KOffice Developers Reply to Yates 368
danimo writes "In response to his letter to the Massachusetts administration, the KOffice team has written an open letter to Microsoft manager Alan Yates. It clarifies some false claims that Yates made, such as KOffice, StarOffice and OpenOffice.org being one codebase and that OpenDocument was thus never a real standard. Massachusetts has meanwhile adopted OpenDocument."
Open FUD (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Open FUD (Score:3, Informative)
I haven't in anything except a hardware failure. I live with my brother and his Windows XP machine crashes regularly even on something as simple as playing a game (it BSODed once and stalled completely once just yesterday). The actual computer including RAM seems fine according to the toolsets. My other flatmate actually said to me "does Linux crash? I've noticed that you just leave your computer on and it's on all the time and I've never seen it crash."
Why even bother with word processors? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:5, Informative)
Word Processors are less capable but more immediate, especially in the WYSIWYG area.
Sure, there's LyX, and probably other semi-WYSIWYG editors for LaTeX, but it's not the same.
When it comes to typesetting power, LaTeX wins hands down. It's like having a compiler with a full set of support libraries, compared to a simple interpreter with only the functions that came built in.
Personally, I have never learned LaTeX, although I used to use LyX quite a bit before OpenOffice. It was in many ways better than OpenOffice, but it took me quite a while to learn how to do new things. Also, of course, I could never share documents with others at work.
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the beauty of a text-only format like TeX and LaTeX is that you can share it with everyone. In fact, more people can make small additions to a TeX document than they can a Word document. There's also nothing for them to install, you can store the document in a revision control system and get meaningfull history (diffs), there's no hidden information [microsoft.com] inside of it, etc.
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:5, Interesting)
You might want to try the 1.3.6 version (latest stable), or, if you're adventuresome, the 1.4.0 in CVS. LyX is NOT designed for short documents, such as very quick notes or things of that nature. But it's phenomenal for long documents (several page letters, technical notes, books, theses, and, with the beamer class, even presentations which knock the crap -- admittedly not a difficult task -- out of PowerPoint).
I suppose you meant you could never share *editable* documents with others at work. Well, LyX exports to just about every "nice" standard, including
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:5, Informative)
I can vouch for the power of Lyx. :) I used it to produce a 105-page technical report a month ago -- it makes section numbering and generating tables of contents & lists of figures/tables effortless, of course, but the best thing is being able to just throw figures and tables at the document and having LaTeX position them in sensible places without having to do anything. It knocks the socks off trying to do the same thing in MS Office/OpenOffice/KOffice/etc.
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:3, Informative)
I love LyX. And I did a majority of my college papers in straight LaTeX because of its beautiful output and because I just wanted to learn it (using octave + gnuplot to make "pslatex" graphs using the beautiful LaTeX font was a colassal pain but very pretty).
But if LaTeX does something wrong... its a pain to fix. And debugging a document is absolutely no fun. So, LyX is very nice... don't usually need to debug (unless you messed up an imported pslatex file), but has the same limitations of LaTeX where
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:5, Insightful)
The other problem, as always, is some people/places requiring Word. As a graduate student I had to supply some papers in Word format. I could'nt get away with doing it in LaTeX even though Word was a pain.
So, yes, there is a requirement for GUI based word processor, even though I think the effort required to learn LaTeX pays back a hundredfold in terms of efficiency (for anythjing more than 2 pages) and professional looking documents
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:2)
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, come on. If typing \begin{tabular}
As for the original +5 Funny comment that wordprocessors are easier to learn than LaTeX, I would point out that no one really understands the wordprocesso
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:5, Funny)
That's an understatement — TeX is Turing-complete.
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:2)
That's a non-statement - Postscript is also Turing-complete (for example), but neither does Turing-completeness matter when all you want to do is create good-looking text documents, nor does Turing-completeness actually say anything about the usability of a language. (Sure, there are people who write web servers in Postscript, for example, but that's just the exception that proves the rule)
Of course, that being said, I *do* agree that TeX/LateX are cl
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:5, Insightful)
LaTeX is only for big documents? (Score:5, Insightful)
The principal reasons LaTeX hasn't taken over the world are that it is almost unlearnable, and that the instant feedback of WYSIWYG is lost. I've been using LaTeX for almost 15 years, and still feel like there's a lot I don't know and can't do.
That said, the idea that one wouldn't write letters or a CV with it is just silly. My CV and resume are in LaTeX, and it is what I write letters with. It's way easier to get a document that doesn't look like a ransom note, and to get consistent formatting with different content, with LaTeX than with a WYSIWYG word processor. Trust me: when I evaluate the horribly-formatted .doc resumes I'm always receiving from potential employees, it's a strike against them. I'd encourage everyone to explore LaTeX as time permits them.
Problem is editing (Score:3, Insightful)
- afaik it was designed as a typesetting program, i.e. to give a nice PRINTED result, especially for mathematical formulas. Roughly speaking, its target group is academics (and maybe professional typesetters).
- it is not very legible. Writing text is easy enough, but editing someone else's source is no fun (unless using an editor that recognise
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:4, Insightful)
2. Most people will never be as productive with it as with word?
3. Most people will try everything to avoid having to think when performing some task.
Or... not everybody is a geek.
LaTeX rules!
Word processing != Typesetting (Score:5, Insightful)
In short, the vast majority of word processor use is for manipulating, organizing, and retrieving text-based data in a format rapidly parsable by human eyes as part of a workflow or thought process.
For such things, LaTeX, troff, or any other text formatter... sucks. In fact, it isn't even appropriate for the task.
But you're right, if you just want nicely structured, rendered output in hardcopy or PDF, you can't beat 'em.
Re:Word processing != Typesetting (Score:3, Interesting)
Neither is Word. The appropriate program for such things is WordPad (in Windows world) or gedit (in Gnome world). Word is too complex, and its many features get in the way and become distracti
Re:Word processing != Typesetting (Score:4, Informative)
In the office world (i.e. the other 90% of the globe) the need to work with highly structured documents both visibly and rapidly on an ongoing basis is extreme, and Word/Excel are actually a very good fit indeed.
Re:Word processing != Typesetting (Score:3, Interesting)
Most people use Word to gratuitously format specious documents that they cap
Re:Word processing != Typesetting (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sorry, but this is just bullshit and makes me think you've never worked o
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is, quite simply, a remarkably stupid comment. I use LaTeX. For pretty much all my documents and presentations. I write my own document classes. Previously I have written LaTeX document classes reproducing the format of company Word and Powerpoint templates so I could produce my documents and presentations in LaTeX instead of MS Office - and yes, I did get that cleared with marketing. I am quite intimately familiar with all the power, flexibility and benefits that LaTeX has to offer. The fact remains that word processors are remarkably fast efficient and easy to use and entirely suitable for the majority of users. Most of the real benefits of LaTeX simply aren't of sufficient importance for most casual and business needs to bother - and it's not like word processors these days don't have their on benefits (usually relating to integration with the rest of an "Office Suite" package.
LaTeX is truly wonderful, and if you know how then by all means use it. But don't pretend that it's a replacement for a word processor - they are really filling different niches, and have quite different areas at which they excel, and at which they are weak. The right tool for the job and all that.
Jedidiah.
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:4, Insightful)
How is opening a raw LaTeX file really any different from opening the XML zipped inside an OpenDocument file? In practice both use a program to render the raw file into a more presentable format. if you don't have the program then you can't get the presentable format. Both are readable in the raw if that's required though.
Just because MS made a particularly fucked up closed binary format for their word processor doesn't mean that word processors are evil, it simply means MS isn't particularly good at making portable formats.
Jedidiah.
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:3, Insightful)
Seeing how much they are being used, I would say they already found the problem...
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:2)
Why the heck is this modded "funny"? (Score:2)
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:3, Funny)
And you would ask them to use LaTeX?
Re:Why even bother with word processors? (Score:2)
Yay! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yay! (Score:2)
Re:Yay! (Score:2, Insightful)
Allow me to say ... (Score:3, Funny)
Alan Yates.
invitation to mailing lists. (Score:3, Funny)
[...]
You can also write to the KOffice mailing list and ask your questions there.
I can't wait to see his flames on the mailing list!
Is legal action possible? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Is legal action possible? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is legal action possible? (Score:2)
It doesn't just harm KOffice, it harms America! (Score:2)
Microsoft hates Freedom! Microsoft hates America! Microsoft supports Fascism!
And no, this isn't a troll, because it's supported by the fact
Re:It doesn't just harm KOffice, it harms America! (Score:2)
Re:It doesn't just harm KOffice, it harms America! (Score:3, Insightful)
And no, this isn't a troll, because it's supported by the facts of Microsoft's actions.
In other news, the Free Software community continues to ponder why the general public still views them as blithering moonbats.
Re:Is legal action possible? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would it be?
There are valid reasons to put restrictions on authoritative speech, particularly to the government or the public. Two of these are:
Perjury: lying under oath, such as in court.
Libel: Harming a reputation through written words.
The check and balance of harmful speech is especially important in cases where you have an "expert" opinion. Microsoft's comments on OASIS compatible software could be analogous to Bayer saying their antibiotics (Ciprofloxacin), while more expensive, is the only one that works. We do not want Bayer, or Microsoft, lying about these things.
Interestingly, the more broadly the statement was made, the more likely it is to be considered a "puffery", an accepted norm of bullshit in advertising. If it was made directly to an official's office, in court, or in any situation analogous to 'under oath', then maybe it could be considered perjury. The hyperbole of this would be lying about the capacity to cheaply produce an influenza cure on the brink of a pandemic; there is a general public policy consideration to honest statements in general, and in particular in situations of potentially grave risk. That opens up liability in fraud.
So a couple of things of importance. First, the context of the statement: under oath, or an analogous situation, opens liability to perjury for false statements. Second, a concise and defamatory statement can create liability in libel. Finally, there is a public policy consideration to the impact of the statement, especially if it can have grave ramifications, that we deter by incurring liability for fraud.
Like a stuck pig (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Like a stuck pig (Score:2)
Re:Like a stuck pig (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not saying this is true. I doubt even Microsoft thinks it's true. However, as long as the masses are convinced of it, Microsoft will use/abuse this for marketing and PR. Every time someone uses Linux or OOo, Microsoft will paint them as fanatics and crazy people, out to get Microsoft.
Re:Like a stuck pig (Score:2)
Re:Like a stuck pig (Score:4, Insightful)
Once MS had the 2 monopolies, they owned the market. But if they lose just one of the 2, they will lose the other quickly. Basically, they must maintain both, or risk losing all.
Re:Like a stuck pig (Score:2)
If they have a monopoly, or a near-monopoly with no real competition, then they can do what they want. As soon as there's a real competitor, they need to actually compete. There's generally less money when you have to actually compete.
Re:Like a stuck pig (Score:3, Interesting)
In the business universe, Word/Excel/Powerpoint is the de facto standard. If you don't have access to these formats, you're going to have trouble working with others.
This is why Firefox is a true success. It has changed
More for PR (Score:4, Insightful)
Translated: Don't listen to Yates. We can assure you that KOffice is its own entity that is in no way shape or form a derivative of OOo.
It's not a bad thing, though. There are certainly people stupid enough to believe a letter sent by Microsoft would have no agenda. This, at least, sets the record straight for all the world to see.
THIS is why I can't stand MS sometimes... (Score:5, Interesting)
All so they can convince the Mass. gov't to use their own single codebase "standard."
Just "sometimes?!" (Score:2)
When you go to PR training... (Score:3, Funny)
KOffice, or anybody else for that matter would probably have better served their cause by not responding at all to this.
Re:When you go to PR training... (Score:4, Insightful)
KOffice, or anybody else for that matter would probably have better served their cause by not responding at all to this.
KOffice team quite simply pointed out a false statements made by a Microsoft executive about their applications, and in the process they grab some good PR as well. I think they payed better attention to the PR course than you did ;-)
Re:When you go to PR training... (Score:5, Insightful)
However, Microsoft's claim that KOffice was the same code as StarOffice wasn't an opinion. It was a false statement of fact, or in other words, a blatant lie. How is it a bad idea for the KOffice people to stand up and say "no, you are blatantly lying (to the government, no less!) to serve your own interests?"
You know, if it weren't for the facts that computer issues are hard for people to understand and that Microsoft is part of the media, I would think that people would be shouting "Microsoft hates Freedom! Microsoft hates America!" right about now -- and they'd be right!
facts still matter (Score:3)
But the KOffice team has to get the facts out. MA really does need to know that KOffice is an independent codebase. MA should also know that the argument made by Yates is based on faulty data and weigh his arguments accordingly.
Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:3, Interesting)
"KOffice is the most comprehensive of all office suites in existence, comprising no less than 11 different components in one well-integrated package."
Is it really, though? I mean, it's one thing to have 11 different components. But it's another to have all those components working well. While the very core KOffice applications like KWord are acceptable, some of the other components aren't exactly the most usable. To declare KOffice as being "the most comprehensive" office suite might be somewhat incorrect.
"Last, but not least: Within a year, KOffice will likely run on Windows as well."
This could be a very dangerous thing to claim. Let us say that in a year, KOffice is not running on Windows. This claim has now left the KOffice team in a very difficult position. They have no choice now but to include support for Windows within a year. Otherwise Microsoft and others could point to this letter as being a work of deception.
I commend Wallin for attempting to set the record straight regarding the claim that KOffice was derived from StarOffice, but perhaps some of the claims are going a bit too far.
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:2)
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:2)
I think they are just waiting for both QT4 & KDE 4 before doing a complete port. Ports using Cygwin and Colinux are being worked on in the meantime.
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:2)
I don't doubt that a port could be done eventually. My problem with the statement is that they're saying it could be done within a year. Frankly, I think that's just as misleading as the statements from Microsoft.
Will QT 4 and KDE 4 be ported to Windows within a year? It's very possible that they (specifically KDE 4) won't be, or at least KDE 4 won't be in a
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:2)
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:5, Insightful)
As for Inge's statement that KOffice will likely run on Windows within a year. This is not a statement of courage. It is an entirely reasonable and obvious assumption. Plans are afoot as we speak to do just that. KOffice, much as all of KDE, will be ported to Qt4. Qt4 is now GPL'd on Windows. The internals of kdelibs are being redesigned to acknowledge this fact and allow us to target non-X11 desktops.
KOffice will be coming to Windows/Mac OSX desktops in the near-to-mid future.
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:2)
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:2)
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:2)
I can see it now:
"In September of 2005 it was claimed by KOffice representatives that their product would likely be running on Windows within a year. It is now March of 2007, and there is still no functional port available. The open source community makes
Re:It's better not to be wrong so publically. (Score:5, Insightful)
You've already been told that the statement that KOffice will be ported to Windows within a year isn't a statement of courage. This is likely only a few man months worth of work. Inge knows this. I know this. Why? See... because we actually work on KOffice. You?
Typical... Slashdot... IDIOT.
Re:This is how you treat your users? (Score:3, Informative)
KOffice already has one application that runs natively on Windows: Kexi. The other large applications... KWord, KSpread, KPresenter don't have hard dependencies on X11. They have a hard dependency on kdelibs, yes, but this has already been ported to Qt4 which is already
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:2)
Re:Are Wallin's comments much more accurate? (Score:2)
Massachusetts Attitudes (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm still amazed that Microsoft is acting like this is a sudden event. The tide in Massachusetts has been turning this way for a long time. Didn't they wonder about Massachusetts being the only state that didn't cave in and settle in the MS monopoly case? Didn't they wonder about the ramifications of the Massachusetts "Open Source Software Trough" when it was first instituted some years ago? Didn't they see the writing on the wall in local Massachusetts community sites like Saugus.net [saugus.net] that have been promoting free software [saugus.net] and open standards since the '90s? Haven't they noticed that recent Massachusetts-based projects (like the local Teaching American History Grant participation [saugus.ma.us] have been embracing open standards?
Wake up Microsoft. This shouldn't be a surprise. What's more, other states have been following Massachusetts' example regarding the open source trough, so I expect that they may also take a good hard look at what's happening here now.
What would be the best thing to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Does anybody know wether there are plans by Apple?
Re:What would be the best thing to happen (Score:2)
Re:What would be the best thing to happen (Score:2)
I suspect it will support OpenDocument, but that's just mean.
OpenDocument support will make the OS X 'ecosystem' an easier sell to governments.
Re:What would be the best thing to happen (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know what Apple's plans might be, but it's certainly an idea I'd support.
I wonder, however, how difficult it would be to create a stand-alone transformation package. Pages uses XML. OpenDocument uses XML. There are XML Transformation tools out there. Someone only need describe the transform, and you should be all set.
I really don't understand Microsoft's attitude on this one. Their reasoning for not implementing OpenDocument in Office just isn't sound. Sure, there may be areas where Microsof
Re:What would be the best thing to happen (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What would be the best thing to happen (Score:3, Informative)
It's not as perfect as one might thinks though.
Re:What would be the best thing to happen (Score:2, Informative)
Office Formats Not That Good (Score:4, Informative)
Some of the traders have become so annoyed by the degree of control Microsoft has over what an user can do that they joke, "Microsoft is trying to protect me from myself again".
Save to HTML and then edit the text manually... (Score:2)
The Microsoft Office formats themselves aren't that great. I work at a investment company which relies heavily on Excel. Over the years they've been using a few spreadsheets that has been around since Office 2000 at least. When we upgraded again to Office 2003, we had a few sheets exhibiting really, really strange behavior such the sheets wouldn't update unless you do a cut and paste first. We ended up having to simply rebuild those sheets cell by cell in Excel 2003. Once that was done, everything was many
How does MS's own format compare? (Score:4, Interesting)
How many different applications from different vendors already support the MS XML format? How does this number compare to the OpenDocument number?
OpenDocument will be usable on a number of CPU and OS platforms. How many CPU and OS platforms will be supported by MS's own XML format? (I use a Solaris workstation at work and do not myself have access to a Windows PC until I get home, at which point I'm not "working" anymore)
How long ago was MS's own XML standard finalized? And how widely is it in current use today? (I honestly don't know either since MS tools don't run onmy workstation at work, and I don't do this sort of thing at home to be worth buying their stuff myself) Has this been long and wide enough to "prove itself" in comparison to how long and wide OpenDocument's use has been to date?
If MS is losing business due to the choice of standard, why does MS not implement this open standard in their own product?
What are the costs involved with implementing MS's own XML format for 3rd party vendors in their tools such as OpenOffice, KOffice, etc?
MS seems to dictate what capabilities are required for "modern documents". Surely the committee that decided on OpenDocument knew what their own needs are and will be, and could determine if OpenDocument's capabilities were suitable?
Hi. Here. Us, too... :-) (Score:5, Informative)
Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH
Re:Hi. Here. Us, too... :-) (Score:2)
I would love to see Corel, Lotus and other commercials not only support it, but announce it. That will cause just about every major company to look at switching, and a number will switch. All that is needed, is an open source program that will convert from MS to OASIS format. But it should be very open so that as one group learns, it can enhance the convertor.
Re:Hi. Here. Us, too... :-) (Score:3, Informative)
Now I understand that an export filter is difficult/expensive to make but claiming that you support a file format while you support it read only is a marketing lie if I ever saw one.
Re:Hi. Here. Us, too... :-) (Score:3, Interesting)
Simply put, blame the EU. We have to pay Value Added Tax (VAT) for sales to European customers and we don't have to do this for non-European customers.
Our US$ prices and our Euro prices are identical in numbers. This currently means a value difference of about 20%. This is close to the amount that we have to pay in VAT -- 16% now, going to 18% shortly.
If you can present a European VAT number, we can ship without VAT to you, but you have to pay your govern
MS Trolls/Fanbois/Employees (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, right now, there are only 5 applications that support OpenDocument.
Yes, right now, those applications do not have a lot of marketshare.
Pray tell: How many applications support MS Office Open XML?
How much marketshare do those applications have?
Oh, thats right, the answer it 0, and 0.
OpenDocument will always be better supported, and right now, OpenDocument has more marketshare.
Will this change with the release of Office 12? Maybe-- My guess is all your customers will continue to use DOC.
Will this change with the adoption of OpenDocument by the European Union, and various governmental organizations in the U.S.? Absolutely. You *do* realize that much of the economic activity in Europe requires working with the government.
Microsoft itself will be forced to submit documents to the EU in ISO-approved OpenDocument. Hilariously, Microsoft will have to use OpenOffice.org to do so.
Re:MS Trolls/Fanbois/Employees (Score:2)
Microsoft itself will be forced to submit documents to the EU in ISO-approved OpenDocument. Hilariously, Microsoft will have to use OpenOffice.org to do so.
Or they can use another product with a similar codebase, such as KOffice :).
And no, I didn't read the article.
Yep, free advertisement.... but (Score:2)
This kind of media circus brings attention to the KOffice products, and hopefully to other F/OSS offerings. There literally are people that don't know what is available,
What's up with KWord fonts? (Score:2)
I Konqueror for my web browsing, KMail for my email, etc., and love the application+desktop integration. My one bugaboo is that I still can't use KWord to produce nice output, because it gets the character spacing wrong with TrueType fonts.
Has anyone else experienced this? It's been this way since the first time I tried KWord; the letter sizes and spacings are simply uneven compare
Re:What's up with KWord fonts? (Score:2)
Re:What's up with KWord fonts? (Score:2)
It's not "obvious" per se, until you compare it to the same words printed out
Re:What's up with KWord fonts? (Score:2)
te xt
But I didn't. 'Arial' looks as if I'd typed:
Aria l
Neither is quite as exaggerated as they'll appear here with an actual space character in them, but again, it's really obvious when compared to other Linux word processors.
Full Text of Alan's Letter (Score:2, Redundant)
Beware, the evil web PDF! Here is the full text of Alan Yates' letter, in good ol' HTML. And yes, it is a very long letter.
-------
September 8, 2005
BY ELECTRONIC MAIL AND OVERNIGHT DELIVERY
Secretary Eric Kriss
Executive Office for Administration & Finance
State House, Room 373
Boston MA 02133
Mr. Peter Quinn
Chief Information Officer/Director
Information Technology Division
200 Arlington Street
Chelsea, MA 02150
Re: Proposed Revisions to Information Domain-Enterprise Technical Reference Model
Microsoft probably already has OpenDocument... (Score:3, Insightful)
You could call the Massachusetts decision a victory, and I think it is certainly deserving. Just know that Microsoft isn't as dumb as many people seem to think -- you better bet they're prepared to launch their next volley.
He mentioned Abiword and Gnumeric as well (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, it wouldn't even be a problem if they were the same codebase, because since they're Free Software they can all share the same code. Certainly, Microsoft could support OpenDocument easily just by copying the same code into Office, right?
...oh, wait.
Re:He mentioned Abiword and Gnumeric as well (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:He mentioned Abiword and Gnumeric as well (Score:2)
Re:He mentioned Abiword and Gnumeric as well (Score:3, Insightful)
One shouldn't expect SGI officials to make press statements on behalf of Microsoft, IBM or HP. The same applies here.
Re:He mentioned Abiword and Gnumeric as well (Score:3, Interesting)
Can't you run KDE applications on Gnome too, using the KDE-libs, and doesn't the letter announce a port for Windows?
Re:K office reply also fud ? (Score:3, Informative)
"I understand your worries, but fortunately I am able to put your mind to rest: KOffice is in fact not related to StarOffice or OpenOffice. It is a completely separate product, and a very fine one at that."