Novell Statement on Agreement.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Novell Statement on Agreement.

Boyd Lynn Gerber
Hello,

At a Novell conference today the advised reading this and if any question
post them via the links on the page.

http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq_opensource.html



--
Boyd Gerber <[hidden email]>
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah  84047

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Novell Statement on Agreement.

PerfectReign
On Tuesday 07 November 2006 17:57, Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
> Hello,
>
> At a Novell conference today the advised reading this and if any question
> post them via the links on the page.
>
> http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq_opensource.html

One question to the SUSE community:

<quote>
 What does this mean for Mono and its inclusion in non-SUSE distributions?
Does Mono infringe Microsoft patents?
We maintain that Mono does not infringe any Microsoft patents. This agreement
does not impact the rights and abilities of other distributions to bundle and
ship Mono.
</quote>

This seems like a silly question to ask (and answer).  IIRC, mono is based on
the ECMA standards C# and the Common Language Runtime.  Hence, there should
be no patent issues to speak of.

(This in addition to the fact that software cannot be patented, which the US
PTO seems to have forgotten.)


It was interesting reading and very full of marketing-speak. I had a good
laugh (or cry) at the ODF/OOXML portion.

--
kai ponte
www.perfectreign.com

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Novell Statement on Agreement.

PerfectReign
In reply to this post by Boyd Lynn Gerber
On Tuesday 07 November 2006 21:03, Michael S. Dunsavage wrote:
> > It was interesting reading and very full of marketing-speak.
> > I had a good
> > laugh (or cry) at the ODF/OOXML portion.

> What was wrong with that section? Isn't one of the things holding Linux
> back from the desktop the lack of compatability with what is used on MS
> products?

Yes, that has been a sticking point. Having to reverse-engineer MS Word/Excel
formats has kept people from using  OOo and other items in more numbers.

However, there has been an attempt to create a standard non-proprietary format
for the past few years. There was a big issue in the US in the State of
Massachusetts where they attempted to to go with all ODF format. Microsoft
came out and defended their formats and proposed the OOXML format for Office
13 (2007) instead. Of course, the Open Office folks didn't like that and we
once again are in the middle of a struggle for "my way is better than yours."

Sigh...


--
kai ponte
www.perfectreign.com

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Novell Statement on Agreement.

Joe Morris
Kai Ponte wrote:
> However, there has been an attempt to create a standard non-proprietary format
> for the past few years. There was a big issue in the US in the State of
> Massachusetts where they attempted to to go with all ODF format. Microsoft
> came out and defended their formats and proposed the OOXML format for Office
> 13 (2007) instead. Of course, the Open Office folks didn't like that and we
> once again are in the middle of a struggle for "my way is better than yours."
>
>  
IIUC, it isn't a case of mine is better, but mine is open.  I had even
read somewhere that MS had finally agreed to support ODF in Word, but as
I suspected that was words to soothe the lawyers.  When MS actually
creates any non proprietary format, i.e. a format that is not designed
to run better on a MS product and by design to make any other look
wrong, is the day that I might start to believe MS has changed (i.e.
never).  Their OOXML is nothing more than IMHO another stall tactic to
keep those who would demand compliance by MS Office to ODF at bay.  I
would rather see an ODF STANDARD than a MS controlled compromise that is
just a delay tactic to keep others from adopting ODF, such as Mass. WAS
planning.

--
Joe Morris
Registered Linux user 231871







--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Novell Statement on Agreement.

Peter Van Lone
On 11/8/06, Joe Morris (NTM) <[hidden email]> wrote:
> IIUC, it isn't a case of mine is better, but mine is open.  I had even
> read somewhere that MS had finally agreed to support ODF in Word, but as
> I suspected that was words to soothe the lawyers.

actually, I am pretty sure that word (can or will be) able to open ODF
formatted documents directly. Probably also save docs in that format.
It is just that MS is also developing there "own" xml-based doc format
that will be the ms office default and that will carry ms specific
"extensions" .

I believe one of the issues Novell and MS will be working on is the
interoperability of the ODF format, so that docs exchange gracefully
and well.

Peter

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Novell Statement on Agreement.

BandiPat
On Wednesday 08 November 2006 20:00, Peter Van Lone wrote:

> On 11/8/06, Joe Morris (NTM) <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > IIUC, it isn't a case of mine is better, but mine is open.  I had
> > even read somewhere that MS had finally agreed to support ODF in
> > Word, but as I suspected that was words to soothe the lawyers.
>
> actually, I am pretty sure that word (can or will be) able to open
> ODF formatted documents directly. Probably also save docs in that
> format. It is just that MS is also developing there "own" xml-based
> doc format that will be the ms office default and that will carry ms
> specific "extensions" .
>
> I believe one of the issues Novell and MS will be working on is the
> interoperability of the ODF format, so that docs exchange gracefully
> and well.
>
> Peter
=========

Actually there is already a filter for MS Word to save and open in ODF.  
I believe some of the Openoffice guys created one just after all the
noise created in the Mass controversy.   So considering the fact that
is taken care of, what else does Novell need to be concerned about, as
the two office suites work suitably with each other, now.

bye,
Lee

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Novell Statement on Agreement.

Peter Van Lone
On 11/8/06, BandiPat <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Actually there is already a filter for MS Word to save and open in ODF.
> I believe some of the Openoffice guys created one just after all the
> noise created in the Mass controversy.   So considering the fact that
> is taken care of, what else does Novell need to be concerned about, as
> the two office suites work suitably with each other, now.

that's cool if true, I'll have to fire up my winders vm to see if I
can find and install that.

But, I am sure the doc spec is pretty large ... and while working on
ms formatted docs has been "ok" in the past, there are still
translation issues. I would think that is still the case working in ms
on ODF docs, also.

One example: There is the idea of embedded macros, and translating
those ... which is very important in a corp world. My county
government social services folks use complex excel spreadsheets that
they expect contracting agencies to use for reporting ... open office
spreadsheet just could not translate that document ... so, the small
agency I help HAS TO HAVE excel. It would be way cool, if this moving
back and forth between programs was transparent.

So .. maybe it is that kind of stuff, that still needs working on?

Peter

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Loading...