Re: [libreoffice-marketing] inconsistent boilerplate

Hi Cor, *,

On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 1:05 AM, Cor Nouws <oolst@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
> Marc Paré wrote (24-06-11 23:48)
>
> > I like it too, although, I do second the notion that was mentioned in
> > Tom Davies reply, that we should also mention StarOffice because, as Tom
> > so aptly states that we still have remnants of StarOffice usage in
> > "soffice", "swriter" etc.
>
> I disagree here. The OpenOffice.org community never had anything to do with
> StarOffice.

If StarOffice wouldn't have existed, then there would have been no OOo.
If StarOffice wouldn't have been bundled with my very first PC, I
probably would not be using OOo right now (SO brought me to the usenet
forums, and that way to the "news", rest is History) If StarOffice
wouldn't exist, I'm not sure whether Duden Verlag would have created
their (commerical) spell-checking extension (that also works for OOo),
similar for Stampit from Deutsche Post (Stampit as a whole will be
discontinued though)
OOo's developers from the beginning were the StarOffice developers,
OOo was a stripped down version of StarOffice. So there is history.

And as pointed out, you cannot deny that StarOffice still lives on in
the api (com.sun.star.....), StarOffice (and StarSuite in Asia) were
the commercial version of OOo by Sun.

But also I agree with Cor, this was years ago... And now you could say
that StarOffice has a strong correlation on OOo, as StarOffice is
based on OOo+something, not OOo is StarOffice-something. But yeah,
it's complicated, and no need to mention it.

ciao
Christian

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+help@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted