RE: [libreoffice-users] Re: Adopting LibreOffice in Corporate Environments

Hello,
I agree with all of your conclusions about the A, B, C users.  But there are also some issues with 
the C users who learned something in a specific way and do not want to learn another way, even if 
it is for the best.  As a Law student who is writing his master thesis with LibreOffice, I would 
love to see other students and teachers to switch to libreoffice.  Somes does (As I try to promote 
it), but it's far from being the majority, here in Québec, Canada.  As someone who is implicated in 
some committees, we once agreed, last december, that it was time to implement Openoffice in the law 
library's computers.  I tough that this was a great choice and a good step forwarded for the open 
community.
The next day after the implementation, lot of students complained about Openoffice, saying that it 
was not the same as what they were accustomed in the bast.  i'm sure that they did not tried it 
that much.  I did not agreed with them, butt he directors decided the next day to go back to Ms 
Office.  Even if it is for the best, it is in the human nature to resist to change. 
In my case, the threshold was when Microsoft imposed the ribbons in Office 2007 without my consent 
and when they restrained the users of Windows 7 starter to only 1 background image.  I then 
switched to Linux/Openoffice and now, LibreOffice and I never looked back.  I only use Windows and 
Office 2003 as a last resort.

Anyways, in my example, the C users were the problems.  It is very hard to convince someone who is 
comfortable with a software to switch to a new interface, even if  I do succeed in convincing some 
from time to time.  Just the other day, a friend of mine asked if I had some copies of Ms Office 
for his computer.  I told him that I don't but that I can install LibreOffice, which he never heard 
about before.  Some days later, he told me that he finds Libreoffice interring and that for the 
future, he will only use Libreoffice.
Other than that, I agree with your conclusions that focus should be first made on quality and 
documentation and then, new features.
Simon
> Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 14:47:34 -0700
> From: ms777@web.de
> To: users@global.libreoffice.org
> Subject: [libreoffice-users] Re: Adopting LibreOffice in Corporate Environments
>
> Hi,
>
> I lead a department of about 100 people in a German institution. We are on
> M$ products. From these 100 people
> - 80 to 90 use Excel for making beautiful tables, and using minimum amount
> of cell formulas. Lets call them C users.
> - about ten additionally use Excel for making medium complex charts. Lets
> call them B users.
> - maximum 5 use Excel to a large extent, including VBA programming and Pivot
> tables. Lets call them A users.
> - I guess that this structure is just the average structure in any
> engineering related enterprise.
>
> - I guess 5 of my staff do like M$ and 95 do not like M$
> - I would have the organizational power to introduce OpenOffice or
> LibreOffice in my department. About 99 of my staff would support me in
> introducing OO or LO. Most likely, they would even like me for that.
>
> Personally, I use OpenOffice since many years at home. I am active (> 1.000
> posts) in the support forums, focusing on Macro / API issues. Personally, I
> like Openoffice. 
>
> The reason I  have not yet introduced OO:
> - I want compatibility across all users. I have quite bad experience with OO
> / M$ compatibility in calc and writer. About 20% of my trials required
> manual rework, not always successful
> - So A, B, and C users have to use the same office suite, even if only the
> few A users really use most offered features
> - B and C users would be well served by OO/LO.
> - Being personally familiar with calc / UNO and Excel VBA, the required time
> to achieve a certain programming goal is on average maybe 5 times higher
> with UNO. Several Pivot things cannot be done with calc. A users would not
> at all be served well with OO/LO.
> - This is half due to the lousy documentation of UNO. Even M$ docs are much
> better. The other half is due to the lousy implementation. You can never be
> sure that what should work from the documentation actually works. I needed
> too much trial and error in OO programming.
>
> The costs of the M$ office suite is equivalent to about 5 working hours per
> year for each of my staff. I am sure that my staff would loose much more
> working time because of the compatibility and programming issues if I partly
> or completely switch to OO/LO. This is why I did not (yet) introduce OO/LO.
>
> So, if you want to win in Corporate Environment
> - understand that the A users determine the software requirements. B and C
> users have to use the same due to compatibility amongst staff
> -  focus on quality, not feature adding
> - get the programming better documented and work as documented. I am afraid
> this requires rework the code from scratch.
>
> Somewhat frustrated,
>
> ms777
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Adopting-LibreOffice-in-Corporate-Environments-tp3322040p3330983.html
> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> -- 
> For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+help@global.libreoffice.org
> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
                                          
-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted