Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2014 Archives by date, by thread · List index


I just have to ask.

Are you the same Jim Seymour who used to do battle with John Dvorak in the PC magazines?


On 3/5/2014 7:50 AM, Jim Seymour wrote:
On Wed, 5 Mar 2014 09:31:06 +0700
"Urmas" <> wrote:

"Tom Davies":

Do you think ODF stands a chance with its incompatible changes
between 1.0 and 1.1, or formulas fiasco?
Or the lack of documentation and a heap of undocumented extensions
AOO/LO uses?
Do you think .doc[x] stands a chance with newer versions of proprietary
software having the propensity to re-write existing documents into
formats incompatible with older versions [1]; gratuitously wildly
divergent user interfaces, from version-to-version, that violate all
the tenets of POLA [2], and the per-seat expense of said proprietary
software [3]?

Do you think a Certain Large Software Company's stated goal of
subverting or destroying commodity protocols [4] has been successful?

[1] In a transparent attempt to persuade customers to continue the
     vicious, and expensive, upgrade cycle.
[2] Principle Of Least Astonishment
[3] See: [1]
[4] If you've never seen them: The Halloween Documents:


To unsubscribe 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.