Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 14:26 +0100, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
Hello,

the coverage of LibreOffice 3.3 is generally good, and the span of the
coverage (the number of written articles) is excellent. 

Anyone , any journalist is entitled to his/her own opinion, but this
article is somewhat problematic. I usually read these articles and
their comments carefully. They are often good sources to understand the
"outside" perception of an OSS project or product. Yet I don't manage
to find one point that is not sheer and free criticism of LibreOffice
in this one.
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/217679/libreoffice_33_handson_with_the_free_office_suite.html
My question might be naive so bear on with me: how can we avoid this
amount of crap ? "it's really only good for Open Source Developers but
not in real life" That's not journalism that's prejudice. "I miss
SharePoint"..WTF?

Your comments are welcome (note: I might have taken the issue in a
completely wrong way). 


Hi Charles,

That would be bad if he wrote that, but I can't find those words in that
article anywhere?

//drew



-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+help@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/marketing/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.