>> > My take.
>> >
>> > I have invented a *notional* program called "The Mail Program"
>> > which I will
>> > refer to as TMP. This *might* be an existing program that gets
>> > modified, Thunderbird for example, or a new program that gets
>> > written for the purpose.
>> > I don't much care except that Thunderbird comes close to fitting
>> > the bill already. But if there is a better candidate ...
>> >
>> > I also expect that whichever of OOo and TMP is installed *second*
>> > on a user's system will notice that the other is already there and
>> > configure itself accordingly, or at least to offer the user a
>> > choice (or series of choices) as to whether s/he wants this.
>> >
>> > I also expect that if TMP and OOo are both installed and if the
>> > user then uninstalls one of them, then the one that remains does
>> > *not* lose functionality. For example, with MS Office, if the user
>> > uninstalls Word, Outlook Express can no longer check spelling. As
>> > far as I am concerned this
>> > is just shoddy.
>> >
>> > The numbering below is for convenience only. I do *not* intend it
>> > to imply a
>> > priority ordering.
>>
>> >
>> > --
>> > Harold Fuchs
>> > London, England
>> > Please reply *only* to users@openoffice.org
>> >
>>
>> Could'nt have put it better myself Harold,That is the way to go!
>>
>>
>
> Sorry, I have to disagree.
>
> Firstly the assumption that an office suite should do everything one
> does in an office is an absolute fallacy. People might assume that's
> the way it is, but it doesn't make it right.
-There are no assumptions here-It is afact that for OOo to be fully
acceptable,there are 'benchmarks' already existing for what to expect in a
productivity suite in the marketplace- So what OOo should aspire to do is
set the pace for other productivity suites just the way Firefox took the
Web browser market by storm.Let us not bury our heads in the sand(quite
literally)assuming there is no bushfire just because our eyes cannot see
the fire (the head is in the sand remember)-Run baby run....
>
> But the assumption is itself contradictory. Why do we not hear any
> requests for integration of financial software into OO? After all
> financial controls such as accounting, invoices, payroll, etc.
> etc. are core to any business. The only reason why we don't get
> hundreds of emails asking "where is the accounting module" is that
> Microsoft doesn't do it that way.
-That now is the beauty of OOo,you can customize it to suit your
application needs as a user at your convinience via addons and extensions.
> People have been conditioned to make certain assumptions about what
> belongs and does not belong in an office suite.> Does OO have to meet
that assumption? I don't think so. We can suggest
> alternatives ways of doing things and that's fine.
-I beg to differ since currently only MS certifications are widely
acceptable by most employers-at least from my part of the world,hence the
need to upgrade OOo to certification level,Congrats to Gabriel Gurley for
a wonderful job
http://theingots.org/moodle/
>
> Next, question is this: If we believe that email should come in pretty
> forms rather than just straight text, who determines what format all
> those pretty features are going to be in? It used to be html until MS
> in its infinite wisdom decided that email composition was a word
> processing feature not an email feature and changed the default
> into .doc format rather than html. So do we let people compose .doc
> or .odf in your TMP? Should proprietary document formats even be
> considered when sending documents by email (much less composed in an
> email program)
>
> What about those silly schmucks like me that think email is best
> composed as a plain text format for most situations? What if we choose
> to use a non-Thunderbird, non-TMP program that is actually far better
> than Thunderbird (obviously I don't know what features TMP has!) at
> dealing with email.
-Please give Harold a chance to show us what TMP has in store for us
before blazing you guns at him.
>
> How would you see this working in all the different operating systems
> that OOo is produced on? It would be particularly galling to linux
> users such as myself who believe in the philosophy that an application
> should just do one thing really well and communicate well with other
> applications rather than trying to do everything in one monolithic
> world-dominating program that takes a super-computer to run and is prone
> to break by the nature of its architecture.
-Considering the virtues of Openoffice,as a user i think my priority
should be converting new users across all OS platforms so as to cut out
vendor lock in and at the same time save lots of $$ for our economies.let
us start with the basics.
>
> Why should OOo, which is trying to break the stranglehold of one
> software manufacturer, be beholden to the same philosophy and then tied
> to another organisation in this way?
It is a fact that this Software manufacturer "owns" 95% of the Market and
OOo intends to cut out a niche of the same market,any second
chances/choices?
>
> Yes let's work on better communication between, for example,
> dictionaries and email composition. But let's not fall for the bigger
> is better, tying everything together is better belief that has really
> done little more than change one set of problems for another.
>
> OOo is a brilliant office application. It can do better. The way ahead
> is actually the way that Firefox has moved forward- plug-ins and
> extensions. OOo is just starting to move down that track and i think as
> extensions develop, many of these problems will be sorted out by third
> party developers working out add-ons that will meet specific needs.
Thats correct Keith,100% correct :-)
>
> That's my take on it all.
>
> And why doesn't Ooo have a podcatcher built in? After all I use my
> office computer to download and play music- that make it an office
> function for me :-)
I think we have agreed to deal with basic office requirements first.heh heh..
Regards,
Sammy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
