[tdf-discuss] Re: Re: Why LO mobile version should not be ignored

"Phil Hibbs" <snarks@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:AANLkTin5x5+tSqrNJ=bE061ONrnu1FAS2xq1XEK+DQZn@mail.gmail.com...
> Ian Lynch:
> > And of course there is the
> > argument that without certain features some of the large public sector
> > switches might not have happened.
>
> Back in my teens, my dad and I wrote a Basic interpreter for the PC
> based on the Acorn BBC Micro dialect. We went to a computer show, and
> I lost count of the number of people who just asked "Is it 100%
> compatible?", and when I said "no, but...", they just laughed and
> walked off. It's a hard barrier to break through - there are plenty of
> people who will say "It doesn't have feature X therefore we'll stick
> with Microsoft". Sometimes it's features that can be worked around,
> such as only allowing one AutoFilter in a workbook, but someone will
> use that as an excuse for declaring a show-stop.

A portable version would (a) have all the features and (b) be a first, 
albeit small step towards modularisation because it would free the code from 
dependencies on things like the Windows Registry.


--
Harold Fuchs
London, England 



--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***