Adam Moore wrote:
On 5/5/06, Louis Suarez-Potts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Really? If you believe that getting MS to adopt ODF hurts OOo why
would you wish someone the best for doing it?
To be sure, I think it's a dubious idea to advocate MS O to use
ODF, though it does help to portray them as stick in the muds, as I
have (eg, OOo leaps ahead, MSFT looks behind--and stays there).
But I was being both polite and also trying to nuance that whereas
I don't agree with the idea of OpenOffice.org advocating MSFT to
employ the ODF, I am not about to suggest what your group does.
There is an idea in marketing with brick stores called cross traffic
customers. If you ever wonder why there are two stores that sell the
same types of things next to each other there is logic behind this.
Let me show you with an example.
This simple example works well for items that may be bought at a number
of stores, but if you are comparing MSFT vs open source, and more
specifically OpenOffice.org then you need to use speciality stores in
the example.
I'm not sure of elsewhere, but here in Australia shopping centre (malls)
managers usually don't have two computer stores next door or near each
other.
At the moment, OpenOffice.org is obtained mostly by point-n-click.
Store A is a large chain and has many customers.
Store B is new doesn't have many customers, but offers lower prices.
If you are considering the specific case of MSFT adopting ODF then I
think this example is flawed. As far as ODF is concerned, OpenOffice.org
is ahead of MSFT in this regard and would be considered as Store A.
We may not have the market share which is what you are using in your
example, but we have the technology share in ODF and this has recently
been supported by being well on the way to becoming an ISO standard.
Store B opens up a store next to Store A. People are already going
to Store A, but see that there is a store B. They look at Store B
sees the prices are cheaper and they are selling pretty much the same
product and the quality is good too.
Store B will inevitably take customers from Store A.
Why would OpenOffice.org wish to encourage a competitor to adopt ODF? Or
promote a plug-in so that they can remain using their existing software ?
It is much easier for people to keep the status-quo, and I think this is
what a lot of people (especially larger organisations) will do with the
availability of a plug-in that allows them more wait and see time for
the next MSFT offering.
If we were all running from the same starting line, individual vendors
in the race who all support ODF - may the best product(s) win. But there
is no starting line, and the office products are in different stages of
their life-cycle.
While most of us understand and realise a standard is better for
developers AND consumers, any competitive advantage (in this case OOo
already uses a file format that is to become an ISO standard) is to be
used. If you are running first in the race, looking back often allows
your competitors to pip you at the finishing post.
This is what OOo could be like if MS adopts ODF. OOo gets to move
into the same area as MSO. Cross traffic becomes easier and more
people get a chance to look at our product.
Most people have never had to think of file formats so I think it is
unlikely that they will load and install something on their computer if
they already can share files and integrate with other software products.
OpenOffice.org suffers from this too, and as John often points out, the
file format is a feature, not a benefit.
Before you disregard this as another OpenDocument Fellowship ideal
remember that a lot of us started here first and still believe in
what OpenOffice can do. As much as you try to paint us as outsiders
we are still here trying to do our best for OOo.
It is not so much inside and outside, but the fact that we are here to
promote and encourage the use of OpenOffice.org, which I would think is
just one of tools in the OpenDocument Fellowship toolbox. Another is
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20060505081533186
Regards
Jacqueline
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
