| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
On another issueOn another issuePosted Nov 23, 2005 15:29 UTC (Wed) by Baylink (subscriber, #755)Parent article: Open document formats and the path to world domination
> After all, if it did support a completely open file format, the barrier to switching to other office suites would disappear.
This one, alas, isn't as clear-cut.
Ask anyone who runs a temporary staffing agency: client's explicitly request people who are familiar with specific apps. OOo is not likely on that list yet. It's not *only* about file formats...
(Log in to post comments)
On another issue Posted Nov 23, 2005 18:42 UTC (Wed) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] But this is driven largely by the closed nature of the file formats. If you need someone to prepare Word documents of a particular version, and you have a copy of that version of Word for them to use, you pretty much need to get someone who knows how to use that version of Word to get the job done. If you need someone to prepare ODF documents, you can get someone who knows how to use the software you have (Word with a plugin, maybe), or someone who can do the job with some software they provide themselves.
Of course, they could continue to require the knowledge of a particular program, but if they've switched to ODF for the purpose of not needing to care what programs people use (either locally or in preparing documents they'll receive), that's less likely.
On another issue Posted Nov 25, 2005 3:49 UTC (Fri) by gdt (subscriber, #6284) [Link] As an interesting data point the office temps we've used recently preferred to bring along their own laptops rather than face the challenges of the corporate desktop. If the falling price of laptops makes that catch on elsewhere then it makes the file format, rather than the software used to create the file, the point of agreement between the employer and temp.
Sure... Posted Nov 25, 2005 13:31 UTC (Fri) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link] Cause I want random induhviduals not under my direct administrative control putting random computers on *my* internal network.
And there's *still* a gamble there, even if we posit a temp who's running OOo, since I don't *think* it quite knows Office 2k3 format yet.
On another issue Posted Nov 23, 2005 18:49 UTC (Wed) by grouch (guest, #27289) [Link] Ask an IT department bean-counter if they'd like to save a few dumptruck loads of license fees per year as well as a few more such loads for license audits and they are likely to explain the costs of converting existing documents.
File formats are the cage.
On another issue Posted Nov 25, 2005 5:29 UTC (Fri) by tjhanson (guest, #357) [Link] It would be a significant crack in the dike cement. Free replacements would likely show up at the margins, with workers who don't need the features of a full blown Office. Small, struggling businesses would begin using it. Gradually the mind share starts to support it.
Oh, certainly Posted Nov 25, 2005 13:51 UTC (Fri) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link] I'm not saying that it's useless, merely that the proposition isn't quite as clear-cut as it was originally presented as.
|
|
||||||||||||