Lists Home |
Date Index |
I agree that even the home office tools should be XML-capable.
The question is what XML capabilities should be there. It makes
some sense to me not to sell Mom and Pop software that they will
not use nor can they make good sense of. It makes sense that many
users can make use of XML tools that cannot afford expensive
So after everyone gets their licks in on MS, perhaps with some
more information, we can make some sensible suggestions about
which of these capabilities belong in the upper-tier products
and which should come with Office for any user.
Open Office with everything including the kitchen sink tossed
in will be problematic in its own right. A home user doesn't
fiddle with install files, doesn't know a jar file from Adam
Sandler, and will not tolerate excess baggage on the disk drive
if it takes up room reserved for wedding photos. We really do
have At Least, two tiers here, based on what they have skills
for and what they expect to do. Yes, the skills of home users
are often underestimated. Still, I just don't see Auntie Mame
grinding out XML Schemas for exporting her Excel to Turbo Tax.
Is this really a debate about what it will cost the rest of us?
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
MDubinko@cardiff.com (Micah Dubinko) writes:
>>And I think they also have in mind a much more nuanced marketing
>Their approach is as nuanced as the top notch in a food chain.
It might seem more nuanced if there was any clear explanation about the
details of what they're doing. Lack of nuance combined with lack of
detail - aren't we really analyzing footnotes here? - is pretty
More generally frustrating - and certainly not limited to Microsoft - is
the general notion that XML is stuff for the enterprise only. That's
completely exasperating, and a perception that I was really hoping
Office would change.