On 07.06.2011 17:13, Danese Cooper wrote:
It's a lot of code as well. When we launched it took a day (as in 24
hours) to build. I'd imagine that situation will have improved
somewhat
Indeed, fortunately. And before the 24 hours build is quoted out of
the context that these number originates
Hello Leo,
thanks for your interesting mail. It relaxes me and consider this one closed
Cheers,
Christian
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:22 PM, Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com
wrote:
30 downloads per day or per
Dear -Rob, all,
2011/6/7 robert_w...@us.ibm.com:
[...]
We should be able to check the math from another direction. Microsoft
claims something like 400 million Office users. Studies looking at OOo
install share show approximately 10%. Pick some random number between 6
and 12 months.
Hi -Rob
2011/6/7 robert_w...@us.ibm.com:
Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 03:43:56 PM:
robert_w...@us.ibm.com:
Not surprisingly, you missed my point (or chose to ignore it). We at
Honestly, your insult does surprise me.
Apache don't think that money is evil, but we
Manfred A. Reiter ma.rei...@gmail.com wrote on 06/08/2011 10:17:02 AM:
2011/6/7 robert_w...@us.ibm.com:
[...]
We should be able to check the math from another direction. Microsoft
claims something like 400 million Office users. Studies looking at
OOo
install share show
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote:
We at Apache don't think that money is evil, but we also believe that seeing
our code in wide use is more important than money. OpenOffice.org is
important to the Developing World, some of whom will pay for convenience. I
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote:
Danese,
3) LOTS of people download OOo
Like maybe 10% of the human population of the planet. And its a big
file.
Initially we engaged Akamai, but it quickly became too expensive. Serving
up downloads of OOo
I just checked with my Brazilian friends involved with the BrOffice
project in the past years, and it seems that all problems that we've
had in the past with the OpenOffice.org trademark are now solved.
Best,
Jomar
-
To
Some of you know I was closely involved in the original open-sourcing of
StarDivision code as OpenOffice.org. I'm also an Apache Member. Thought some
of the current discussions could benefit from a tiny bit of (no axe to grind)
history.
This information is offered in the spirit of trying to
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote:
4) most customers use OOo on Windows
Last time I checked, the percentage of Windows users was still in the high
90s percentile. But it builds on the various Linux distros, as well as
MacOSX and a bunch of other
Danese,
3) LOTS of people download OOo
Like maybe 10% of the human population of the planet. And its a big file.
Initially we engaged Akamai, but it quickly became too expensive. Serving up
downloads of OOo was pretty intense. I know Apache has all that web server
download traffic and
Hi all,
2011/6/7 Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com:
Some of you know I was closely involved in the original open-sourcing of
StarDivision code as OpenOffice.org. I'm also an Apache Member. Thought
some of the current discussions could benefit from a tiny bit of (no axe to
grind) history.
On 6/7/2011 10:23 AM, Phillip Rhodes wrote:
One question about the comment above though: Are you advocating that Apache
OOo stick to source-only releases, and avoid
building and delivering binaries altogether? Or is your idea that Apache
OOo would deliver builds, but that they be Vanilla
Hi,
2011/6/7 Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com:
3) LOTS of people download OOo
Like maybe 10% of the human population of the planet. And its a big file.
Initially we engaged Akamai, but it quickly became too expensive. Serving up
downloads of OOo was pretty intense. I know Apache has
Have a look at http://marketing.openoffice.org/marketing_bouncer.html
Maybe a bit outdated and actually there is no release date in the
displayed time. The old load balancer (bouncer) usually failed totally
when a new version was announced, therefore OOo switched to Suse's
Mirrorbrain.
Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 11:13:45 AM:
3) LOTS of people download OOo
Like maybe 10% of the human population of the planet. And its a big
file.
Initially we engaged Akamai, but it quickly became too expensive.
Serving up downloads of OOo was pretty intense.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On 6/7/2011 10:23 AM, Phillip Rhodes wrote:
One question about the comment above though: Are you advocating that Apache
OOo stick to source-only releases, and avoid
building and delivering binaries altogether? Or
On 6/7/2011 11:11 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net
wrote:
Just to clarify, only source code is released by the ASF. Yes, there may
I don't believe this is true - we have to release the source, but
anything we distribute is
On 6/7/11 12:31, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/7/2011 11:11 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
Just to clarify, only source code is released by the ASF. Yes, there may
I don't believe this is true - we have to release
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:31 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On 6/7/2011 11:11 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net
wrote:
Just to clarify, only source code is released by the ASF. Yes, there may
I don't
On 06/07/2011 05:00 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
Have a look at http://marketing.openoffice.org/marketing_bouncer.html
Maybe a bit outdated and actually there is no release date in the
displayed time. The old load balancer (bouncer) usually failed totally
when a new version was announced,
just to check the . there for i18n issues, you mean about 52TB? That
translates to about 1.5PB/month, which is equivalent to the CERN LHC data
rate once it's ramped up to full luminosity and event rate.
Yes, I can imagine people's concerns.
Its 30 downloads with 180 MB each (rounded).
30 downloads per day or per month?
52TB per month is still a lot...
LieGrue,
strub
--- On Tue, 6/7/11, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: A little OOo history
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Date: Tuesday, June 7
Hi,
Am 07.06.2011 17:51, schrieb Manfred A. Reiter:
In Switzerland, there is the brand name Open Office as well. - So be
careful. ;-)
Last time I checked (~2 years ago) it was not registered anymore.
The name itself is still in use. The current BACHER EDV Beratung (in
Liechtenstein) took
:
From: Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: A little OOo history
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Date: Tuesday, June 7, 2011, 5:03 PM
just to check the . there for
i18n issues, you mean about 52TB? That
translates to about 1.5PB/month, which is equivalent
to the CERN LHC
Hi Phil,
IMHO we would have to roll vanilla builds just to make sure it still builds
when we declare a version. It used to take some iterations and tweaks per
version to get a valid build (imagine that's still true). ASF should at least
validate buildability as part of servicing the codebase,
Hi André, *,
Am 7. Juni 2011 19:32 schrieb André Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net:
Hi,
Am 07.06.2011 17:51, schrieb Manfred A. Reiter:
In Switzerland, there is the brand name Open Office as well. - So be
careful. ;-)
Last time I checked (~2 years ago) it was not registered anymore.
The
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:58 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Of course, this is not necessarily a problem for Apache. Think of it this
way. It would be perfectly possible, and actually quite easy for someone
to host the files with a scalable cloud storage provider, e.g., Amazon,
and
Hmmm. I'd have thought it a bit difficult to build a developer community for an
end user product if theres effectively no way for an end user to get it from
that community (or to get direct feedback from users)... while you want
downstream distributors as well, I'd expect the podling to want to
Just have to say...I have often been quoted saying the advent of OpenOffice.org
was a rare case of corporate greed aligning with human need. Safe to assume a
high percentage of downloaders don't have $.99. I know we're all excited by the
commercial potential of an unencumbered codebase, but
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
30 downloads per day or per month?
52TB per month is still a lot...
per day.
Look at this chart:
http://marketing.openoffice.org/marketing_bouncer.html
TL;DR: these bandwidth numbers are not actually that
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:58 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Since this is a large download, I wonder whether the quoted numbers are
impacted at all by timeouts, abandoned downloads attempts, etc. In other
words, is it counting the HTTP GET's? Or the successful downloads? That
may
Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 02:19:38 PM:
Just have to say...I have often been quoted saying the advent of
OpenOffice.org was a rare case of corporate greed aligning with
human need. Safe to assume a high percentage of downloaders don't
have $.99. I know we're all
Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote on 06/07/2011 02:40:01 PM:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:58 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Since this is a large download, I wonder whether the quoted numbers
are
impacted at all by timeouts, abandoned downloads attempts, etc. In
other
words, is it
Leo Simons wrote:
You know, there is this large and interesting community of maintainers
of mirrors of open source software.
A fair share of them are your typical beard stroking [1] uber
experienced unix [2] system administrators who maintain a local mirror
for their company / campus / ISP
It seems Apache will have a destination of value in OpenOffice.org. There
should be a way to monetize this, similar to how Mozilla monetized their
default search engine choice with Google.
That'll spawn a whole other set of debates.
For example, ASF could take bids and award a contracts to
robert_w...@us.ibm.com:
Not surprisingly, you missed my point (or chose to ignore it). We at Apache
don't think that money is evil, but we also believe that seeing our code in
wide use is more important than money. OpenOffice.org is important to the
Developing World, some of whom will pay for
Op 7-6-2011 18:31, William A. Rowe Jr. schreef:
On 6/7/2011 11:11 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
Just to clarify, only source code is released by the ASF. Yes, there may
I don't believe this is true - we have to
Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 03:43:56 PM:
robert_w...@us.ibm.com:
Not surprisingly, you missed my point (or chose to ignore it). We at
Honestly, your insult does surprise me.
Apache don't think that money is evil, but we also believe that
seeing our code in wide
On 6/7/2011 3:17 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 03:43:56 PM:
Apache don't think that money is evil, but we also believe that
seeing our code in wide use is more important than money.
OpenOffice.org is important to the Developing World,
Subject: Re: A little OOo history
Hi Phil,
IMHO we would have to roll vanilla builds just to make sure it still builds
when we declare a version. It used to take some iterations and tweaks per
version to get a valid build (imagine that's still true). ASF should at least
validate buildability
Am 07.06.2011 19:58, schrieb robert_w...@us.ibm.com:
and charge $0.99 for the download, the cost of an iPhone app. That is
over $30 million/year. Heck, I might just do that myself and retire!
No, you can not retire: I will only charge $0.49 or a part of a bitcoin ;-)
Cheers,
Andreas
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:25 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
The words not surprisingly were not necessary. Labeling these words
as an insult, while arguably technically accurate, increased rather
than reduced tension.
Guys, aren't you married? This not surprisingly simply
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:37 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On 6/7/2011 3:17 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote:
The OpenOffice.org installation packages contain code from a considerable
number of
external libraries (i.e. third party ones that are developed in their own
projects,
Op 7-6-2011 22:37, William A. Rowe Jr. schreef:
On 6/7/2011 3:17 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote:
The OpenOffice.org installation packages contain code from a considerable
number of
external libraries (i.e. third party ones that are developed in their own
projects, not
copyright Oracle and have
On Jun 7, 2011 3:01 PM, Simon Brouwer simon.o...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Op 7-6-2011 22:37, William A. Rowe Jr. schreef:
On 6/7/2011 3:17 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote:
The OpenOffice.org installation packages contain code from a
considerable number of
external libraries (i.e. third party ones that are
46 matches
Mail list logo
