<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> <div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed; font-size: 12px;" lang="x-western">============ Le 2010-12-08 12:00, Olivier Hallot a écrit : The no  ise I had to fight in a 120.000 desktop deployment I am managing, by the IT security dept who almost made me write under oath that these stupidities are not a security threat. Sorry, but I had pretty tought times dealing with that to have fun with. It is not. OOo and LO are the underdogs in a (any) migration situation and easter eggs is another ammo for those who want to go back to Microsoft Office. I rather prefer not to give'em that sweet taste. No matter how good or fun is your easter-egg, it puts you a label of lack of seriousness when it comes to address the enterprise needs or code quality reputation. ============ I have to echo Olivier's words too. I am/was in the process of recommending the OOo (and now) LibreOffice to a school board in Canada. "Easter Eggs" at this point would not go well with the committees and higher ups. As with Olivier's situation, other members of committees at this school board as well as many other stakeholders will grab to any kind of excuse to de-value the LibreOffice distro in order to keep MSO on the computers. IMO, it does not make the suite look professional if Easter eggs are hidden in the code. My particular board has been blacklisted twice this year for having been the source of virus mailouts (due to only 2 teachers irresponsible behaviour on their email system). They are now very wary of any piece of software that has any kind of hidden code. Add this to the reason why we are now recommending the use of LibreOffice rather than OpenOffice. It just makes it harder to market the distro. Marc </div> </body> </html>