__/ [Mark Kent] on Tuesday 01 November 2005 17:32 \__
> begin oe_protect.scr
> wd <n@xxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 07:28:09 +0000, Mark Kent wrote:
>>> begin oe_protect.scr
>>> wd <n@xxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>> On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 03:56:54 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>> I also wonder if those couple of OpenOffice developers will focus on
>>>>> some Google search bar for the office suite. I'm skeptic.
>>>> If it doesn't have the search bar it will have something. Maybe a
>>>> Google-branded version that automatically uploads files to your Gmail
>>>> storage? Or that keeps track of what you are typing and puts related
>>>> AdSense in a sidebar... just kidding (sort of)...
>>> I thought that the big plus point of open source was that people could
>>> do exactly this, ie., contribute to projects as they saw fit, assuming
>>> that they get the buy-in of the core developer(s). 'course, they could
>>> fork, but I don't think anyone sees that as a sensible route.
>>> So, does it really matter all that much what they focus on, so long
>>> as they're working towards the common goal?
>> I like OpenOffice. I don't want a GoogleOffice though. Not interested in
>> them collecting my personal information for advertising programs even if
>> it is "open source". I don't want my programs communicating with Google's
>> servers. If it becomes GoogleOffice I'll switch to Abiword. It would be
>> a good blow against Microsoft though.
> As it's all open-source, I don't think that kind of vendor lock-in
> practice would be workable - as you say, you could just skip to abiword
> or to koffice.
...Or you could get the source and create a fork that excludes all the nasty
bits (whatever aGGravates you) and bring it back to the community. That's
the beauty of Open Source software.
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Computers are useless. They only solve problems"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
6:00pm up 67 days 23:49, 5 users, load average: 0.53, 0.25, 0.12
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms