From byte@bytebot.net Mon Feb 23 00:03:09 2004 Subject: Errors with article on OpenOffice.org From: Colin Charles Reply-To: Colin Charles To: editor@thestar.com.my, adlin@kemudi.com Cc: "Charles F. Moreira" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Organization: ByteBot.net Message-Id: <1077465789.1459.127.camel@hermione> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 00:03:09 +0800 X-Evolution-Fcc: file:///home/byte/evolution/local/Sent X-Evolution-Format: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dear Editor, I bring to your knowledge the article published on Sunday, February 22, 2004, written by S. Indramalar. (http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2004/2/22/education/7328377&sec=education) It is filled with errors, and I would have hoped that Indramalar would have checked the article's accuracy out first, because publishing such an article; which really doesn't paint a good picture of the open source community. Paragraph 3, where you state that Mohd Adlin Abu Bakar's company M3 Management Sdn. Bhd. being the "local distributor of Open Office", this is a grave misconception. Open source software has no "distributor", and there is no commercial backing to make M3 Management the "one true giver of OpenOffice.org". By making such a misleading statement, people look at all the other folks selling OpenOffice.org as it being illegal - this is not true. I bring to your attention the OpenOffice.org Distributors page: http://distribution.openoffice.org/cdrom/. M3 Management is *not* listed there. Bytecraft (for one) distribute the software; MIMOS used to have a free CD giveaway; atSC, getting the CDs from a British school gives away the software for free. Sun Microsystems doesn't endorse OpenOffice.org, more than it would endorse its commercial offering, StarOffice. They do however offer support for OpenOffice.org, but have never openly endorsed it. Stating that there is "a 10% difference" between OpenOffice.org and Microsoft Office is not a comment Mr. Adlin is fit to make. He is not a developer, neither is he a contributor to the project - in fact, we at the OpenOffice.org world do not want to make a product similar to Microsoft Office. We have other goals, so where Mr. Adlin arrives at a 10% figure, I wonder. "M3 Management is one of four GNU public licence holders for Malaysia and has the authority to distribute the software." - This is a statement of *utter rubbish*. I'd like Mr. Adlin to name the "four GNU public license holders". There is no "public license holders for Malaysia". Thats the idea of the GNU GPL. No one has rights to hold the license; reporting this to the Free Software Foundation will get Mr. Adlin and his crew in a lot of trouble. "To obtain the free software, interested institutions need only fill up a Request Form on the company’s website (www.m3.com.my). " - the form in question looks like a way to get information about companies, etc... The website is non-working, the support links are broken, its filled with errors. For a Sunday write-up, its filled with plenty of inaccuracies, and it got full-page coverage as well. Damage control needs to be done here, because the "image" of M3 Management as the "official distributor" is very, very wrong. Saying they have the rights to the GNU GPL, and that they are the one of four in Malaysia to have this, is also very misleading. I just thought this was useful to let you know. Kind Regards, Colin Charles OpenOffice.org Community Marketing Contact (http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html) P/S: Mr. Adlin Abu Bakar, please do remove the OpenOffice.org Community Distributor logo from your website. In fact, the Fedora Project logo that you use on www.m3.com.my, I hope you got permission, otherwise, that has to be removed too. -- Colin Charles, byte@bytebot.net http://www.bytebot.net/ http://fedoranews.org/colin/fnu/ - Fedora News Updates