What is an "Office" Package?

users
#1

People have been poking at this from different angles based upon what
"they" want, and what "they think" LibreOffice is or should be. Putting
it bluntly, they are all incorrect. When you work in IT for a
significant length of time and reach the Architect or procurement level
there is a single definition which has existed LONG BEFORE MS OFFICE
EVER CAME OUT. In that world, and "Office" package is defined as
follows:

A standardized bundle of software, that, when installed with the base
operating system on a desktop allows a corporate worker to do at least
90% of their job.

This definition has existed since the days of DOS before we even hand
reliable networks in corporate offices. The "bundle" varies company to
company. Believe it or not, it used to include PC-TOOLS and WordPerfect
at most shops then. After it became determined that each user needed
Internet access the package requirements became:

Browser
email
word processor
Calendar tool
drawing program
Spreadsheet
database reporting tool

Some companies add presentation tool to the list, only because MS forces
that down their throat and sells them Visio for extra money.

The more highly integrated these tools are, the easier it is to bring on
new users because the keystrokes will be the same, and, they can share a
common contact database with more robust features. The KOffice project
understood this. OpenOffice explains why SUN went bankrupt. They
wanted to show off Java, fine, but they left out most of the package.
LibreOffice is in the same boat. The only one really benefiting from OO
and LO right now is IBM because they bundle their Symphony package into
Lotus Notes with full integration. The "Notes" environment provides all
of the missing "Office" pieces.

KOffice has had a fork and is now Calligra.
http://www.ask.com/wiki/Calligra_Suite http://www.calligra-suite.org/

I am somewhat shocked they haven't pulled KMail and Kalendar into the
package.

One thing is certain. As Qt continues to expand its application
framework, there will be less and less of the KDE libs needed which will
make it easier for Calligra to continue supporting all of the platforms
it supports.

#2

Interesting how you think nothing ever changes or evolves or that different
industres/departments might use the same term to mean different things. Go
poke elsewhere if it bothers you; most won't have the time to spend reading
this tripe anyway.

HTH,

Twayne`

#3

People have been poking at this from different angles based upon what
"they" want, and what "they think" LibreOffice is or should be. Putting
it bluntly, they are all incorrect. When you work in IT for a
significant length of time and reach the Architect or procurement level
there is a single definition which has existed LONG BEFORE MS OFFICE
EVER CAME OUT. In that world, and "Office" package is defined as
follows:

A standardized bundle of software, that, when installed with the base
operating system on a desktop allows a corporate worker to do at least
90% of their job.

This definition has existed since the days of DOS before we even hand
reliable networks in corporate offices. The "bundle" varies company to
company. Believe it or not, it used to include PC-TOOLS and WordPerfect
at most shops then. After it became determined that each user needed
Internet access the package requirements became: Browser email word processor
Calendar tool
drawing program
Spreadsheet
database reporting tool

Some companies add presentation tool to the list, only because MS forces
that down their throat and sells them Visio for extra money.

The more highly integrated these tools are, the easier it is to bring on
new users because the keystrokes will be the same, and, they can share a
common contact database with more robust features. The KOffice project
understood this. OpenOffice explains why SUN went bankrupt. They
wanted to show off Java, fine, but they left out most of the package.
LibreOffice is in the same boat. The only one really benefiting from OO
and LO right now is IBM because they bundle their Symphony package into
Lotus Notes with full integration. The "Notes" environment provides all
of the missing "Office" pieces.

<snip >

One thing is certain. As Qt continues to expand its application
framework, there will be less and less of the KDE libs needed which will
make it easier for Calligra to continue supporting all of the platforms
it supports.

Your logic is a bubble off plumb.

We were doing DOS based SpreadSheets (ex: VisiCalc) long before MOSAIC and the ARPANET
becoming main stream.

Browser part of an Office Suite - NO.

Office automation needs have changed. Let us not forget Today's need for digital forms
and workflow.

You wrote...

"No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol reserves."

No but they have lost their lives so you can make stupid political statements like that.

#4

Your bottom posting equates to the IQ of your logic. I was there for
Visicalc and DOS had nothing to do with it. Visicalc had its Heyday on
CPM and the Commodore Super Pet. Visicalc followed CPM into oblivion
replaced by many DOS based contenders until Lotus 123 ruled the
corporate desktop around 1986 give or take.

Office Automation needs have changed. Today, a Browser is part of the
Standard Corporate Desktop. Some day you might, though I have strong
doubts, become educated enough to actually know something about which
you type. For the past decade and a half corporate America has been
embracing SOA (Services Oriented Architecture) of which I've published
a highly regarded book on, where legacy/heritage data silos are exposed
via internal and external Web pages.

Bottom posters contribute so little to society....your remark dissing
the troops proves that your parents should have chosen abortion over
birth.

#5

First, Visicalc was a *big* hit on Apple ][.

Secondly, it would be good to tone this down. Way down. And talk about problems of mutual concern and not matters that have nothing to do with use of LibreOffice and the typical office-worker desktop computer software.

There is nothing to be accomplished here with regard to other matters.

The personal attacks are unseemly and are not likely to inspire useful responses from those who might otherwise be interested in exploring this topic with you.

- Dennis

#6

Your bottom posting equates to the IQ of your logic. I was there for

...

Bottom posters contribute so little to society....your remark dissing
the troops proves that your parents should have chosen abortion over
birth.

...

Enough already. Are there no moderators on this list that can/will put
Roland out to moderation? I can (of course) continue to use email client
filters to filter out such nonsense, but there must be some limits on
this list.

#7

Hi, Roland,

Your bottom posting equates to the IQ of your logic.

<snip>

Bottom posters contribute so little to society....

I've gotten tired of comments about which type of posting is correct. My conclusion is, there is no absolute right or wrong way, other than the rules set forth by the organization being represented, in this case, The Document Foundation.

At the end of each message, there is a link to posting guidelines for The Document Foundation. In those guidelines, there is a link to proper proper quoting. Should you take the time to read that document, you'll find this text:

"2.3 Why should I place my response below the quoted text?

Usually, the reading-flow is from left to right and from top to bottom, and people expect a chronological sequence similar to this. Especially people who are reading a lot of articles (and who therefore would qualify as the ideal person to answer your question) appreciate it if they can read at first the text to which you are referring. The quoted text is some kind of help to remember the topic, which of course will not work, if you place the quoted text below your response.

Furthermore, that's the standard. This may sound as a weak argument, but since people are not used to reading the other way around, they have no idea what you are referring to and have to go back and forth between the referenced articles, have to jump between different articles and so on. In short - reading the article becomes more and more difficult - for people who read many articles it is reason enough to skip the entire article, if the context is not obvious.

And besides: doesn't it look stupid to first get the answer and then see the question? (Aside from Jeopardy, of course.)

Furthermore, you (yes: You) save a lot of time using this way of quoting: You do not need to repeat what the person you refer to wrote, in order to show the context. You just place your comment after the text you wish to comment upon, and everybody immediately knows what you refer to. Also, you realize which text you are *not* responding to and can delete these parts.

So: using this technique you save time, your readers don't have to waste time, you save bandwidth and disk-space. Isn't it great what you can achieve by such simple means? "

(My mother would kill me for the poor punctuation and improper use of quotation marks, but I'm too tired at the moment to care. :slight_smile: )

If this link represents The Documentation Foundation's position on posting in the mailing list, then your top posting is in error.

And I must agree with Mr. Hamilton's comments about personal attacks.

#8

Unfortunately the moderators have no such function.

I agree with you, and repeat Dennis Hamilton's request that posters tone it down.

Roland, David, please call it a truce, however much you each are boiling with one last put-down.

//James
One of the moderators

#9

Roland Hughes wrote:

People have been poking at this from different angles based upon what
"they" want, and what "they think" LibreOffice is or should be. Putting
it bluntly, they are all incorrect.

At last! Thou is our real, awaited god of IT! Finally show us the Way
to the "correct" way we must "think"... - uh wtf? :slight_smile:

[...] a single definition which has existed LONG BEFORE MS OFFICE
EVER CAME OUT. In that world, and "Office" package is defined as
follows:

"That world" seems to date at least 20 years ago. Before things like
gmail existed.

A standardized bundle of software, that, when installed with the base
operating system on a desktop allows a corporate worker to do at least
90% of their job.

This now-a-days would include all of the stuff corporations use such as
in-house customised web-applications (e.g. for back-office etc), SAP,
and all sorts of non standard stuff they might need.

[...]
Browser
email
word processor
Calendar tool
drawing program
Spreadsheet
database reporting tool

Bundling all of this in the same 'suite' doesn't make much sense.

The more highly integrated these tools are, the easier it is to bring on
new users because the keystrokes will be the same, and, they can share a
common contact database with more robust features.

This seems yet to be a very loose and blurred definition of
'integration'. Keystrokes are fully customisable in modern software.
Contact databases are easily handled outside specific software (e.g.
LDAP etc.)
Not to mention the fact that what some products sell as "integration" is
actually a lock-in. That is, if you can only import an excel spreadsheet
into a Word table, the two integrate but you're locked in.

I am somewhat shocked they haven't pulled KMail and Kalendar into the
package.

Not surprising really with so many people switching to gmali these days
which, in turn, means switching away from email clients.

Lorenzo.

#10

* Ken Springer (Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:47:05 -0600)

Furthermore, you (yes: You) save a lot of time using this way of
quoting: You do not need to repeat what the person you refer to wrote,
in order to show the context. You just place your comment after the
text you wish to comment upon, and everybody immediately knows what
you refer to. Also, you realize which text you are *not* responding to
and can delete these parts.

So: using this technique you save time, your readers don't have to
waste time, you save bandwidth and disk-space. Isn't it great what you
can achieve by such simple means? "

It's a bit more complicated than that: your readers save time and you
gain comprehensibility on the expense of your own time (because it takes
more time to selectively "snip" your reply). So you're giving away
something for free.

Of course in the end (especially when you get a reply to your reply) you
might also gain some time and benefit yourself.

Thorsten

#11

I respond as I'm treated. The response I was handed came from an
individual with less than zero knowledge of corporate desktops and an
attitude to match, yet you ask for me to be moderated...that shows a lot
of class.

#12

........snip.........

Bottom posters contribute so little to society....your remark dissing
the troops proves that your parents should have chosen abortion over
birth.

....as yours obviously did.

BTW, learn to trim.

#13

The first OS on Apple II was a customized version of CP/M in ROM along
with BASIC, which was pretty standard for the day. Later they adopted
various flavors of DOS, but provided a Z/80 expansion card to run CP/M.

http://www.ask.com/wiki/Apple_II_series

#14

Lorenzo,

You are free to "think" however you wish, thank a veteran when you see
one. The fact is each corporation in the Fortunate 1000 has a "standard
desktop" and while the name brand components might change, the
functional content does not.

Much much before that. There was no email other than internal company
email. If your company was a big mainframe user, your email system was
PROFS and your "standard desktop" included a 3270 terminal emulator. If
your company was VMS based they used VMS mail and your desktop included
a VT-100 or other terminal emulator. Quaker Oats, having a large number
of both platforms wrote its own email system called, wait for it,
Oatmail. I kid you not.

Gmail and Yahoo mail are being used by INDIVIDUALS en-masse. While
"some" corporations have migrated there, most cannot. Neither Gmail nor
Yahoo, nor any other email hosting site offers you any security. There
is no such thing as "internal only" email and no possibility of
arranging for an Arthur Andersen late night disk shredding party when
the government demands all of those internal emails discussing the
addictiveness of Nicotine or the fact your shiny new drug shreds a
patient's liver in less than 20 months.

Even if you don't have nefarious intentions, from a corporate
perspective, an external email host is extremely high risk. What
happens when your engineering team finally identifies the mix needed to
successfully cast a 4-cylinder ceramic engine block which weighs less
than 15lbs and now enables a 40MPG car to get 70MPG? Do you really want
the documents passed among your production environment via email
(because it was fastest) sitting out there on the Web where anyone can
hack them? They could use those documents to file for a patent now,
without building a prototype first, completely locking you out of the
market.

Be that as it may, external email services generally have a browser
interface and a browser was listed.

Bundling all this stuff in the same suite might not make sense to you,
but it is _exactly_ how MS Office displaced better products. Without
Outlook and its calendar/contact integration, it would have never made
it on the desktop. IBM had already bundled everything except email into
their Lotus SmartSuite and despite having a full torso better word
processor and the "industry standard at the time" spreadsheet 1-2-3, MS
Office managed to push SmartSuite out of the market. They even pushed
WordPerfect out and that ruled the word processing market for over a
decade.

You may find this hard to swallow, but most email services and clients
block gmail and yahoo email by default. They do this because there is
absolute zero verification going on for those accounts and more than
half of the "$25 million from long lost relative", "Nigerian government
overbillings", and "Country xxx lottery" scam emails are coming from
those addresses.

Keystrokes are not fully customizable in most packages, nor are they
common, nor do most of the keystrokes one gets used to with an
integrated package exist. What keystroke do you hit while editing a
document to bring up your email creation client? How about a
spreadsheet? How about popping open the browser to look something up?
IBM is actually solving a lot of this in Symphony with plug-ins, but
they have a limited desire since they are designing Symphony to be
integration glue amongst the various portions of Lotus Notes.