Hi :) I disagree. When people have decent software that does adequately support the ODF format people will find that it is preferable because it's better imo. MS Office had a great excuse for using the older ODF 1.0 but ODF 1.2 has been officially released now so they will have to find some excuse for stuffing things up. Regards from Tom :)
--- On Tue, 8/5/12, e-letter <inp...@gmail.com> wrote: From: e-letter <inp...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Email more than once .doc file To: users@global.libreoffice.org Date: Tuesday, 8 May, 2012, 14:25 > > Jiri: Both of these people work for professional organizations where the > organizations have settled on the .docx format as their default document > format. For one of these people, installing LibreOffice at his > university is simply not an option for now. The other person works for a > large music organization that has also settled on MSO although she is > advocating LibreOffice with some sort of success, but not yet endorsed > by the organization. > The fact that these organisation chose to use m$ in instead of odf is of their own right to do. Making their lives easier using m$ is of _no benefit_ to LO. > Tom: Both of these people are already exporting their files in .doc or > .pdf files. The problem with this is that they now have a ton of files > that have been doubled; they are both at the admin levels of their > organizations and have very active roles in committees. > Nothing to do with LO. Are these people using LO with authorisation from those who decided to use m$ by default? The duplication of documents in multiple formats is entirely the responsibility of the organisation; nothing to do with LO. > Being able to "Send" more than one file at a time would eliminate > completely the need to export physical files to hardrives. > They should have thought about this before deciding upon m$! > I was thinking if LibreOffice were able to do this, then people would > grow to depend on the ODF file formats more and view any other file > format as being less important. The perception to users would be that > ODF formats are the "defacto" format and other are really "sub-formats" > to the defacto OFD formats. > Total nonsense. The only result would be: "fantastic, we can continue to use LO as a m$ clone and increase the proliferation of m$ file formats" Even m$ would find that scenario (m$ documents being created by LO) preferable to an increase in quantities of odf documents being distributed. Lack of strategic analysis is preventing growth in the use of odf... -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
