If I may say so, based on my experience, we should not go too much into details about versions, this is about having a heterogeneous environment, something that most IT departments try to avoid at all cost, and AOO just happened to be the excuse for making the structure slimmer. In my opinion a response telling that a newer version is better, would actually catch bad press, whereas a response (if possible with some equal success stories) showing why it is not a problem to have AOO and MS-OFFICE side by side, would catch a positive interest.
We need the thumbs up from the IT department, and that is not accomplished by telling them they should have upgraded. But apart from that, I agree that we should make a coordinated response, if possible with other OO derivates. Jan. On 21 November 2012 19:35, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > On 21/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote: > >> Freiburg putting the blame for the challenges of managing >> heterogeneous IT systems solely on an old version of OpenOffice.org is >> wrong and unfair, IMHO. But it is common. >> > > Indeed this is quite common. But, if in this case we have reasons to > believe that better practices or using current/future versions of Apache > OpenOffice would yield better results, it would be excellent to prepare and > publish a coordinated response, since this news item was featured in many > online technology news sites in the last few days. > > Regards, > Andrea. >
