[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Fsfe-uk] AbiWord
From: |
John Seago |
Subject: |
[Fsfe-uk] AbiWord |
Date: |
Wed, 9 Mar 2005 18:37:34 +0000 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.7.2 |
I have used AbiWord up to, now to read and print Microsoft Word documents,
I, going by its home page, took it that having translated FROM Microsoft
Word, it would do the reverse, see the following from its home page:
"What Makes AbiWord Different?
AbiWord is unique among word processors in its drive to become a fully
cross-platform word processor. Our source code is carefully written so
that AbiWord will run on virtually any operating system with a minimum of
time spent on porting. This combined with our support for
internationalization (the ability to run AbiWord in many languages) gives
AbiWord a massive potential user-base.
Currently we run on most UNIX systems, Windows 95 and later, QNX Neutrino
6.2. We also have a MacOS X native port in the way (you can still use the
UNIX version on MacOS X if you want). There used to be a BeOS port, but
that version has been gone unmaitained for too long to consider it as
still alive; we dreamt that it was any different, so if you want to help,
feel free to contact us."
Obviously it does not. My using it with the intention that it should do so
is a mattter of my ignorance of its workings particularly as the above
paragraph states "Windows 95 and later". To refer to those who are
ignorant of a given matter, as stupid, given the richness and flexibility
of the English language is not only lazy but, insulting, and in the case
where it was applied to me, I consider it deliberately so. I doubt that
Chris Croughton, would call me stupid were we face to face, (here I am
assuming a normal level of good manners), and will happily accept an
apology.
As is noted above it is stated that AbiWord, and I took it, its documents,
could be used by "Windows 95 and later", hence my request as to who to
complain to, that a governmental department could not read a document that
can read "Windows" documents.
For Alex Young and Chris Croughton to adopt a rebarbative tone when
replying, whilst others took the trouble to explain why I was wrong in my
assumptions, only serves to highlight their differing attitudes to those
others who proved so helpful, personally, in this matter. Some surprise
with their unselfish helpfulness, to those may I extend my thanks
--
John Seago
GNU/Linux User #219566 http://counter.li.org
AFFS http://www.affs.org.uk/