logo.com/cat/view/logotron-school-office.html
Is this officially part of Open Office? Looks like a £29 rip off of Open
Office, Logotron say that they are only charging for the resources that
they've created and that they've added a more
Randomthots wrote:
On the one hand it's not set in stone in the sense that there's room
for maneuver, but within reason. Customer demand is only one factor.
We also have to consider the reality of limited resources and
technological trade-offs (e.g. bloat).
No different than any proprietary
Randomthots wrote:
This is why I question the philosophy of keeping the wall of
separation between office productivity apps and communication
tools, like browsers and e-mail clients that some on this list seem so
adamant about.
It would be stupid for OOo to try to do everything. It has to
Randomthots wrote:
It would be stupid for OOo to try to do everything. It has to make a
decision about what it's trying to be, and stick to that.
Sure. But is that decision carved in stone? Regardless of customer
demand or desire? BTW, what exactly is the it making this decision?
it ==
Hello Jeffrey,
OpenDocument is supported by OpenOffice, StarOffice, IBM Workplace,
KOffice, Abiword and we know that Corel (Word Perfect) and Gnumeric are
working towards supporting it. There are also projects to add a plugin
for MS Office to read and write OpenDocument files.
In addition,
Henrik Sundberg wrote:
Yes, I think I understand this. But I don't understand why the
doc-formats are of no concern.
Can doc-filters be GPL:ed? Why? Are they licensed with more freedom?
Microsoft is not claiming patents on any processes necessary to read or
write .doc files. They just keep
Hey,
I just finished reading David A. Wheeler's article. Yes, it's that long
:) And it's the best article on OpenDocument I've seen, by far. It's
well worth the read. Guys, you MUST READ THIS ARTICLE.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20051029212458555
All I can say is wow. It is
Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
And, as far as Andrew's statement being absurd, OOo *DOES* open MSO
stuff- and so do hundreds of other non-MS programs. If every piece of
MSO Software on earth disappeared, through some sort of mega-virus, or
miracle, the *DATA* of the files said in their ultra-secret,
cono wrote:
Is there a short reference (which of course means reliable as well) on
this?
Perhaps not short but certainly reliable and well worth the read.
Primary sources:
* Peter Galli's eWeek article:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1829728,00.asp
* Legal analysis by Marbux (retired
Andrew Brown wrote:
Secondly, and selfishly, if he goes someone else will have to take up the
position of microsoft realist, and I fear it will be me.
I don't see what's wrong with that. It's good to have a Microsoft
realist. But that's not what Chad is. I would be happy for you to
replace
1 - 100 of 457 matches
Mail list logo
