Ian Lynch wrote:
If one app is going to be less good at file compatibility better for it
to be Impress than Writer.
Agreed.
It depends who the audience is. Marketing is a selective communication
with specific customers in specific market sectors. While ODF might be
of no interest to some
Alexandro Colorado wrote:
Most of the things we already know, thats why we want to push the
OpenDocument format as an open standard to stop playing catch up.
If you want to play catch up forever you will end up devoting most of
your developers to be back-engineering forever. Instead we shou
On 2005-11-13, Randomthots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ian Lynch wrote:
>> If there are web browser
>> viewers, editors, utilities galore in the next couple of years it will
>> make a compelling case for adoption of OOo too.
> Which is when marketing OOo as the ODF "reference app" will be really
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 19:51:43 -, Randomthots
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I understand that. But the OOo homepage trumpets ODF like the second
coming of Christ. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I would think the web
presence is mostly targeted at the home and smb markets. The big-biz and
On 11/13/05, Randomthots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I agree with all that. I just think that promoting OOo and promoting ODF
> are interlocking but still separate propositions. *At this point*
> promoting OOo on the basis of ODF is non-starter. But the more OOo is
> adopted, the easier it wil
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 13:51 -0600, Randomthots wrote:
> I understand that. But the OOo homepage trumpets ODF like the second
> coming of Christ. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I would think the web
> presence is mostly targeted at the home and smb markets.
Not sure about that really. I should th
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 13:54 -0600, Randomthots wrote:
> I agree with all that. I just think that promoting OOo and promoting ODF
> are interlocking but still separate propositions.
That is why OpenDocument Fellowship exists as a separate entity.
> *At this point*
> promoting OOo on the basis