redifining GNOME office.

I definately agree.  Not sure I agree with wikipedia says
makes up
GNOME Office.  But we need something that we can say works
together,
abiword, gnumeric and gnome-db for sure.  We still need a
presentation
app, criawips also seems dead.  Lets get these revitalized.

I know people just say OpenOffice.org is good enough, I
simply don't
agree.  Yes it is very full featured and pretty compatible
with M$
Office.  However, it isn't well integrated in GNOME.  One of
the
things I love about GNOME is out well integrated things are.
 But OOo
has it's own print dialog... just for a simple example.  We
need
something to fill this void.

I don't think GNOME Office should be a product by itself,
but more of
a collaboration of other projects to play well together. 
The biggest
issue I see right now is the lack of a impress alternative. 
Anyone
know the status of criawips?

--Ken

On 4/4/07, Thilo Pfennig <thilopfennigforesightlinux.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I suggest we redefine GNOME Office. See als this bug:
> htt
p://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=422337.
>
> The Wikipedia website says
>  http://en.w
ikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME_Office
>
>
>
> The Ubuntu 6.10 documentation also includes the
following as part of the
> GNOME Office product suite:
> Dia, a diagram editor
> Inkscape, a vector graphics editor
>  The GIMP, the classic image editor
> Planner, a project management solution I suggest that
rather than every
> distribution does its own definition we agree to extend
the concept and also
> to work again on this field. This also means that we
should encourage to
> work on the weakness. Like that we still miss a
presentation program.
>
> Would like to see some other opinions on this topic.
>
>
> Thilo
>
> --
> Thilo Pfennig
> http:
//issues.foresightlinux.org/confluence/x/R
> --
> marketing-list mailing list
> marketing-listgnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
>
>
-- 
marketing-list mailing list
marketing-listgnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list

On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 12:55 -0400, Ken VanDine wrote:
> I definately agree.  Not sure I agree with wikipedia
says makes up
> GNOME Office.  But we need something that we can say
works together,
> abiword, gnumeric and gnome-db for sure.  We still need
a presentation
> app, criawips also seems dead.  Lets get these
revitalized.

I don't think "GNOME Office" needs to be
short-hand for "the GNOME
Office suite"; I think it does need to be much more
about integration
and collaboration.

So, for example, I don't see why both Abiword and OO Writer
can't be
part of GNOME office. They appeal to totally different types
of users,
and don't really compete in terms of functionality. Both
should be
"first class" in terms of the GNOME desktop: yes,
OOo is very sucky in
some areas (mostly the UI), but that does seem to be
improving very
rapidly (and perhaps would be quicker with GNOME pushing
it).

I think it's more important that programs are able to work
together well
(e.g., good OpenDocument support, that kind of thing) and
work well in
the overall desktop. Programs like Abiword et al. are
definitely
worthwhile IMHO, but I don't see them replacing OOo in my
daily work in
the next few years - they're just not "big"
enough. It seems important
to me that they all work well in GNOME.

Cheers,

Alex.

-- 
marketing-list mailing list
marketing-listgnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list

Why don't we do the opposite: close officially GNOME Office
and keep
working on the interoperability and integration between
GNOME
applications.

Do we need a concept of "Office" for GNOME
nowadays? There is a lot of
people working in offices with computers in the XXIth
century, and
they use all kinds of applications.

For instance, who could strongly disagree if someone would
propose a
GNOMEish Office suite made with

Epiphany - Evolution - Gaim - Abiword - Gnumeric

The sensible combinations are multiple, who are we to decide
what is
Office and what is not? Also important: without MS Office
and its free
clone OpenOffice, would we be discussing now about GNOME
Office?

I agree the tools should be integrated, but this principle
is
applicable to (at least) all the products of the official
GNOME
release. No need to remark a weak "Office" concept
to work on actual
functionality.

-- 
Quim Gil /// http://desdeamericacon
amor.org
-- 
marketing-list mailing list
marketing-listgnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list

That would be fine with me, I just want to get all the areas
covered.
The major week point is the lack of a presentation app.

--Ken

On 4/4/07, Quim Gil <qgilgnome.org> wrote:
> Why don't we do the opposite: close officially GNOME
Office and keep
> working on the interoperability and integration between
GNOME
> applications.
>
> Do we need a concept of "Office" for GNOME
nowadays? There is a lot of
> people working in offices with computers in the XXIth
century, and
> they use all kinds of applications.
>
> For instance, who could strongly disagree if someone
would propose a
> GNOMEish Office suite made with
>
> Epiphany - Evolution - Gaim - Abiword - Gnumeric
>
> The sensible combinations are multiple, who are we to
decide what is
> Office and what is not? Also important: without MS
Office and its free
> clone OpenOffice, would we be discussing now about
GNOME Office?
>
> I agree the tools should be integrated, but this
principle is
> applicable to (at least) all the products of the
official GNOME
> release. No need to remark a weak "Office"
concept to work on actual
> functionality.
>
> --
> Quim Gil /// http://desdeamericacon
amor.org
> --
> marketing-list mailing list
> marketing-listgnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
>
-- 
marketing-list mailing list
marketing-listgnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list

On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 22:08 +0300, Quim Gil wrote:
> Why don't we do the opposite: close officially GNOME
Office and keep
> working on the interoperability and integration between
GNOME
> applications.

I think we're in rough agreement; whether or not there is an
official
"GNOME Office", we're saying that there ought to
be a broad idea of how
office-type tools can work together in GNOME rather than a
narrow idea
of a single suite with a single set of applications.

What users probably care more about is that their
applications can read
their files (so, I think OpenDocument is important, though
users might
not realise that), and that basic stuff that Ken mentioned
works:
open/save dialogs are all consistent, printing is
consistent, and the UI
fits with GNOME.

But I think we also need to keep sight of the fact that
office-type apps
are very important to many users, especially those using
GNOME for work.
They are the main day-to-day productivity tools, and I think
GNOME could
do a lot better job integrating them. From a marketing point
of view, I
think we would lose an important constituency (those making
purchasing
decisions, etc.) if we didn't highlight GNOME as being
excellent for
Office tasks: whether or not that means having a GNOME
Office, I'm not
sure, but I wouldn't want to lose that concept completely.

Things like being able to link e-mails from Evo into tomboy
are just
scratching the surface, we should be able to link all our
data in there
if we like (e.g., having a note for a project, and links to
relevant
e-mails, documents, etc.). GNOME's role in that kind of
desktop is one
primarily of ensuring apps talk to each other and work in
concert, IMHO.
I think we can still communicate something meaningful at
that level
which primarily applies to productivity apps.

Cheers,

Alex.

-- 
marketing-list mailing list
marketing-listgnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list

On 4/4/07, Alex Hudson <homealexhudson.com> wrote:
> we would lose an important constituency (those making
purchasing
> decisions, etc.)

Those making purchasing decisions don't look at GNOME alone,
look at
distributions. They think in Firefox, they think in
Evolution/Thunderbird, they think in OpenOffice, they care
to have
well covered the PDF, Flash, Java issues... and they don't
really care
if application X is in fact GNOME or not as far it works
properly.

IMveryHO trying to marketing-wise (re)build a concept of
GNOME Office
to compete against OOo is even more futile than putting
energies into
beating Firefox's success with Epiphany.

We have very limited energies, we better concentrate them in
the
critical areas where the free software offer needs us most.

-- 
Quim Gil /// http://desdeamericacon
amor.org
-- 
marketing-list mailing list
marketing-listgnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list

On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:30 +0300, Quim Gil wrote:
> On 4/4/07, Alex Hudson <homealexhudson.com> wrote:
> > we would lose an important constituency (those
making purchasing
> > decisions, etc.)
> 
> Those making purchasing decisions don't look at GNOME
alone, look at
> distributions. They think in Firefox, they think in
> Evolution/Thunderbird, they think in OpenOffice, they
care to have
> well covered the PDF, Flash, Java issues... and they
don't really care
> if application X is in fact GNOME or not as far it
works properly.
> 
> IMveryHO trying to marketing-wise (re)build a concept
of GNOME Office
> to compete against OOo is even more futile than putting
energies into
> beating Firefox's success with Epiphany.

Sure, but I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm not trying
to sell the
concept of GNOME Office over OOo, because I agree, I don't
think that
would work. For those who really care about productivity
apps on the
free desktop, OOo is the most important app (IMveryHO also
;)

What I'm saying is that "GNOME Office" needs to be
about saying to these
people, "GNOME is the best environment for running
your
OpenOffice/Tbird/whatever". It's not about promoting
GNOME ahead of
those apps, but promoting the idea of GNOME being the best
environment
for those apps.

At the end of the day, people will choose GNOME for a very
few reasons,
but primarily I think their reasons will be based on the
apps they want
to run, not because they like the look of the desktop. We
should be
making their apps work better in GNOME, and telling them
that if they
want the best OOo/whatever experience, that GNOME is the
desktop to run.

Cheers,

Alex.

-- 
marketing-list mailing list
marketing-listgnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list

We could very well base marketing on that concept.
ie: "Still thinking your software working suite in
terms of * Office?"

and show that GNOME doesn't force you into using certain
apps, but
allows you to build your own suite in your own terms, but
yet - they
all "speak" to eachother hassle-free.


On 4/4/07, Alex Hudson <homealexhudson.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:30 +0300, Quim Gil wrote:
> > On 4/4/07, Alex Hudson <homealexhudson.com> wrote:
> > > we would lose an important constituency
(those making purchasing
> > > decisions, etc.)
> >
> > Those making purchasing decisions don't look at
GNOME alone, look at
> > distributions. They think in Firefox, they think
in
> > Evolution/Thunderbird, they think in OpenOffice,
they care to have
> > well covered the PDF, Flash, Java issues... and
they don't really care
> > if application X is in fact GNOME or not as far it
works properly.
> >
> > IMveryHO trying to marketing-wise (re)build a
concept of GNOME Office
> > to compete against OOo is even more futile than
putting energies into
> > beating Firefox's success with Epiphany.
>
> Sure, but I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm not
trying to sell the
> concept of GNOME Office over OOo, because I agree, I
don't think that
> would work. For those who really care about
productivity apps on the
> free desktop, OOo is the most important app (IMveryHO
also ;)
>
> What I'm saying is that "GNOME Office" needs
to be about saying to these
> people, "GNOME is the best environment for running
your
> OpenOffice/Tbird/whatever". It's not about
promoting GNOME ahead of
> those apps, but promoting the idea of GNOME being the
best environment
> for those apps.
>
> At the end of the day, people will choose GNOME for a
very few reasons,
> but primarily I think their reasons will be based on
the apps they want
> to run, not because they like the look of the desktop.
We should be
> making their apps work better in GNOME, and telling
them that if they
> want the best OOo/whatever experience, that GNOME is
the desktop to run.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alex.
>
> --
> marketing-list mailing list
> marketing-listgnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
>


-- 
Panos Laganakos
-- 
marketing-list mailing list
marketing-listgnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list