![[TEST] Document Foundation Community](https://communitytest.documentfoundation.org/images/discourse-logo-sketch.png){kind=logo}
The first thing I do when I get a computer is to install Ubuntu as a dual boot system. The next thing I do in Windows is to delete the trial version of MS Office.
Hi 
I think MS have been really clever. Their .DocX and such have been pushed through as ostensibly being an accepted ISO standard even though each of their programs seems to mis-implement it in strange and different way.
So, they can say the DocX is a standardised format and then that it's the user's fault for not using the right version of MS Office in order to read this so-called standarised format in the right way.
"Third party" programs such as LibreOffice have to decide which of the DocX formats they follow. Should they implement the spec as agreed with the ISO people, in which case none of the MS programs display it properly or should they pick 2007, 2010 or 365? Whichever of the 4 choices are settled on people will then grumble that their documents produced in any of the others doesn't display properly AND because DocX is an ISO format then therefore it is the fault of LO for not following the 'standard' properly.
So, people have to stick with MS Office in order to read and produce the standardised MS format. More than that, they have to upgrade to whichever one all the people they deal with uses otherwise it wont look right. All that is the user's fault because the standard is DocX and the format used in each program is called DocX and therefore it must be the same, right?!!? (The big NO from all those that know gets ignored). So who is claiming that it is the users fault when it clearly isn't?! The users themselves blame themselves and make excuses as to why they haven't bought the 'right' version yet! They honestly don't think it's a bit strange that a so-called 'standard' is not acting the way a standard should and that they need to keep upgrading.
So, while file-compatibility is often cited as a reason to stick with MS Office that compatibility only happens if the people sharing the document are using the same version of MS Office. Also a disclaimer during installing 2010 states that it needs to be on the same OS. It says that 2010 on Xp will look different if viewed by 2010 on Win7 [on the same machine with the same printer]
The whole thing is crazy.
Add in that MS made a big fuss about trying to work with other people by including "OpenDocument Format" but used the older format rather than the 1.2 that everyone else uses and now says it shows that the ODF format is fundamentally broken so people should stick with DocX. It's only MS Office that fails to display ODF properly. Sometimes one product makes an honest mistake but that is seen as a bug and gets reported and hopefully fixed. It's not blamed on the user for not using the right product.
Amazing that people keep falling for MS.
Regards from
Tom
Hi
I tend to use Office either
1. as a generic term covering MS Office, LO, Gnome Office and all the rest (incl ones i don't know) or
2. meaning LO (unless chatting with colleagues)
If i am chatting with colleagues and they use the term it's usually to say that something is broken or weird or doesn't work properly in MSO so i make them clarify which Office they are talking about and if they say the MS one then i grimace and shrug and maybe even vocalise the "Well what do you expect? That is one of the many typical problems with MSO. You have to either put up with it (as everyone else does) or use LO. Don't worry though because no-one else will notice that mangling of your document because they are so familiar with that sort of thing from MSO"
Regards from
Tom
Hi
I just installed LibreOffice on all our own machines so that everyone in this office can easily open ODF documents. It's only when sending to outsiders that there might be an issue. In those cases i save using the older "doc" format and send a Pdf. The doc format has become such a cross-platform standard that MS are going to have to work hard to get people to stop using it. Perhaps we will see another rash of viruses attacking MS formats.
So, i don't need to encourage people to go back to MSO as e-letter does. Just pity those that do use it.
Regards from
Tom
Hi
Again that is something MS has been pretty clever about. Their new format (the one that only works on the same machine, the same OS and the same version of MSO) has the same name as something they pushed through as an ISO standard and it has all the right words in it, such as Office and Open. So even though their implementations are not open they can claim the standard is and when that standard is implemented and doesn't work they can claim it's the fault of the 3rd party.
Regards from
Tom
Hi
Hmmm, i thought that machines without Windows cost more because of some weird marketing deal with OEMs
Regards from
Tom
Not sure if this is specific enough, but take a look here:
http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2012/11/16/sgauti-digest/
There are also some articles on Sophie's blog that are not listed there. You
can find them here:
http://sophiegautier.com/blog/index.php/
Hi
I think it's better if they make suggests rather than being dictatorial otherwise people make a determined stand to go another way. Prohibition didn't work in the US and other countries have tried to suppress this or that which has continued anyway despite a government outlawing it or even grown in popularity once it becomes "naughty".
Regards from
Tom
Hi
If it's for myself i do very little to the Windows side except perhaps install Firefox and LibreOffice. I just don't use Windows if i can possibly avoid it. However if it's for a colleague or friend that's when i do loads to make it more usable.
Regards from
Tom
Hi
Errr, but i always avoid removing a Windows even if i think i'll never use it or need it. Apparently with Win8 it's going to be even more important to keep the OS that is installed by the shop if you want to be able to return the machine for them to fix hardware issues. At least if it's on the machine you can set Grub to hide itself and boot straight into Windows.
Regards from
Tom
________________________________
From: Tom Davies <tomdavies04@yahoo.co.uk>
To: Don C. Myers <donmyers@myersfarm.com>; "users@global.libreoffice.org" <users@global.libreoffice.org>
Sent: Tuesday, 20 November 2012, 18:19
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: OpenOffice to be dumped in Freiburg ?Hi
If it's for myself i do very little to the Windows side except perhaps install Firefox and LibreOffice. I just don't use Windows if i can possibly avoid it. However if it's for a colleague or friend that's when i do loads to make it more usable.
Regards from
Tom________________________________
From: Don C. Myers <donmyers@myersfarm.com>
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Tuesday, 20 November 2012, 17:02
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: OpenOffice to be dumped in Freiburg ?Don Myers wrote:
I have never purchased a copy of Windows either. I only get it when it comes on a computer. Microsoft charges computer companies less than what the public pays, but the last time I heard anything it was something like $50 per computer that the computer companies pay Microsoft for Windows. So we both do pay for it with new computer.
And lets not forget the time bombed versions of Office that's included with many new computers. People start using it, and then, after a while, find they can't work with their own documents unless they pay for Office.
The first
thing I do when I get a computer is to install Ubuntu as a dual boot system. The next thing I do in Windows is to delete the trial version of MS Office.
Hi
I think it's better if they make suggests rather than being dictatorial otherwise people make a determined stand to go another way. Prohibition didn't work in the US and other countries have tried to suppress this or that which has continued anyway despite a government outlawing it or even grown in popularity once it becomes "naughty".
Regards from
Tom
I think the best method is use of open, standard formats for all documents issued by the governments and the requirement that vendors can only submit documents using the same open, standard formats. The proprietary formats are a legacy of the 80's.
The real problem with proprietary formats is that the owners' eventually stop supporting them, leave the market, or go out of business. Then users have orphaned documents that are very difficult or impossible to read. Compare books from say 1850 to computer formats from 1990. The book is still functional today and accessible to anyone while many computer formats from 1990 are inaccessible. Anyone who used computers since the mid 80's has run into the data format problem - old unreadable files compounded with storage on obsolete media (5.25 inch floppies, etc.). I picked 1850 to highlight that data formats need long term storage and retrieval into the future not just tomorrow or next week.
In reality, probably all I am getting is an added discount for requesting a PC without windows and no license. The PC in all probability is made no different. Gennerally I can get close to the retail value of win off the price.
Steve
I think Jay expressed it very well. New features do hardly increase productivity. Quite in contrary, the new ribbon cause a tremendous slow down in productivity for several months and requires corporations to spend a lot of time and money to train people. Additionally MS will change to subscription of SW.
Both aspects together is a chance for LibO and AOO. I am looking forward to the announcement that both teams tie up, slow down the development of new features and substantially reduce the bugs.
This is very unlikely.
There are many political differences between both teams (check these two blogs:
http://www.italovignoli.org/
http://www.robweir.com/blog/ ) that will not simply go away. Wounded pride is
not the best adviser.
Technical difference between both suites deepen. In LO 4.0.0 (scheduled for
February 2013) they decided to break API backward compatibility. AOO 4.0
(scheduled for first half of 2013, I believe) is said to have completely new
UI, incorporated from IBM Lotus Symphony.
There are also licensing differences.
All sum up, contributing code to both LO and AOO is getting harder and harder.
Both suites finally part ways and they probably will never unite again.
As I read LO new features announcements, I see that most of these are made
with MSO compatibility in mind. Saying "LO devs should stop developing new
features" sounds like "LO devs should stop caring about MSO compatibility",
which is contrary to many users expectations.
Dear Miroslaw & other LibO folks,
I do absolutely not agree: I cannot see that anyone on this list should have said that "LO devs should stop developing new features"!
But at least me - repeatedly since January - and some others too have claimed that the LO devs should "stop stop developing new features until there is a certain LibO-version that is completely free of bugs and misfunctions" (and from that version on continue developing what ever).
With such a version free of bugs and any kind of problems the people in Freiburg should never have even discussed the possibility to skip OO/LibO.
No one - not in Freiburg or in other places, in companies or in private - can afford to waste time and energy playing with a program that does not work, no matter if caused by bugs or no-working functions or bad instructions.
Better then to get the works done by paying some money to MS - in the long run it is cheaper.
I think that is obvious.
regards
Pertti Rönnberg
From what I understand of the Freiburg problem is that it is a combination of many different versions of OO and MSO being used side by side and a poorly planned migration. Migrating from one package to another can be messy particularly if it is not properly planned. Often there are subtle differences that must be accounted and planned for. Plus sometimes people will completely skip any user orientation/training believing it unnecessary when even a few minutes of orientation may solve many problems. This is true of LO/MSO but of other migrations say MS SQL Server to MySQL.
Hi
Some people do work in both projects. Even if that is becoming increasingly difficult for devs to do there are a lot of other teams and a lot of other work which can be shared with only minor modifications.
Regards from
Tom
Does anybody know if the Freiburg Municipal Council or any of the political
parties represented there have responded to the Document Foundation's open
letter ? If so, I'd love to see a link (links)...
Henri
Hi
The devs team has a list of "Easy Hacks". The docs team are working at producing something similar. The marketing team have a list of specific tasks from fairly simple to quite complex&involved. I imagine the design team have something similar but you never know with artists. The website team almost certainly has a list of things they wish they had time for. Translations teams seem to have a list of the chapters with completed, work-in-progress and unclaimed ones clearly identified. Translations and docs teams always appreciate someone stepping in to proof-read. QA has a list of bug-reports that haven't been triaged yet (probably best to treat as multiple choice and avoid getting bogged down in ones you can't handle yet (return to them later)).
Each team has something but it might not be immediately obvious without joining the specific team and asking for their jobs (or whatever) list.
Regards from
Tom