On 02/05/2014 02:38 AM, Marcello Romani wrote:
Il 03/02/2014 17:47, Kracked_P_P---webmaster ha scritto:
On 02/03/2014 08:48 AM, Marcello Romani wrote:
Il 03/02/2014 13:21, IOmazic ha scritto:
is it possible that you share this tools for windows? I will need to
it to around 450 pc, so it will be cool to have some tool to do all
IT Assistant / Technical Lead
+41 22 730 81 55
+41 79 918 34 26
View this message in context:
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
This might prove a useful starting point:
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
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
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?
Googled for a solution.
Found an interesting thread.
Thought it could be useful to the OP.
I don't get what all this whining is about.
Is there LO-specific information around, or some tutorial that doesn't
involve OO? Fine, somebody is goind to come up with it (you didn't, by
the way. Just sayin')
As an example, V Stuart Foote provided a more general solution to the
OP problem in this same thread.
I am not "whining", or hope that is not so. I am stating the fact that
TDF and LO are mature "company" and software packages. Our support
"personnel" should look for a solution withing our own web site[s] and
not go to some other "company's" software package web site[s]. Yes,
both packages has the same "roots" OOo to LO and OOo to AOO, but we are
now different packages and offer different GUI styles and options, plus
our base coding has been changed and may not be reflected in AOO's base
WE need to have all of the needed information to deploy LO, migrate to
LO, and use LO, in our own web pages, wiki or not. We should not rely
on AOO/OOo web sites for that information. It has been available since
January 2011, and we have grow up along the way to be thought as a
different package then our roots, as a fork of OOo, and different from
AOO's "fork" of OOo. We should, by now, have most of the needed
information available on our web pages and not need to tel users to go
to an AOO/OOo web page[s] to get that information. Yes, it may be the
same information, but users get confused if we keep telling them to "go
to our competion" to get the information they need. They, most likely,
not understand the FOSS community and its sharing of code, information,
and such. So we need to keep our users happy with looking into our
sites, and not others, to get the information [and help] they need with
our office suite package. I also would not expect users of AOO to
expect to go to LO's pages to get their needed information. It is not
the "normal" business support practice people expect to see form
company's support "center".
To some users, having us tell our users to go to AOO/OOo web sites for
their info, this might lead them to think/feel that LO is not a "grown
up" and fully mature office suite package while AOO is. In "year one"
articles seem to state that LO was better than OOo. Then the official
word came out that Apache acquired OOo and now there are two packages
competing to be the best package in this non-MS office suite market. I
feel we are better than AOO still, and we need to take pride in that.
This "issue" of sending our users to the other package site may lead our
business users to feel that we are not ready to be a contender in that
market, while AOO is.
We want to be proud of how well LO works for this market. We should
make every effort to make sure that our web sites have the needed
information our users want and need. It is just the right marketing and
support that most people expect from a mature company and its
product[s]. We matured during the first few months or by the end of our
first year of "operation" as a company and software provider.
I want US, the support and marketing people, to take pride in what LO
has done and will due in the future. But, it gets a little harder if we
keep sending our users to AOO/OOo for information. We really need to
give our users everything we can to have them think that our package is
the best one in the FOSS and open source office suite market, plus the
best alternative to buying/using MS Office [if available on their OSs]
for their personal and company's needs. We need to take pride in our
office suite and our support system, to the point where businesses will
take a look at "us" and agree they we are the best and we have the best
office suite for their business's wants and needs. When governments
[and their agencies], businesses [large and small], home and academic
users, see LibreOffice as their first choice, and best choice, for their
office suite needs, then we will gain more market shares [and faster].
We want these users to see our office suite as the better alternative to
buying/renting MSO to use for their needs in an office suite. Europe is
coming around, but the USA is not, to see that FOSS may be the better
option for their business needs over the proprietary office suites and
their file formats.
So, if this is "whining" then I cannot help it.
I want LO to be the best we can be. I want our users to thing we are
the best. I want potential users to look at LO and see that we are the
best. So, I want LO's marketing and support people and web site[s] to
reflect that we are the best and we take pride in being the best by
making LO better and easier to find help and support from our resources
and not going to others for that help and support. I am proud to be a
LO user and I want other to think the same about LO as I do. I want our
marketing people to have all of the help and resources we can give them
to help them with their efforts in getting businesses [and other users]
to see LO as the better option than sticking with proprietary software
and their proprietary file formats that are not the International
Standard for office file formats. ODF is that standard, while OOXML is
not [and not supported properly between MS's own versions]. We are the
best FOSS and ODF office suite on the market. We need to make sure
potential users knows that as well. To do so, we must present a mature
front for all parts of our "doing business", including our help and
support abilities. The new design of the front page of our web site
[since 4.0] makes us look better to businesses, over the previous
Yes, this work to make sure we are the one place, and only place, people
need to go to get help and support for LO. But as a mature office suite
and company, we should be able to do this. We must do this, if we are
to be a contender in this office suite market and alternative to MSO.
We are the best, so not let us do everything possible to make sure our
current and potential user know that we are the best.
So, if this is "whining", well I just want us to do everything we can to
show others that we are the best office suite out there, including MSO,
plus the other OOo forks [AOO, etc.].
creator of the LibreOffice North American Community DVD Project
[established in the spring/summer of 2011]
creator of the LibreOffice-NA.us web site.
user of LibreOffice since its first official release back in January 2011.
living in the Finger Lakes Region of New Your State, in the USA.
To unsubscribe e-mail to: email@example.com
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
RE: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice 'deployment' · V Stuart Foote
[libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice 'deployment' · Pedro
Impressum (Legal Info)
: 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