Mailing-List: contact ooo-marketing-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au;
  h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
  b=l9AGU0dMCWlF0bmrFUQPunm4GLSY0IScXIZfTs5msSH7Dm4ak3JAuonEV1MTYj66aZjLBwYcsOvyNEGkvy2v1EFAjrfZu+GZKLD6BbrsiEKVoyGYvOepd90bi3U2J5LvQWtFXV06uIO/XgbzKcbQEsamJ1DV3jOtzllL5B9rlAQ=;
References: <50041.1329840842@zandona.nl>
 <8CEBECC9F09C709-14B8-50D84@Webmail-d102.sysops.aol.com>
 <4F43C857.6040001@gmail.com>
 <CAP-ksojo=T6TKh5fC=L5XkaVR8Exw3oCh5ZmVR-nvOja7HC+xQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1330043799.73696.YahooMailNeo@web161706.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 16:36:39 -0800 (PST)
From: Terry <terauck-aoomark@yahoo.com.au>
Reply-To: Terry <terauck-aoomark@yahoo.com.au>
Subject: Collaboration with other projects
To: "ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org" <ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAP-ksojo=T6TKh5fC=L5XkaVR8Exw3oCh5ZmVR-nvOja7HC+xQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

A new thread again because I wanted to start from this point.=0A=0A=0A=0A--=
--- Original Message -----=0A> From: Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org>=0A> To: =
ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org=0A> Cc: =0A> Sent: Wednesday, 22 Februar=
y 2012 3:53 AM=0A> Subject: Re: Where is the OpenOffice logo used?=0A> =0A>=
 On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Vadim Korsakov <vadim.finpm@gmail.com> =
=0A> wrote:=0A>>  Hello!=0A>> =0A>>  I am thinking also about general promo=
tion of open office.=0A>>  I also think it would be a great idea to encoura=
ge companies who make=0A>>  proprietary software to include OpenOffice in t=
heir distributions. But I do=0A>>  not think that companies who make propri=
etary OS will include OOo in their=0A>>  distributions. In most cases they =
have their own office software that they=0A>>  need to promote.=0A>> =0A> =
=0A> A few ways to think of this:=0A> =0A> 1) It is entirely reasonable for=
 us to make Apache OpenOffice into a=0A> package that can be submitted to L=
inux distros and then made available=0A> to users in their package catalog.=
=A0 In some cases we might also be=0A> installed by default.=A0 But at the =
very least we can be listed in their=0A> catalog so users can easily instal=
l OpenOffice.=0A> =0A=0AGenerally speaking, the Linux distros have decided =
to 'support' LibreOffice.=A0 Judging partly from comments in the forum of m=
y distro but also from various articles and blogs, it seems that is unlikel=
y to change.=A0 One sector which could be singled out is the enterprise mar=
ket.=A0 That is where marketing meets development because some developer(s)=
 would need to focus on enterprise needs.=A0 I have in mind distros such as=
 RedHat, CentOS and Scientific Linux.=A0 Oracle, I gather, is another.=A0 I=
 am hopeful that those distros are motivated more by pragmatism than philos=
ophy.=0A=0AIt occurs to me that the Mozilla foundation may be interested in=
 collaboration because of its booting to the web project, aka Booting to Ge=
cko aka B2G: https://wiki.mozilla.org/B2G=0A=0A=0A> 2) With Windows 8, they=
 will have an "App Store" where users can=0A> browse and download software.=
=A0 They will likely have technical and=0A> packaging requirements for this=
, but it is probably worth our effort=0A> to make sure that OpenOffice is v=
ery easy for Windows users to=0A> download and install.=0A> =0A=0AI can't i=
magine any disagreement with that since Windows is the most widely used pla=
tform.=0A=0A> I'm not very worried about companies that have both operating=
 systems=0A> and applications discriminating against OpenOffice.=A0  There =
is strong=0A> regulatory pressure against companies using control over thei=
r OS to=0A> discriminate against competitors in the applications market.=0A=
> =0A=0ARegulatory pressure has not stopped Microsoft abusing its position =
as owner of the most widely used operating system to put much better softwa=
re manufacturers out of business.=A0 I had the misfortune last year to use =
the 2007 version of its office software for several months and I believe it=
 is the worst software *of any kind* I have ever used.=0A=0A>>  We can also=
 negotiate with different companies who produces all kinds of=0A>>  softwar=
e except OS to include in their distributions open office as a bonus=0A>>  =
to a customer. In my opinion it can improve the popularity of a product.=0A=
>>  E.g. somebody buys an antivirus and gets a bonus office packet with the=
 =0A>> same DVD.=0A>> =0A> =0A> The bundling aspect is interesting as well.=
=A0 But I'd focus more on=0A> hardware vendors.=A0 Today many PC's come wit=
h some version of Office=0A> pre-installed.=A0 Why not bundle Apache OpenOf=
fice instead?=A0 It allows=0A> the hardware vendor to lower their costs to =
consumers, making them=0A> more competitive.=0A> =0A=0AWhy exclude organisa=
tions which produce an operating system?=A0 A company which has produced so=
ftware disks for many years is http://on-disk.com/