Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice 'deployment'

YES, F.O.S.S packages share things with other groups, but I really thing 
business users needs the documentation on LO pages and not OOo pages.  
These people do not understand about the sharing of information between 
"friendly competition" FOSS packages and the lack of info due to the 
package[s] being too "new" or immature to work for them.

I really would hope the first place for our users for information would 
be on a LO site or in LO docs.  So I feel we need to have the business 
information for deployment and migration in the LO wiki system and not 
ask the business users to go to our "friendly competition" for that 
info.  It just does not look well for us and those who market and 
support LO to the business users.


On 02/03/2014 12:27 PM, Tom Davies wrote:
> Hi :)
> You are not alone in that opinion but i can see it from other angles too.
>
> 1.  The way i see it is that LO and AOO are produced by 1 large
> community.  There are quite a few people who work in both or move from
> 1 to the other and sometimes back again.  The mainstream press seems
> to think we fight and argue constantly and that seems to have boosted
> coverage for both projects.  AOO aims at a slightly different niche
> from LO although both have a lot of ground in common.  It's NOT a case
> of us against them.  It's both of us and others (Caligra/KOffice,
> Google-docs, AbiWord&Gnumeric etc) acting in "co-operative
> competition" with/against each other against a dominant market-leader.
>
> 2.  I copy&pasted one page from OOo's documentation into our own wiki
> and the original author proof-read it for us.  He was more than happy
> to share the knowledge and help distribute it widely.  Since then
> others have made a better page and Hagar has updated his one in AOO so
> 'mine' has fallen quite far behind and rarely gets visited now.  I'll
> set it as a redirect to the updated one someday.
>
> 3.  I agree that business people are probably unfamiliar with the
> concept of co-operative competition and that it might even scare them
> off from using either of LO and AOO!!  Corporate-types are often timid
> when in unfamiliar terrain so it's better for us to appear to be easy
> for them to understand (imo)
>
> Regards from
> Tom :)
>
>
>
>
> On 3 February 2014 16:47, Kracked_P_P---webmaster
> <webmaster@krackedpress.com> wrote:
> > On 02/03/2014 08:48 AM, Marcello Romani wrote:
> > > Il 03/02/2014 13:21, IOmazic ha scritto:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > is it possible that you share this tools for windows? I will need to
> > > > install
> > > > it to around 450 pc, so it will be cool to have some tool to do all
> > > > modification needed.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards,
> > > > Ivan Omazic
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----
> > > > Ivan Omazic
> > > > IT Assistant / Technical Lead
> > > > iomazic@wmo.int
> > > > +41 22 730 81 55
> > > > +41 79 918 34 26
> > > > --
> > > > View this message in context:
> > > > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-deployment-tp4077035p4095225.html
> > > > Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > > This might prove a useful starting point:
> > >
> > > https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=28765&start=0
> > Why are people still sending others to the OpenOffice.org web site for
> > information about LibreOffice?
> >
> > For this posted need, I remember hearing about "deployment" of LO on a LO
> > web page.  Although LO was a fork of OOo from several years ago, it is
> > "grown" past those roots now.  If we do not have the needed documentation
> > now, we should really make it a priority to set up a web site/page to talk
> > about IT management deployment of LO, including network based.
> >
> > The current AOO/OOo web site should not be the place where people go to get
> > information about LO.  From a marketing aspect, this could lead business
> > users to think we are not the package to use, but AOO is.  That is wrong way
> > of doing "business".
> >
> > SO, just from the marketing aspect to businesses, this needs to be resolved.
> >  From the typical user, this could be an issue as well.
> >
> > I stopped using OOo when LO came out.  I do not want to have to explain to
> > users that LO's documentation site[s] is not the place to find the needed
> > information to migrate/deploy LO to their systems.
> >
> > Would you tell the UK tech advisors to not consider LO for the open source
> > option to using the mandated ODF file format requirements, but to go with
> > AOO/OOo since we do not have the needed documentation?  We would be saying
> > this if we tell them to go to the OOo web site for the deployment
> > information.
> >
> > I see too many of these postings telling users to go to the OOo site[s] for
> > the needed information or extension/template download.  Yes, there may be
> > something there that LO currently does not have, but it should not be the
> > first option.  LO needs to rely on LO's sites to give the user the help and
> > support they need.
> >
> > I do not use Nabble, but I would think that there must be a forum there
> > about business migration and deployment.  IF not, then there should be.
> >
> > Am I alone in this opinion?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@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


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@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