[vox] Reasons you might not want to use OpenOffice

[Ryan Northrup]

I think the Linux software being ported to Windows is more out of popular
demand (and unwillingness to switch operating systems) than it is by
Microsoft's direct influence.  Several Windows ports of Linux-originated
software that I've seen were explicitly stated to be third-party projects,
separate from the official project.  For example, QEMU, on the download page
on the main site, is available solely as a source tarball (see
http://wiki.qemu.org/Download for reference).  A Windows port isn't even
mentioned, at least that I can tell (the Windows binary is available at
http://www.h7.dion.ne.jp/~qemu-win/, clearly not the QEMU homepage).

In short, I'm convinced that many Windows ports are done by users hoping to
be able to use this software without worrying about a new operating system,
not by people being encouraged to do so by Microsoft.  Likewise, I'm certain
that OpenOffice was created to provide a less-expensive alternative to
Microsoft Office (which is expensive), not to prevent monopolistic
accusations against Microsoft.

P.S.  I did some research on the relationships between Coke and RC Cola, and
between Seiko and Casio.  Neither pairs are evidenced in corporate
histories.  The closest thing there was to a relationship was a merger
attempt between Coca-Cola and Dr. Pepper/Seven-Up (into which the RC Cola
brand was folded into by both their owners, Cadbury Schweppes), which was
blocked by the FTC.  Any benefit that one of these companies provided to the
other is a side effect, and likely not nearly as great of a benefit as the
maintenance of market dominance.

If I'm horribly mis-guided and incorrect, my apologies.

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Michael Cheselka <cheselka at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Most of this doesn't apply to recent versions of OpenOffice.org.
>
> As far as FS versus FOSS is concerned; they are the same thing.  FS is
> considered vague( hence clarifying with "free as in speech vs free as
> in beer") so people came up with FLOSS.  I personally believe it
> should be Freedom Software or Freeing Software to make it easy and
> clear.  Microsoft is in favor of free software because it enables them
> to escape monopoly charges.  Also, Microsoft is currently wooing free
> software developers to develop for Windows.  Many programs associated
> with Linux are available for Windows now like Cygnus, GIMP,
> OpenOffice.org, MPlayer, VLC, etc.* Many high end markets try to
> control the low end, often by creating low products to compete with
> their own high end products.  Hence, Coke introduced RC cola, Seiko
> created Casio, etc...  Microsoft benefits from free software of all
> types and would like to have more of it, not less.  The idea that
> OpenOffice.org is threatening to Microsoft and that they would like to
> stamp it out is not true.  They couldn't keep people from writing
> useful programs and giving them away if they wanted.  It's guaranteed
> as free speech.
>
> There are numerous free software licenses but in my mind I simplify
> them as either requiring you to contribute under some circumstances or
> asking for nothing, or almost nothing, in return.
> ,
> * of course the opposite has happened too, like Acroread, Skype,
> Dropbox, VMware, and many others I can't name.
>
> Regards,
> Michael Cheselka
> 650-488-4820
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 15:18, Will Marshall <marshaw3 at imail.losrios.edu>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Bill Kendrick <nbs at sonic.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:25:49AM -0700, Brian Lavender wrote:
> >>> What you say is exactly what is happening. I ask technical questions
> >>> on the list about OpenOffice and no one responds. I post an email as to
> >>> why you might not want to use OpenOffice and the FLOSS'ers (FOSS as you
> >>> call it) immediately jump to its defense.  I think we have a number of
> >>> hobbyists on this list. There should be a Lugod elite organization.
> Those
> >>> who practice it and those who get it. ;-)
> >>
> > Well, to a large degree before (and to some extent now) posting to
> > this list, I just skimmed messages, and just trashed anything without
> > immediate interest.  I doubt I'm the only person here who is
> > subscribed to so many mailing lists that fully reading everything is
> > impossible.
> >
> > There were also several messages where people stated a preference
> > using LaTeX rather than any word processor (and indeed presentation)
> > software.  Others defended using whatever worked, whether it was OO,
> > MS Word, or iWorks.  I know that depending on what I need done, I'll
> > use OO, Neo-Office, LaTeX, InDesign, Scribus, emacs, (or even vi) etc.
> > Each has its strengths and drawbacks.  As to specific technical
> > issues, I'll leave that to people who use $SPECIFIC_APP more regularly
> > and thus, are more qualified to answer.
> >
> >> I think this is why we have 'vox' (general discussion, chatter, and
> >> apparently arguments when I'm not paying attention)
> >
> > Oldest traditios on the internet: Fluff, thread-drift, and arguing :)
> >
> >> and 'vox-tech' for
> >> the "how do I do this?" questions, and (hopefully) answers.
> >>
> > Great.  Yet another list to subscribe to.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Will
> >
> > --
> > "The effect of music is so very much more powerful and penetrating
> > than is that of the other arts, for these others speak only of the
> > shadow, but music of the essence." -- Schopenhauer
> > _______________________________________________
> > vox mailing list
> > vox at lists.lugod.org
> > http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox
> >
> _______________________________________________
> vox mailing list
> vox at lists.lugod.org
> http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.lugod.org/pipermail/vox/attachments/20101028/9fbb247b/attachment.htm