Linux Word Processors

[Tom Diehl]

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004, Robin Laing wrote:

> Jeff Vian wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-12-22 at 08:56 -0700, Robin Laing wrote:
> > 
> >>Ryan D'Baisse wrote:
> >>
> >>>Okay, I am beginning to see just how many apps out there are
> >>>classified as word processors.  So, allow me to get a bit more
> >>>specific...
> >>>
> >>>1. The editor must be WYSIWYG;
> >>>
> >>>2. It must be able to import to, and export from, Microsoft Word
> >>>format without any difficulties; and,
> >>
> >>I will state that this won't ever happen unless all users are using 
> >>the same version with the same installation configuration.  I hear the 
> >>screams as people that are working on collaborations get work back 
> >>that doesn't look like the copy previously worked on.  More hours lost 
> >>re-formatting.
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > I think the *unreasonable* goal here is that it must interface with the
> > proprietary format word documents, "without difficulty" and we all know
> > that M$ changes the format regularly to prevent that.
> > 
> > Thus an unreachable goal and a better plan would be to go to a
> > standardized format that is not dependent upon the whims of M$. One that
> > many editors can use easily and without the stress of trying to reverse
> > engineer a format that is deliberately closed.
> > 
> > 
> The problem is Word has problems meeting this goal with other Word 
> documents.  I hear this all the time.
> 
> It is interesting that Sun has submitted the OpenOffice format to ISO 
> for standardization.  If it is approved, it may force Microsoft to 
> support the "Standard".  Wouldn't that be a coup. :)

What makes you think M$ would suddenly care about standards? They have never
cared in the past. Unless it is to their advantage I doubt they will care.

Tom Diehl		tdiehl at rogueind.com		Spamtrap address mtd123 at rogueind.com