Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Why not solve this issue on "stable" or not in a different thread.

How about the BoD come up with a marketing statement[s] that the local people can use to promote LO to businesses, non-profit organizations, colleges and other schools, and individual users.

We need some material we can take to these different type of users that has been professionally made and that will give the users all the facts about LO and why they should use it instead of MSO, and maybe AOO.

I would like to have a marketing package that I could hand out copies to the IT people and their bosses, so they have a professional presentation/material to help evaluate and hopefully choose LO for their organization.

I am not a marketing expert. I do not have a sales background. I bet most of the local people who want to promote LO in their areas are in the same boat as I am.

What we need is the marketing materials, including fact sheets, to be able to provide the needed information to potential users, business or other, on the advantages of using LO's free open source office package.

I would like to be able to have something beside my opinion on LO to offer these potential users. LO has been around for over a year, but there is still not good marketing resources available for us local users to promote LO to business in our area.

Please get a marketing plan and the copyable materials available to us local/regional promoters.

On 06/18/2012 07:52 AM, timofonic timofonic wrote:
Hello Tom...

Are you a developer? Why using so much analogies? Could you provide
strong facts instead? Please, this is boring and time wasting. It
seems like you only want to be polemical and grow the controversy, but
I hope to be wrong about it. If you say about stable and pre-release
versions, that's a common software releasing way and I don't see your
point here. If you want to discuss the philosophy behind the LO
development model and how to improve it, I think that's a better task
for developers.

I agree about better file format support (I still think a code sharing
alliance with other projects must be done to make things easier), code
efficiency optimization, constantly improving the code quality, more
robust code and more open about expanding the project to other needs.

What would "corporate" want? Well, certain corporations like IBM seem
to want to take the full control of the project in a proxy way (and
form a corporately controlled community over it, just like Sun tried
with OpenSolaris and OpenOffice too). Apache is quite passive in that
regard and they adopt corporate owned technologies like Java, in my
opinion (and they become some kind of low cost subcontracted
organization to manage the development). But other corporations "just"
want an a lot lower cost software that meets all their needs (just as
the Linux kernel is for tons of them) and that's the interesting ones
to join forces with.

Look at Linux Foundation, they managed the equilibrium and still the
kernel is one of the most used pieces of code as basis for tons of
devices from embedded to clusters. Even Linus these days is becoming
grumpy about the years of damaging Nvidia attitude (no hardware
programming documentation, tons of binary blobs and not just related
to their graphics chips...), despite his non-correct political
attitude quite common from the rebel way of the hacker philosophy.

About friendly corporations, I think this must be formalized in a
dynamical and pragmatic way but also with a good set of lawyers. They
must be formal members of the community in a similar way that Linux
Foundation does with corps :)


On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Tom Davies<>  wrote:
Hi :)
The way i see it is that LO always has 2 products.

Lets take LO's equivalent of fine red wine in a market where everyone else is restricted to only being able 
to produce beer.  LOs strategy is to claim that it's red wine is "low alcohol" (because wine is 
about 12% whereas whiskey is far higher).  Meanwhile LO is also offering freshly squeezed fruit juice but it 
never mentions about that until you dig around the back of the shop.

Regards from
Tom :)

--- On Mon, 18/6/12, Cor Nouws<>  wrote:

From: Cor Nouws<>
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Latest newsletter from SourceForge re: AOO
Date: Monday, 18 June, 2012, 11:21


My customers hate (some) bugs as much as I and we all do. Still, they don't dump computers :-)

My customers want better compatibility with .docx, xlsx, and pptx.
They want a faster Calc, a Base that works, import of Visio, and so on.
They want a office suite that is preparing itself for the future and faster solving of bugs.
Guess what they want ..

It seems as if Tom doesn't know well enough what he is talking about.
Which if course is a pity when he is taking such strong positions on the marketing list.

Tom Davies wrote (18-06-12 11:59)

--  - Cor

-- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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.