Hi :) In your meeting with the boss it might well be worth pointing out that a lot of other companies had to buy MS Office 2010 just a year or so ago and that most of those are now finding that they already have to buy 2013 or 365. That by delaying a purchase of MS Office for so many years or even just months you have positioned the company to be ahead of the competition AND saved it x (and delayed on spending x again).
Regard from Tom :) On 1 October 2014 14:03, Tom Davies <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi :) > I think probably the best way to handle it is to arrange a meeting with > your boss. Make sure it's a proper meeting rather than just trying to > catch him/her "on the fly" while he/she is busy dealing with other stuff. > > > Apologise profusely for having tried to save the company x amount of > money! > That you did so by trying to avoid the needed upgrade to MS Office > 2013/365. Explain that you have put tons of your own time into saving the > company money in this way. Let him/her know that the office workers are > now demanding that the company buy in MS Office 2013/365 at a cost of x. > > Let him/her know that MS products typically run into many problems when > they are first released but that most of those have probably been fixed by > now. Let him/her know that by delaying the cost you have ensured that the > company should run into far fewer problems with their purchase than they > would have done if they had just spent the money back when MS Office > 2013/365 was initially released. > > Maybe point out that there still will be problems because each version of > MS Office has problems reading some files from any previous versions and > that will continue to be a problem as each new version of MS Office needs > to be bought. Maybe follow-up by saying that converting documents to > LibreOffice only suffers that problem the one time and that future versions > of LibreOffice are built to ensure that old files can be read > > Maybe say that the whole exercise to save the company x amount seems to > have created tensions with colleagues and been disheartening and taken up a > lot of your own time and that for those reasons you would rather not be > involved with installing MS Office 2013/365. > > > > Basically wash your hands of it and point out that your motives were good > but that it was tooo much of an uphill fight that you are not happy to > continue with. It would help to know the licensing cost, x. For 2013 i've > heard around $500/machine for the version with Access in it or for 365 it's > probably a monthly figure. Companies can often get a discount and get a > "volume" license. > > DON'T offer to share your research on this! Just make it sound like you > have heard a rumour that it costs roughly x. Picking the right version of > MS Office is notoriously difficult and likely to run into problems. > Whichever version you (or anyone else) choose is likely to be the wrong one > and incurr extra, hidden costs = if it's you that did the choosing or > recommending then they might think it was you deliberately sabotaging the > project so make sure it's someone else that is highly visibly to blame. > > Similarly with installing it. it's likely to be a lot more of a struggle > than they probably realise and is likely to over-run both in time taken and > costs. So, again make sure you are visibly distanced from it. Try not to > help in any way to avoid getting the blame when they make mistakes! If > they need information then deliver it to your boss for your boss to hand on > to whoever is doing the installs. > > Hopefully they'll need to get some external consultants in to do it, and > as is typical in the Window world those consultants will be tooo arrogant > to ask for any information or help. > > > Maybe at the end of the exercise arrange another meeting with your boss to > talk about talking back routine administration of the MS Office systems and > just express amazement at just how high the costs were, that you had been > trying to save the company from! > > > It might be worth asking a lawyer's advice about refusing to do certain > parts of what might be in your employment contract = there might be > justifiable excuses. Perhaps time to take a holiday? > > > Sorry this is not particularly useful! I know you have worked hard at > this and now find yourself in an untenable situation so i hope you are able > to work out a way of freeeing yourself and maybe gain a lot of respect from > your boss and maybe from the other workers too. > Regards from > Tom :) > > > > On 1 October 2014 13:04, Tanstaafl <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Werner, >> >> This regression has already been discussed here, with essentially the >> same result (fix it yourself, pay someone else to fix it, or shut up >> about it)... >> >> On 10/1/2014 7:13 AM, Werner <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi Tanstaalf, >> > >> > In the thread "LibreOffice Still" you made a very important point, >> > however it has absolutely nothing to do with the main point of the >> > discussion on how to name versions and I just by chance noted it. >> > >> > You then might have a chance of having it dealt with. >> > >> > Werner >> > >> > P.S. >> > Just a LO user who sometimes reads this list but just about every time >> > get frustrated with it due to the misuse of threads! >> > >> > >> > >> > On 10/1/2014 12:27, Tanstaafl wrote: >> >> <rant> >> >> Charles, fyi, in our office, we are stuck on 4.1.6 because of a major >> >> regression introduced in 4.2 that is still there today. >> >> >> >> When our first user reported this after I started updating everyone (at >> >> about 4.2.4), so I had to revert them all (I'd gotten maybe 20 >> >> workstations updated that weekend). >> >> >> >> I kept promising my boss that 'they will have to fix this, it is a >> >> regression and they treat these seriously' - but here we are, 8 months >> >> later, and we still cannot upgrade. Because everyone found about about >> >> this, a few very vocal users in our office took this opportunity to >> >> start lobbying (again) for replacing Libreoffice with Microsoft Office, >> >> and it looks like they are going to win this time. I know it is only 70 >> >> seats, and you probably don't really care, but I do. The fact is, I >> >> cannot even recommend Libreoffice on new clients in good conscience, if >> >> the response to a very serious regression bug report is along the lines >> >> of 'well, you can just fix it yourself, it is free open source after >> >> all'. >> >> >> >> *Anytime* a long standing feature is totally ripped out and replaced >> >> with something else that causes a major regression, it should be an >> >> absolute top priority to fix it in the very next release. In fact, I >> >> would say that it should be a part of the agreement that any >> contributor >> >> signs, that if they are the one responsible for a regression like this, >> >> they are *required* to fix it asap. >> >> >> >> So, for us, 4.2 and 4.3 are *both* unstable - meaning, we *cannot use >> >> them*, because they lack a very basic capability that we have relied on >> >> since, oh, I don't know... version 1? >> >> >> >> In case you were wondering, it is the new 'Inline Fields' >> functionality, >> >> that when introduced, broke the ability to paste into them, and the bug >> >> is still there today, in 4.3.2. >> >> </rant> >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe 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/users/ >> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be >> deleted >> >> > -- To unsubscribe 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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
