There's always Nextcloud. If you don't want it self-hosted, there are hosting options (up to and including the proper dedicated instance approach).
12 posts • joined 14 Sep 2007
Failed to think this through
(i) it's not the ISPs fault, that's like blaming radio waves for carrying unwanted material;
(ii) parents need to look after their children (although the currently available tools are not best usable);
(iii) most younger children need protecting from content other than pornography;
(iv) the older children are looking for this material actively, and did so before the Internet.
Oh, but I disagree :)
Redhat has taken an awful long time to get to the $1bn mark. Novell could have made SuSE into $1bn but they took some funny turns because of an over-focus on the US market with what was an essentially European product. Alfresco making it to $100m on a single product tells you a multi-product company can make the $1bn no problem. And these are both business-focused companies, while any mobile phone company can tell you the consumer market is where the monies are at.
Frankly, look at it this way; I served on a panel at the IT Leaders Forum (Windows 7 migration, and yes I was in a minority) yesterday and watched a lot of people committing to spending a lot of money and time to keep their companies locked into a monoculture; one has to assume their households are equally proprietary in their computing solutions. Awareness of the options remains absent in mainstream UK; once awareness rises, the opportunities to provide services will be manifold.
Were actually the ones who had least issue, because they got on and figured it out or were quick to ask the "how do I" questions. The only people who needed to be left with MS Office was the finance team because of the old accounting package they use. Once that gets ripped and replaced with OpenBravo or similar, game over. The only copies of MS Office left will be 5 on a terminal server for use with clients that insist on collaborating on docx...
Gary's analysis is flawed
So please don't repeat it without discussion. There are no significant features of MS Office that cannot be mapped to ODF, if not to v1.0 then v1.2.
More importantly, it is absolutely and entirely the wrong approach in developing a standard to start by ensuring you can reproduce all the flaws of legacy pre-standardisation approaches. For certain you should examine existing approaches and learn from them, but not mimic them to satisfy a particular organisation, no matter how dominant.
Note: Microsoft personnel have already stated they could support ODF in discussions around Massachusetts - maybe that would be in a way that would inhibit those documents being used in Sharepoint. I care not if Sharepoint or other Microsoft technologies are so limited. What I demand is that we have a common, documented and unencumbered file format that allows for seamless interchange of documents.
Notes for those who see 550 million installed seats of a product as proof positive that is all we should care about:
(i) they ain't all the same product i.e. are not all compatible with each other in the seamless idealism Gary espouses;
(ii) within 5 years, 550 million will be less than a tenth of the devices in active use capable of read/writing an office-type document.