There was an OpenERP meetup in Montreal recently. I can get in touch with the local people here.
Immanuel On Dec 29, 2012 5:12 PM, "Charles-H. Schulz" < [email protected]> wrote: > Anybody knows someone at openerp? Otherwise I'l lcontact them. > > Best, > Charles. > > > Italo Vignoli <[email protected]> a écrit : > > >Sorry for top posting, but I think that the idea of creating a wiki > >page > >where we can brainstorm about the selling points for Windows (as > >Microsoft document is focused on Windows, which is their cash cow) is > >very good. All the points that have been raised so far are extremely > >good, and I think that we should pick them and paste in a starting > >document. > > > >I am currently working at the final version of the migration and > >training protocol for certification, and I do not have the time for > >creating this wiki page for a few days. Anyone could create the page > >though, in the Marketing area of TDF wiki: > > > >https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing > > > >I would call the page "Selling Point vs MS Office", because this is the > >summary of the contents. > > > >Marc can definitely help in creating the page, if someone has problems > >with the wiki. > > > >I am definitely interested in helping with the contents, once I will > >have finished working on the certification protocols. > > > >On 12/29/12 10:07 PM, Jay Lozier wrote: > >> On 12/29/2012 01:12 PM, Immanuel Giulea wrote: > >>> Well to be fair, I raised three points that seemed to me were the > >>> arguments of MS feature-wise. > >>> > >>> Other arguments are listed, and my suggestion was to create a new > >wiki > >>> page where we could compare (side-by-side) LO and MSO. > >>> > >>> Summary of arguments from MS against LO > >>> > >>> *Arguments about $$* > >>> > >>> * Total costs: Business impact; like software issues, integration, > >>> incompatibility, run-time errors, downtime, unreliable support > >and > >>> security vulnerability. > >>> > >> Unreliable support? MS normally offers very limited direct user > >support > >> - 1 or 2 incidents max if I remember correctly. Most user support > >will > >> be from a help desk (internal or external). If it is from MS it is > >via > >> separate contract or additional costs to the licensing agreement. > >> Security is a joke because MS is notorious for shipping insecure > >> products. Run-time errors? What about BSOD for Windows? Integration > >and > >> incompatibility are very nebulous - do they mean file formats or > >being > >> able to access the program from another? The first is really MSO not > >> following standards and the later is a programming issue. > >>> > >>> * Total benefit: Such as reliable supports, updates, > >accessibility, > >>> and security. > >>> > >>> * Integration cost: The cost associated when you decide to use a > >>> different software platform. > >>> > >> Different software platform - do they mean OS? If so, LO does this > >> better even if the OS/distro is not officially support because the > >> source code is available and can be compiled by someone for a very > >> specific platform. With MSO, if a version is not provide you have no > >> options (Linux version available). > >>> > >>> * Management: Can it be easily managed? Large companies tend to > >have > >>> this issue because they don't have a unified system. > >>> > >> This is truly a management problem, is the management competent? > >>> > >>> * Deployment costs: Can it handle corporate size business > >>> productivity? In addition to the compromise or extra benefits of > >>> software alternatives. > >>> > >> Software suitability should be determined for each case. There is no > >> blanket answer for this. MS is implying that MSO is the only answer > >for > >> businesses when in fact it is often not. Often the issue is that a > >> company has an installed base of VB macros, etc for MSO that would > >need > >> porting to LO > >>> > >>> * OpenOffice/LibreOffice does not provide the same depth of > >>> functionality as Microsoft Office as a result do not meet the > >>> needs of some end users. This will force your organization to > >>> manage multiple software suites potentially increasing IT costs. > >>> > >> No software meets the needs of all users because all are > >design/feature > >> compromises. > >>> > >>> * When running a mixed software environment you are also running > >the > >>> risk of interoperability issues which could further increase IT > >>> and helpdesk costs, inhibit productivity, and generate end users > >>> frustration. > >>> > >> Most companies standardize on the software tools as much as possible > >to > >> reduce these costs. However no single program/suite will cover all > >user > >> needs so to some degree there will be a mixed software environment. > >>> > >>> * Additional factors that could create higher costs include > >>> integration with your existing systems and applications like ERP > >>> and content management systems and software updates. > >>> > >> This is more of issue with the ERP and CMS software not LO per se. > >They > >> can support LO if required by contract or if the vendor desires. > >>> > >>> * *LibreOffice*/OpenOffice *does not allow for incremental > >software > >>> updates. *Instead it requires a complete uninstall and reinstall > >>> every time you need to update the software. > >>> > >> How difficult are Windows/Mac updates? I use Linux. I am not sure > >this > >> is a major issue if the updates are handle uninstall/reinstall > >without > >> user intervention. > >> > >> The cost argument is mostly bogus because it ignores the > >> purchase/licensing costs for MSO while LO/AOO are free for unlimited > >> installations. > >>> > >>> > >>> *Arguments more about features* > >>> > >>> * Office drives increasing business value through innovations that > >>> span basic functionality, like copy and paste, to > >>> advanced features like business intelligence. > >>> > >> How? Most of the "business intelligence" I am aware of is located in > >> databases outside of MSO/LO thus the issue is interfacing > >(Base/Access) > >> or importing the data (Calc/Excel). Importing data is fairly easy > >with > >> Calc and Base can interface with many relational database backends if > >> desired. > >>> > >>> * LibreOffice/OpenOffice does not deliver a complete productivity > >>> suite. Critical components like email and calendaring are > >absent, > >>> not to mention equivalent software to Publisher, OneNote, > >Business > >>> Contact Manager and SharePoint Workspace. > >>> > >> If they are so valuable why do some versions of MSO not include them? > >> Also, can the feature be done within LO > >> (Publisher/OneNote/BusinessContactManager) using the existing > >components? > >>> > >>> * LibreOffice / OpenOffice also lack some commonly used > >components, > >>> for instance; they do not ship with commonly used functionality > >>> like user friendly ribbons, clipart, SmartArt or Pivot Charts. > >>> > >> Ribbons user friendly? Many find them poorly designed. > >Clipart/SmartArt > >> IMHO nice but not very necessary. Pivot Charts I am not sure about. > >>> > >>> * Organizations may have to fill these application gaps with > >product > >>> extensions, additional software or customizations adding to cost > >>> and complexity. > >>> > >>> > >> And they do not with MSO? The main issue for LO is that is a large > >> number of third part extensions available for MSO to extend > >> functionality that would need to be created if the functionality does > >> not already exist in LO. > >> > >>> *Arguments about collaboration* > >>> > >>> * Collaboration technology should facilitate ease of sharing, and > >>> trust in the fidelity of information shared. To facilitate > >>> collaboration, Office 2010 has many new features including > >>> co-authoring, integration with the Microsoft Unified > >>> Communications technologies in addition to the new online > >>> companion applications, the Office Web Applications. > >>> > >> IMHO, MS is trying to slowly convert everyone to renting MSO by using > >> Office Web Applications. This renting is more lucrative in the long > >run; > >> lots of "small" monthly fees forever versus a one time purchase. When > >> the true costs are analyzed many may reject this model. For many the > >> major reason to upgrade from MSO XP to MSO 2013 is because XP does > >not > >> support the MSOX file format. There are no new features they need > >beyond > >> what XP already has they need. MS dropping support may not be a real > >> issue for some, they are occasional users and security issues may not > >be > >> that critical. > >> > >> Pushing a limited use feature for many - collaboration - as the > >reason > >> for renting MSO online as the reason for this. The are very few truly > >> new features most users want in LO or MSO that would get them excited > >> about a new release. For MS this means most people would then buy the > >> new version for the new feature. This means for any office suite many > >> users will delay upgrading to a newer version for sometime just to > >avoid > >> the cost/aggravation of updating. I suspect MS is seeing this trend > >with > >> business users and is trying find some other way to separate them > >from > >> their money. Thus the push for online collaboration. I can remember > >when > >> spell checkers were added and people really wanted the new version > >for > >> the spell checking. > >>> > >>> * People using OpenOffice/LibreOffice are limited to using > >>> disparate email and document repositories to share and > >>> edit documents one person at a time. To take advantage of > >advanced > >>> collaboration technologies will require additional software and > >>> possibly more customization. In addition to sharing documents, > >>> information formatting integrity is critical. > >>> > >> There are no external users? As soon as the an external user is added > >> this argument falls apart, they must access the document outside the > >> original organizations IT domain. Also, if the all the users are > >> internal why can they not access the documents on the internal > >server? > >> This would seem to much simpler than the convoluted methods MS is > >> talking about. > >>> > >>> * LibreOfice/OpenOffice can read and output many file types, > >however > >>> vital information like formatting structures, calculations, > >>> layout, and macros may not be preserved when sharing with non > >>> OpenOffice/LibreOffice users. > >>> > >> What about MSO file type/version incompatibilities. Macros are a > >problem > >> but they are also a serious security risk. Document layout is often > >> determined by system default settings and the printer settings. I > >have > >> seen different printers re-paginate a document because of mechanical > >> issues when printing from the same computer. > >>> > >>> * Whether you have a mixed group of users or plan to share > >documents > >>> with people outside of your organization you may not be able to > >>> trust that people receive the document with the intended content > >>> and formatting. > >>> > >> See above, also what do the external users need to have; are they > >> involved in editing the document? LO offers better PDF exporting than > >> MSO and often this is a better format for sharing with external > >users. > >>> > >>> *Security/Sensitive information* > >>> > >>> * OpenOffice/LibreOffice are limited to only password protecting > >>> files. Although password protected documents can be effective, > >>> they do not ensure security and may cause additional complexity. > >>> > >> Older versions of MSO used a weak password protection scheme. > >Password > >> protection is useful in some situations but it is limited to the > >> strength of the password. The "complexity" of password protection > >must > >> be judged in context of the security needs for the specific document > >and > >> the overall system security. Also, user level protection schemes > >beyond > >> passwords are dubious, IMHO, because most users do not really > >understand > >> the security methods/models to properly use them. > >>> > >>> * Advantage and also weakness of OpenOffice/LibreOffice for being > >an > >>> open source software means that many users have the ability > >>> to alter the state of the software by integrating their > >>> own design, which could lead to security vulnerability issue. > >>> > >> Truly, how many people actually do this? I think in practical terms > >this > >> more a theoretical issue than a practical one. Most users and > >> organizations (vast majority?) are not going to modify the code. > >Also, > >> this could be a benefit for a large corporation to customize there > >> office suite to better suit their needs. I think IBM did this OO with > >> Symphony. > >>> > >>> * Microsoft Office provides a robust set of features for securing > >>> documents that reduces the risk and cumbersomeness of password > >>> only protection. > >>> > >> MS security implementations have historically been poor so what > >robust > >> features? Also, are these features protecting against MS stupidities > >> which LO does not support anyway. > >>> > >>> * Information Rights Management (IRM) allows individuals and > >>> administrators to specify permissions to documents, workbooks, > >and > >>> presentations. This helps prevent sensitive information from > >being > >>> printed, forwarded, or copied by unauthorized people. After > >>> permission for a file has been restricted using IRM, the access > >>> and usage restrictions are enforced no matter where the > >>> information is. > >>> > >> I doubt most users would correctly use this feature, they are not > >system > >> administrators. This sounds good but can the system be bypassed by > >> anyone logging in with valid user credentials or by some with valid > >> credentials modifying the permissions? > >>> > >>> *Arguments about "Cloud"* > >>> > >>> * OpenOffice/LibreOffice does not provide any other deployment > >>> option besides the desktop. > >>> > >> IMHO, cloud deployment will be secondary for most users, most of the > >> time. The primary issue for users is having the tools available and > >> access to the files. If the user has access to both the tools (local) > >> and the files (external) this issue is moot. See above comment about > >> renting software. > >>> > >>> * Microsoft provides a seamless experience across the PC, phone, > >>> and browser. > >>> > >> Really, Linux users can not use MSO and LO can be compiled/ported to > >> other devices because the code is available Compiling/porting is not > >> trivial. MSO is limited to what MS supports (or not supports) > >>> > >>> *Future-looking arguments* > >>> > >>> * OpenOffice/LibreOffice may be limited in providing the next > >>> generation of productivity, cloud computing, lacking the > >ecosystem > >>> of enabling server and consumer collaboration technologies > >>> likeSharePoint and SkyDrive. > >>> > >> Dropbox? UbuntuOne? AmazonWeb? There are several services for sharing > >> files between remote users. The only issue is which to chose. Also, > >IMHO > >> MS is pushing cloud centric models to drive users to a rental model > >for > >> MSO. If the data is in the cloud why not have the have MSO in the > >cloud > >> and charge a monthly rental fee to access both? MS probably hopes to > >> make more money this way. > >> > >> I have one rule: If sales/marketing is pushing a "solution" I ask, > >"Does > >> the solution really benefit me or does it benefit the vendor?" For > >most > >> cloud models, I do not see any benefit for renting software for me > >but > >> considerable benefit for the vendor. I see some benefit for sharing > >> documents between devices and others and this can be done > >independently > >> of any software. > >>> > >>> * Choosing Microsoft Office will help ensure that you can take > >>> advantage of the next generation of productivity software. > >>> > >> Pure marketing hype. Also, how many new features do users need? IMHO, > >> most users would like improved implementations of existing features > >not > >> many truly new features. Make the software better at what it does and > >> make useful but obscure features more accessible/visible. For example > >I > >> like any improvements for importing and exporting MSOX formats since > >I > >> receive them periodically. But this is not a new feature but > >improvement > >> to an existing feature. > >>> > >>> > >>> Is it possible to add this to a wiki or something please. We can > >work > >>> on it collaboratively :) > >> +1 - see inline comments > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> > >>> Immanuel > >> > >> Summary: > >> > >> Most of MS' talking points are about collaboration with others. LO > >> offers tools for collaboration with others so this is not the real > >> issue. The issue to MS is that LO does not offer a cloud version but > >> this ignores what really is needed for collaboration. What is really > >> needed is the ability to share files with other users and numerous > >> methods services are available to do this. Where the LO is installed > >is > >> not critical along as users have access to LO. IMHO, MS is trying to > >> push a software rental model using the cloud versus a software > >purchase > >> model. The rental model is likely to make more money for MS over the > >> life of the product. Assuming an annual rental of about $300 > >($25/month) > >> one can easily spend more over time than if they purchased. LO and > >AOO > >> use the purchase model, the user installs locally but since LO and > >AOO > >> are both free the user has unlimited downloads/installs to any > >device. > >> > >> Another point is that MS is saying they support a wide variety of > >> devices which is not strictly true, they do not support many OS'. LO > >and > >> AOO have many official versions available for many devices but > >because > >> the source code is available users are able to compile/port either to > >> any device. One can argue LO and AOO can potentially support all > >devices > >> on the market while MS only supports selected devices/OS' with > >> unsupported users having no options. > >> > >> IMHO the MS security features are probably more dangerous because > >they > >> allow untrained users to make important security decisions. While > >there > >> are potential benefits the problem is that most users are well versed > >in > >> security issues. Thus they are liable to make serious mistakes when > >> implementing anything beyond password protection of a document. Also, > >MS > >> has a long, dismal history with security issues so why should one > >assume > >> they implemented best practices. > >> > >> Most direct feature comparisons are disingenuous because LO/AOO often > >> implement the same feature/functionality differently. Some cases > >LO/AOO > >> has a better implementation and in some cases MSO has the better one. > >> Also, when one downloads LO/AOO one gets the entire suite while MSO > >is > >> offered with different retail selections so direct comparison should > >> specify which MSO retail selection is being discussed. LO is clearly > >> more feature rich than the less expensive MSO variants by virtue of > >> including everything. > >> > >> Integration with Outlook, IMHO, sounds good but is really not that > >> useful and the principal functionality can be replaced by other FOSS > >> options. > > > >-- > >Italo Vignoli - [email protected] > >mob +39.348.5653829 - VoIP [email protected] > >skype italovignoli - gtalk [email protected] > > > >-- > >Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to > >[email protected] > >Problems? > >http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ > >Posting guidelines + more: > >http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > >List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ > >All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > >deleted > > -- > Envoyé de mon téléphone avec Kaiten Mail. Excusez la brièveté. > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] > Problems? > http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > deleted > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
