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: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.htmlSent 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=0Why 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?Googled for a solution. Found an interesting thread. Thought it could be useful to the OP. Posted it. 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 coding.
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 design[s].
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.].
Tim Lungstromcreator 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: 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