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

On 10/11/2012 06:48 PM, Andreas Säger wrote:
Am 11.10.2012 20:46, webmaster-Kracked_P_P wrote:

It is nice to see that MacWorld Australia states that LibreOffice is a
"must have" app/package. I wonder if the MacWorld for the USA and Europe
would have the same statement.

Be nice to have LO listed in the "must have" category in the various
Windows magazines. We could use more Windows users, and free
advertisements towards Windows users, as we can get.

It would be nice to have a booth in a Windows version of the big
software shows that happen for Linux and Mac. But those booths may be
very expensive to "rent" for such an event.

Windows users can run MS Office easily and for little money (if any). Why should they use LibreOffice if all they want is cheap MS Office? Idealism? Masochism?

I do not know about you, but LO is free and MSO is not. Then there is the bloatedness of MSO that was giving me problems with MSO2003, now it is even worse, as I have been told. LO is a good FREE alternative to buying MSO. I know a lot of people that cannot afford to spend good money on software they use for other things.

I know of many people who choose MSO and the fee, since they did not know there was any package that they could use instead of MSO. If given a choice, they now would have never paid the MSO fee and just installed LO instead.

We need to get the word out to Windows users about how good LO is. Then there are those people who have to deal with several computers in their household or small business. How about the free community computer centers? How many of those places can afford 5, 10, 15, etc., licenses of MSO when the money is not there, or is needed to keep the computers repaired.

Then there are all of the free language spell checking dictionaries and free language packs. How much would it cost a person to have a version of MSO that is uses English, Spanish - Puerto Rico version, French, and Hebrew, menus and spelling dictionaries? I once talked to a lady from Israel that needed to deal with English, French, and Hebrew, for her tourism center she worked for. She was amazed that one package could do what she could not get MSO to do for her.

How many of LO's user could use the price to buy a full version of MSO-2010 for something else? I do not know where you will find a legal copy of MSO for no cost, so your "if any" comment is not valid. The last price I found for a version of MSO I would use was going to cost me more that it cost me for my new 23 inch monitor I needed, or the cost of the internal 2-TB drive I needed to replace a dead drive.

As a person with a fixed income, I cannot afford to pay MS for their office package when I can get LO for free. I know a lot of people that feel the same way.

LO is not "a cheap MSO". It is a free alternative to MSO and is a FOSS package. There are a lot of European governments, and other governments in the world that are no using a FOSS office package instead of MSO. Our USA federal governmental leaders are now looking at FOSS as a solution to their software needs. A mandate for "The White House" is for looking into FOSS for their software needs before looking at buying something. The need to reduce the budget is just one reason to look at packages like LO.

SO, it is not "Idealism" or "Masochism" in looking towards LO for the office package in a Windows environment. Of course, there are those who rather see MS do everything their way and make sure people pay them for all their computer needs. I do not want to give MS more control of my life and my computers as they are doing their best to force people to do, if they want to use a computer.

I an a Linux person. I still have a couple of Windows systems, but rarely use them. On those Windows systems, other than the OS, I rarely use any products that came from MS. I prefer FOSS. I prefer to go legally free software over paying for some package that I can find/use a good, or better, free one that does the same/similar job.

MS is even trying to claim that they own the rights to a huge chunk of the Linux core code to get people to pay them to use distros like Ubuntu, Linux Mint, even Red Hat, to avoid the "threat" of MS taking that business to court and doing everything to drag out the case till the small company [and larger ones as well] folds due to running out of money to pay the court costs in the fight for what is right. a few million in court costs is pocket change to MS, but not the small/medium business owners. Now who would be eager to give MS more of their money, with that type of business model/attitude towards people they want as customers? Give us money we legally have no right to, or we will take you to court and ruin your business with the legal fees and court costs defending your legal rights.

For 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.