Re: Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Re: Introduction)
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:06:15 -0500
Hal Vaughan <hal@thresholddigital.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 11 February 2007 04:43, Joe Hart wrote:
> > Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > > On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 07:03:18 +0100
> > >
> > > Joe Hart <j.hart@orange.nl> wrote:
> > >> Damn, did it again. I am so used to hitting reply. I have to
> > >> remember Reply to ALL...
> > >
> > > 'Reply to list' would be better. There was just recently a thread
> > > about Icedove/Thundebird extensions to achieve that.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Andrei
> >
> > Thanks, I'll check the archives because I searched for it on mozilla
> > and couldn't find it.
> >
> > To be honest I would prefer switching to Kmail because it integrates
> > much better to KDE, and it is a good client, but I can't do that
> > because my mail has to be accessible from Windows, that my wife
> > insists that I keep on this PC.
> >
> > She gets mail too, and says that she has to have windows for her
> > school. I told her about Crossover Office, but she says "Why should
> > we buy something so I we can run MS Office on Linux when it runs fine
> > under Windows". Maybe I'll play with wine and get her apps working.
> > I have yet to spend the time. She says OpenOffice isn't good enough,
> > because it can't read the .doc files reliably (thanks to the
> > proprietary nature of the .doc files).
>
Where/how is the mail stored? maybe kmail can be configured to work with
whatever option you want ...
> If Office is the issue, and not Windows overall, then why should she buy
> office when she can use OpenOffice for free and it will read and write
> all MS Office files?
>
You did read the line above that she says that openoffice isn't good enough for
here?
Personally I am a bigger fan of openoffice but it does have problems with
properly formatting word documents.
Actually I am a bigger fan of lyx, but that's a hard sell for office fans.
> Why pay for Microsoft when there's a FOSS program that is not going to
> be an infection vector for viruses?
>
> Hal
>
>
Reply to: