Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2011-04-20 Thread Dan
At 11:49 PM -0600 4/17/2011, Tina K. wrote: Looks like Oracle has taken the highway optionŠ Good. - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. -- You received this

Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2011-04-17 Thread Tina K.
On 2010/11/23 08:32, Dan so eloquently wrote: hum. Things are getting messy. An interesting read... Anyone using the 3.3 b

Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2010-11-29 Thread Bruce Johnson
On Nov 28, 2010, at 10:51 PM, Ralph Green wrote: > On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 15:35 -0700, Bruce Johnson wrote: >> Open Office merely came along for the ride. Oracle charging for >> the Office ODF decoder may well be reversed in the future...business >> decisions are subject to change, and note this

Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2010-11-28 Thread Ralph Green
On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 15:35 -0700, Bruce Johnson wrote: > Open Office merely came along for the ride. Oracle charging for > the Office ODF decoder may well be reversed in the future...business > decisions are subject to change, and note this is the only big issue > that Oracle has changed from

Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2010-11-28 Thread Bruce Johnson
On Nov 23, 2010, at 9:58 AM, Ashgrove wrote: > What a can of worms! I personally favor the NeoOffice offshoot, and > now I wonder what consequences Oracle's greed may have in its > development... Here's what I mean by the Holy War theme...casting the issue moralistically as "Oracle's greed". Th

Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2010-11-28 Thread Ashgrove
On Nov 23, 10:32 am, Dan wrote: > hum.  Things are getting messy. > > An interesting read... > > What a can of worms! I personally favor the NeoOffice offshoot, and now I wonder what consequences Oracle's greed may have i

Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2010-11-24 Thread Bruce Johnson
On Nov 24, 2010, at 8:31 AM, Al Poulin wrote: > On Nov 23, 2:22 pm, Bruce Johnson > wrote: > >> I expect that if OpenOffice is useful or profitable for Oracle, they'll >> continue to develop and market it. I welcome any competition for Microsoft. >> It will be the Safe, Bean counter-approved

Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2010-11-24 Thread Dan
At 7:31 AM -0800 11/24/2010, Al Poulin wrote: So where would that leave NeoOffice for individual users? Good question. For now, no change as LibreOffice is too new. Both LibreOffice and NeoOffice are valid forks of OOo. Recall that NeoOffice was basically created because the OOo developers

Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2010-11-24 Thread Al Poulin
On Nov 23, 2:22 pm, Bruce Johnson wrote: > I expect that if OpenOffice is useful or profitable for Oracle, they'll > continue to develop and market it. I welcome any competition for Microsoft.   > It will be the Safe, Bean counter-approved version with per-seat licensing > and service contracts

Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2010-11-23 Thread Bruce Johnson
On Nov 23, 2010, at 8:32 AM, Dan wrote: > hum. Things are getting messy. > Maybe or just another fork in the road. > An interesting read... > > > >

Re: OpenOffice vs Oracle

2010-11-23 Thread Tina K.
On 2010/11/23 08:32, Dan so eloquently wrote: hum. Things are getting messy. Corporate America has peed in the pool yet again. Feels like Oracle wanted to play rock-paper-scissors, but has come up lizard. Couldn't have said it better myself. Not sure that I could say it at all without lau

OpenOffice vs Oracle

2010-11-23 Thread Dan
hum. Things are getting messy. An interesting read... Anyone using the 3.3 beta builds? Feels like Oracle wanted to play r