Prev: Large Capacity DVD RW?
Next: Another question: wireless routers
From: Mike Dee on 1 Jan 2010 20:36
In article <fmoore-BAFE9E.17094501012010(a)mail.eternal-september.org>,
Fred Moore <fmoore(a)gcfn.org> wrote:

> E Z Peaces <cash(a)invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > James Hopone wrote:
> > > Other then MS Power Point what is a good program for Mac that I can open
> > > and watch a PPS?
[...]
> > Open Office. It's free.
>
> or NeoOffice, the free, more Macified version of OpenOffice.org.
> <http://www.neooffice.org/>

That "may have" been the case prior to version 3.x of OpenOffice.org, my
preference these days is for OO.o

YMMV

--
dee
From: johnny bobby bee on 2 Jan 2010 01:41
Larry Gusaas took to the world wide interwebs to proclaim:
> NeoOffice. The company that takes OpenOffice.org code
> modifies/improves?/fixes it then releases it under a different license

Are you sure about this? Doesn't OpenOffice use the GPL? I'm no lawyer,
but surely, the GPL doesn't allow for this.

From: Larry Gusaas on 2 Jan 2010 02:12
On 2010/01/02 12:41 AM johnny bobby bee wrote:
> Larry Gusaas took to the world wide interwebs to proclaim:
>
>> NeoOffice. The company that takes OpenOffice.org code
>> modifies/improves?/fixes it then releases it under a different license
>>
> Are you sure about this? Doesn't OpenOffice use the GPL? I'm no lawyer,
> but surely, the GPL doesn't allow for this.
>

OpenOffice.org uses the LGPL. NeoOffice uses the GPL

PS: Don't forget the .org part of OpenOffice.org. That is the official
name. Open Office is the name of a different company.

--
Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

From: Richard Maine on 2 Jan 2010 02:24
johnny bobby bee <stepore-no_spam_eh(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> Larry Gusaas took to the world wide interwebs to proclaim:
> > NeoOffice. The company that takes OpenOffice.org code
> > modifies/improves?/fixes it then releases it under a different license
>
> Are you sure about this? Doesn't OpenOffice use the GPL? I'm no lawyer,
> but surely, the GPL doesn't allow for this.

If you were a lawyer (not that I am either), you would certainly want to
get data more directly than from highly biased heresay. In particular,
NeoOfice is released under the GPL. Last time I checked, the GPL allows
one to release things under the GPL. :-) It isn't exactly difficult to
check this yourself; go to NeoOffice.org. The FAQ link is pretty
prominent, as is the discussion in the FAQ of the software being
released under GPL.

I'm not going to get in the middle of some NeoOffice vs OpenOffice
debate. I don't know enough about it to do so, and I don't like debating
such things anyway. For the very little it is worth, I've used both at
times, but currently I'm using OpenOffice. I presume there is at least
some element of truth in what Larry said. But it is evident on the
surface that it is presented in a highly biased way. I'd advise against
making judgements based on it alone.

In particular, I don't know what Larry means by the license being
"different", but I give him the benefit of the doubt that this is true
on at least some level. "Different", however, does not appear to mean
non-GPL.

--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
From: Larry Gusaas on 2 Jan 2010 03:02
On 2010/01/02 1:24 AM nospam(a)see.signature (Richard Maine) wrote:
> johnny bobby bee <stepore-no_spam_eh(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Larry Gusaas took to the world wide interwebs to proclaim:
>>> NeoOffice. The company that takes OpenOffice.org code
>>> modifies/improves?/fixes it then releases it under a different license
>>
>> Are you sure about this? Doesn't OpenOffice use the GPL? I'm no lawyer,
>> but surely, the GPL doesn't allow for this.
>
> If you were a lawyer (not that I am either), you would certainly want to
> get data more directly than from highly biased heresay.

It is note heresay, it is fact.

> In particular,
> NeoOfice is released under the GPL. Last time I checked, the GPL allows
> one to release things under the GPL. :-) It isn't exactly difficult to
> check this yourself; go to NeoOffice.org. The FAQ link is pretty
> prominent, as is the discussion in the FAQ of the software being
> released under GPL.

Why didn't you check out OpenOffice.org licensing as well? It is
released under the LGPL. They can't use anything released under the GPL.
Also, third-party developers are required to sign an agreement that
effectively transfers copyright of their code to Sun Microsystems Inc.
NeoOffice developers refuse to do so.

> I'm not going to get in the middle of some NeoOffice vs OpenOffice
> debate. I don't know enough about it to do so, and I don't like debating
> such things anyway. For the very little it is worth, I've used both at
> times, but currently I'm using OpenOffice. I presume there is at least
> some element of truth in what Larry said. But it is evident on the
> surface that it is presented in a highly biased way. I'd advise against
> making judgements based on it alone.

If you don't want to get in the middle, you should do some more research
before calling someones view highly biased. I am biased because I have
done the research.

> In particular, I don't know what Larry means by the license being
> "different", but I give him the benefit of the doubt that this is true
> on at least some level. "Different", however, does not appear to mean
> non-GPL.

You checked out NeoOffice's license but failed to check out
OpenOffice.org's license. As I mentioned before, it is the LGPL.

--
Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Large Capacity DVD RW?
Next: Another question: wireless routers