| |||||||||||||
It is on!It is on!Posted Jul 15, 2011 0:32 UTC (Fri) by AndreE (subscriber, #60148)In reply to: It is on! by kragilkragil2 Parent article: IBM to contribute Symphony to OpenOffice.org
I might be wrong, but I was under the impression that Lotus Symphony was actually quite rubbish. At least those were the reviews that went out when it was launched.
This may have changed, but for OpenOffice to benefit from this, then Lotus Symphony must actually include some features and functionality that is considered quite desirable.
(Log in to post comments)
It is on! Posted Jul 15, 2011 5:28 UTC (Fri) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]
Even if there is the apache license is compatible with the LO licenses. That means LO can simply take the code they like and plunk it into LO. This has always been the problem with the fork for the OO side, the code can go only one way and that's into LO, LO's improvements can't go back to Apache OO.
Either way I doubt there is much to worry about. I just don't see the momentum in OO. IBM is going to throw over the fence some code but they aren't committing to keep contributing.
It is on! Posted Jul 16, 2011 18:31 UTC (Sat) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
Which Symphony?
First of all, *most* office suites were rubbished in the late 90s / early 2000s because they weren't Microsoft Office. And if you're talking Symphony of the early 90s or the 80s, surely it evolved a lot after that?
Secondly, IBM Lotus Symphony is not Lotus Symphony. I don't know the details, but from what I can make out, IBM killed the original Lotus Symphony, and replaced it with their own version of OOwriter called Lotus Symphony.
Cheers,
|
|||||||||||||