On Tuesday 22 February 2005 10:21, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 09:59 -0500, Richard June wrote: > > On Tuesday 22 February 2005 08:38, Paul A. Houle wrote: > > > On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 23:09:25 +0100, Matthias Saou > > > > > > So far as I'm concerned, all the "office" packages can go. > > > I've found that 90% compatibility with MS Office isn't enough to work > > > with the groups I work with and just wind up running the real thing > > > under crossover. > > > > I would disagree with you here. for the groups I work with 90% is great, > > not only that, some have wound up moving to OO.o on windows as well. > > For 2.0 a bunch of work went into the Word & Excel filters, so > compatibility there is much greater than just 90%. A lot also depends > on the fonts you have, even on Windows with Office if you don't have the > same fonts as the document requires, Office has to do some guessing same > as OOo does. I went through the trouble of installing a number of fonts for my users. so fonts aren't much of an issue. I am looking forward to OO.o 2.0 though -- Public Key available Here: http://www.bravegnuworld.com/~rjune/pubkey.asc
Attachment:
pgpCKEuqOooSP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
