Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 29th Mar 2008 23:02 UTC
Features, Office Version 2.4 of the OpenOffice productivity suite was released on Thursday, boasting enhancements to all its core components. Possibly the most significant alteration in the new version of the free suite is in the description of file types. The 'OpenDocument' description has been replaced by 'ODF', which stands for 'OpenDocument Format' and is becoming a well-known acronym thanks to rivalry with Microsoft's controversial OOXML format.
Thread beginning with comment 307245
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: New features
by sappyvcv on Sun 30th Mar 2008 16:51 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: New features"
sappyvcv
Member since:
2005-07-06

"Of course, what you are really going for, in this thread, and with limited success, is to paint me and my client as tyrannical, pointy haired dictators running a sweatshop right here in the American mid-west."

Nope, only that you and some others are slightly overzealous about getting people to use software X over software Y when they want to use Y, and them using Y over X doesn't intefere with them doing their job effectively. But I guess unless I run a business, I'm not allowed to have an opinion.

Now what if we switched this around? Myself, I prefer using Enterprise Architect over Microsoft Visio when I'm writing specifications. My company already had a license for Microsoft Office for me. It wouldn't be "cost effective" for them to purchase a license for EA. But they did. If I worked for the company you do, would you have approved a license? I can certainly get the job done with Visio as well.

Edited 2008-03-30 16:57 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: New features
by sbergman27 on Sun 30th Mar 2008 18:07 in reply to "RE[8]: New features"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Nope, only that you and some others are slightly overzealous about getting people to use software X...

I can't speak for "others", but only for myself. But as a professional consultant, I have no choice but to be a pragmatist, despite my personal leanings. I have to be able to demonstrate that my solutions are effective or I lose my credibility. And credibility, once lost, is very hard to win back. So I have to be careful. And I have to balance my responsibilities. And I have to be cognizant of short vs long term tradeoffs involved in my recommendations.

The way I do that is to be willing to hone my skills, and put in extra effort to make what I feel is the best long term decision, which is usually to go with OSS, work and work well, in the short term, as well. Very often, my extra efforts, often unpaid, are successful. Inevitably, there comes a time that the challenge proves to exceed my capabilities. And when I find myself in such a position, I *must* acknowledge it and do what is best. If I am truly cramming an OSS round peg into a business square hole, the the decision, distasteful as I might find it, is actually simple. Forcing an OSS solution that just isn't adequate is very poor advocacy. This is why I always keep the latest version of Crossover Office on my desktop servers. Some of the employees legitimately require IE. And, as a good consultant and OSS advocate, I must heed that. So far, fortunately, we have not had a legitimate need for MSO. The employee in question is very obviously blowing smoke. And as a good consultant I must heed that fact, as well. (Hence the tone of my original post, to which you seem to have taken so much offense.)

Sometimes I get myself in hot water with certain members of the FOSS community by showing my pragmatic side in public. But in my 20 year experience as a consultant, I have simply found no other way to do my job and also sleep well at night.

I hope that this helps to clarify my position.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: New features
by apoclypse on Sun 30th Mar 2008 20:29 in reply to "RE[8]: New features"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

I think your opinion is valid but impractical. I have yet to work in any business in the IT field where a user has a choice as to what software they use. Everythign is standardized where I work, from software to hardware. Right now we have all standardized on office 2003, some users have asked for 2007 and the answer is usually a hell no, unless they are program officers (big dogs) and they usually get a warning that they may not get support from us on that particular version due to our policy. That is the case if they use their own personal equipment and software.

We have been pushing OO.o to users through citrix (which makes it even slower) and have adopted pidgin as an IM client and that also is getting pushed through our login scripts. Users have no choice or say in the matter. They can install aim if they want but wil only get support for pidgin because its what we want them to use. You may think its unfair but this is done avoid arguments with users and to avoid costs on software we have no business supporting in the first place. We haven't even pushed vista yet, any machine we get gets our company image and that is using xp. Only 2 or 3 users are currently using vista as a test case and they are tech savvy users who know what they are doing and this includes the IT staff.

Reply Parent Score: 3