 Tako, ideje tukaj je, da poživamo nekaj konceptov, kaj smo izgledali, kako smo poživamo nekaj marketovih planov, Ha, je OK. Because I think in general the issue or the problem or the opportunity of the project sustainability is something that we should always keep in mind in general. Vsi zelo vse zelo. Vse zelo našli našli, kaj sem eno delo, da vse dobro vneni projekte. Selo njih nekaj ne zelo, da bovamo zelo, ker je nama projekte. Selo je zelo, da je srečite položenje v akim liberjoflje, zdaj, že je tudi bilo, da je tako vkrat, Asi pa očivamo objevko, In tudi tudi je izveljak drugi otovljenj, Tako tako počujem. A pošli geto, da ste z Contact, Kaj smo, kot nekaj, Zelo wesemo zdevoljno, In z nisi nekaj, In bako peli čudov. Tudi nekaj nekaj. Nekaj nekaj nekaj nekaj nekaj nekaj, Nekaj se neko se možeme, Nekaj nekaj nekaj nekaj nekaj nekaj, Nekaj sem gvane, in danes 10 njev z Librej ofici. Tako, na zelo vse nekaj čelti, nismo, da zelo protekte, potrebno dobro. Zdaj vse zelo, da brzimelim oblijevno in nekaj nekaj. Dela pa nekaj bolj, štih, projekta, nekaj države, zelo v nekaj zelo, zelo vse zelo, kaj to je svoje geografije nekaj, bo, da je produt nekaj, da je zelo prišlo, je zelo prišlo izvah za vrštih, in da je prišlo, da se nekaj, da je vse zelo površtih. Mislim, da so pošli pošli, da je vse produt, in je začel vsega, začel, vsega, vsega vsega. Zdaj, kako jaz sem izgleda, v septemberu in septemberi, svoje delovosti je tudi 3.300.000, zelo, da smo več na zelo, v februji, ki je to več vzelo. Zelo, da več na zelo, in pričešljali tudi, da je učila vse svej tudi, in održavila tudi, da je začala, da je dobro vržava všeč, da si tudi dobro všeč izgleda, in da je dobro všeč, da je dobro všeč, da je dobro všeč, da je dobro všeč, da je dobro všeč, da je dobro všeč. Ište to, da je dobro všeč, da se najtačne, prišlih taj da tukaj ne bomo imeli nešlih tukaj, z 2017. Vsmeču se tukaj uvršili s tem, da ide i se, ki jel zelo srečno je vse tukaj, ki sem ne se tukaj tukaj, da je to konfitentno. Vsem tukaj vse, Pregovori me tega v vseh skupo, da sem ne bo podet nekaj tega, ker se zelo za mnimi. Prej 95 doku months prejdi. Vseh je tudi početno početno, ali na 95 je 40. Zato sem da se pošli, da tudi je vseh seboj, na ta moment. If i wanted to share contents with another person, I had to print the file. Because the interoperability was basically nonexisting. There were different programs. Each program had its own proprietary version of the document. And the only way you could reasonably exchange data was saving at the xt file, ki je zelo vsezivno vsezivno vsezivne koncentru. V nekaj površtih, da je bilo površtih, in v nekaj površtih, da je bilo in kredibno vsezivno vsezivne koncentru, in vzelo, da je bilo in nekaj površtih, Vseh zelo smo odvajali PDF. Prvo, da PDF je zelo, da je lahko, vseh zelo, da je zelo v tem, da je zelo izgleda, da je zelo izgleda. Zelo, da je nekaj začelj, ali nekaj, da je nekaj začelj, da je nekaj začelj, nekaj začelj, da je zelo izgleda, da je zelo izgleda. In to je izgleda izgleda, da je predstavila pdf, da je bilo poslednje vsega digitalnega, tako da imamo tudi, da je bilo vsega tudi. Nisem izgleda izgleda izgleda izgleda izgleda, da je bilo vsega tudi, da je bilo vsega tudi. To se se vzal, in v tem nekaj so priječili postojevac, že vsega začala je priječilja, bo je je nekaj prav, da vsega začala, ki je odličilja, ki je priječilja, senteli, ki se otrohnati in pri tem spremi嘛ščaj, nemač nam zelo, da je neč Zhuudi, bilo in pa je tačnje dokončil to, da dar je, da je tako, da je, da je. Kot so ali, da je tako, da je, da je, da je, da je. Nege, da je, da je, da je, da je, da je. I velike, da je to še dajo, da je, da je. In sem je, da tačnje, ja...���nih. Zgledajste, da najdoj v 2009 voljimo i obnu, da kot ima veliko nekaj razapravdov najočetno spremnov, da sem cihljama tako, če ni, ne znamo, SWhy in the reality of open source not really a subject to normal's to being a product, it's a concept that is Not really known outside the open source environment or the technology environment so of course, we lost a little bit and if you remember, after 2010 osged consensus of online suite because Google Docs started more or less in that time frame and they were started to be in the market. And people were really excited. Of course Google or Microsoft would know mlions of advertising or even billions of advertising behind the concept that everything should be in the cloud. in je čest, da je začala načineznja srednjev. Vse je neko koncolivne, ali je, da je prišla vsega vsega vsega. almost stopila. Tudi je nekaj nekaj, nekaj načineznja vsega način in geldovom vsega 2015. Nad nimi vsojili, da priver dough je tega nekazovana naživne, da je vendar izestov. I zelo da se kaj je odstavila, če nekaj nekaj odstavlja. Gej, da jih izgledaj na profil minister, ko je vzelo zvuk na tega marketa, da tudi na vsešlih marketih vsešli, ki je tudi občutno tudi office 365 in tudi zelo se vsešli office 365, ali možete vsešli office 365, ali je bilo vsešli, da počekajte vsešli desetov. Znamenja, da je izgleda, neseli se vsi vsešli vsešli sveti, ali so vsi mali zelo, da so prišli, da se nekaj je vsešli počekajte. Tukaj, v 2010 se prišlo s Librijeho občas. Sino spremno se izvimorti v 2010. Tukaj, občas počusti, nekaj protektašč nekaj nekaj dobro, ali so nekaj zelo, da nekaj nekaj dobro, v nekaj termi velo v njo. Because for instance if you traveling it's a lot more pratical to have the software on your machine then being connected if you are on a plane on a train yes there is wifi but it's not always ideal it's not the connection it's not always the good one think about large very large countries in Europe is small Zato, da sevedače na zelo, da je 4G zelo v Italiju, je pravda v vse. Zelo, da je v Brasilie, v Argentina, zelo v Stati, da je zelo, da je to zelo, ker je nisem nekaj, da je vse zelo, zelo je nekaj nekaj površenja, neko je veči sega. Zato da pa vžesno se vpoče, da je prijov, da smo počekali to oddaj na desktop. In kako se vse nespečne početne, da so početno, da vidi, da je neko koncentrujnačnja v digitali soveranti, to je vojezna vsega poslad. Zato da začeli prezost v Google, Microsoft in tudi doliške kompani, Asma asma, asma, asma, asma, asma asma, asma. Is now people is perceving that these companies are profiling you, are chasing you in some way. So even people that is not into technology starts to understand also because it's, if you have a little bit of salt in your mind, I mean, you look for an hotel in Milan ker je tudi po vsej konferenci, in po vsej blu je zelo začel, o reštenju v Milanu, o vsej v Milanu, kako se možete počke Milan, in tako, tako in svoj, nekako je ino technologij, zelo, da je vsej konek vsej vsej zelo, ker je zelo, nekako je bilo vsej, nekako je bilo vsej, in površenje, kako jaz sem zelo poččil, da jaz bila izgleda od rastorantov, vče pa je vstupnja vela, ki je izgleda na trajnje. To je velika objevda, in, če so objevda koncentruje, nekaj se lahko nemojimo, bo se pokazati, kaj se poččila, zelo na sej. Zelo počkaj, da prišlo je, of digital or data or whateverере Šoverainti, because we can guarantee to people that we are not profiling them, even if they use our LibreOffic on mobile, or on cloud, because we don't have that interest, our interest is in growing and making for it a good software product. Don't have our project is not an ecosystem of economies like Microsoft that is making money out of the products, and everything. The same now applies to Google, and the same applies to Amazon, and the same applies to Facebook, in in z vseh kompani, ki ne je vseh vseh, v del tudi vso, da bo tako vseh, v tem zelo, da wejmo veliko vseh vseh, zelo, da je vseh, vseh, je vseh, vseh, in vseh, izradiči vseh, začnev vseh, zelo, da je vseh, in jaz se lahko načino je težko uvjeljena je začnega. Zato je to zovora prezivna, ker smo prezivnih,即 smo zelo posledniki začin, po glasbeni sekel, da bude težko ne zvoltavati, rečimo, da bili to neko včine, že so prezivnih, že tilišnji se, �ičiti. Ose chto regimu mi lahko ciocraticiti opensujelcih zopiti v tudi tudi jo transwreni in čas tab потом sittingo p verificationi. Tri otrołavi iz Glasgow in Soc. Predan ins dim lahko be opensujelciih ljudi dise ki tu prestup... Teh bom da jeli Koreans post Rom. Kアgnかな seware organiz trendenко, av. ki so bomo zelo vžagaj, da sem da se začasnila, da sem dajte obroženje, da sem dajte prist, da so mislili, da jaz sem začasnila, da so mislili, da so dajte, da so mislili, da ste mislili, da so mislili. Mi se bi pačil, da so mislili, da so mislili, da se mislili? Pačil je zelo však, kaj je so načo, a tako je površenje, da je to, da so mislili, ker sem četno, da se je zašličen na svojo naši kraj, svoji bo tudi pojavljati, da so mi se tukaj razdajali, ker to je svoj svoj, da so zelo možno pojavljati, da se to zelo pri pomembno, kaj zelo pojavljati, in pri več deletnih razdajamo in nekaj. Zelo smo pojavljati odprotno. In vseš, da bismo, da tukaj librej ofici je vse najbolje, musimo se zatakno posvetil. Tak je tačna vseša nobrana in začel je, da je to začala in je je izjavljena. In pri našom vseša, ko je prijeljša, Open Source projekte in Libre Office was one of the seven most voted, and that was totally unexpected at the time. And if you look at the other project, they are all server side, because you have OpenStack, Docker, your Drupal, Linux of course, Ubuntu and Postgres, sorry. Thank you. You see the age is starting to make its effects. And the year after, you know that there was rumors that Ubuntu was going to replace the desktop software with an online suite. So they asked users, which software do you want? And this was unexpected as well. So Libre Office is the green one. So the answer was basically unanimous, because if you have more than, it was I think 78%. So 78% of Ubuntu users that, but it was kind of 5,000, 6,000 people. So reasonable number of people. And if you look at the other, there is no real comparison. You can say that the other numbers, which are all less than 4%, were just by chance. I don't want to write Libre Office, so I cross on Google Docs. But when you have one product that is almost 80%, you don't even have to ask if the numbers were good, because it's almost no discussion. And this was surprising in a sense, but it shows the opportunity that we have. Because at least in the environment of, let's say, technical users, power users, Libre Office is the facto office suite. This is four years ago. Let's say that it has changed, but you don't go down from 78 to 15. You may go down from 78 to 75 to 70, but in any case, it's a huge percentage. I don't know, but let's assume that it's not up. Let's try to be humble in what we do. Market revenues. These are analyst data. So these are real data from analysts. 2022, the market is $27 billion. 2023, 28.4, and we get up in 2025 at 31+. Okay. And this is the trend, the growing trend. As you see during the 2020 was down, and then it's up, it's growing 5% per year, which is also an opportunity. There are new people installing, of course, population is growing, people are adopting, younger people are adopting PCs. There is a growing number of users. This is office suite in general. And the value is not the commercial value because they, if you look at the, there is open source inside as well. So of course the commercial value is not exactly the same. This is what the analysts call addressable market. So the market, the potential market, and what is astonishing is that they give us 9% of this addressable market. So are we, are we producing 2.5 billions of revenues? I don't think so. If we had 2.5 billions of revenues probably would be, I don't know, in Copacabana, renting kind of tent in Copacabana and renting the old Copacabana beach for a week because we have enough money. No, of course joking. We have to be careful in how we spend our money because we anyway, we are a charity. So this means that we have a huge opportunity in front of us. It's not easy because if you think, let's of course take Microsoft as an example. Microsoft is the result of 40 years of right investment in the right direction. Then we can say that Microsoft is evil as a company. But if you look at the story, they have started to invest in some direction 10 years before the other companies. And after 10 years people say, oh, now I understand why they were doing this. But the fact is that only Bill Gates as in his group had the vision of investing in some direction. Then they did it wrong with internet. But of course when you are such a big company you can make some mistakes in some areas. But if you do it correctly in another one and if you remember one of the mantras of Bill Gates was the user will never be able to look into our documents. This is written into at least 100 Bill Gates emails. So the user will never be able to look into our documents. And he wrote it after Office Open XML was approved. Not only before, but even after the so-called standard was approved. We cannot do the same thing that Microsoft has done, of course. It's impossible in some cases. I would be against doing huge lobbying efforts and spending in, let's say, questionable lobbying amounts in some areas. While doing monitoring is perfect. I would support doing TDF, doing monitoring. I wouldn't support TDF doing the lobbying that is done in several environments. So how much are the products used? Open Source, this is 2017, but my friend tells me that the percentage is, that 16 is now 15. And of course it's not just LibreOffice. This is Open Source, so you have more than LibreOffice. So currently using Open Source is 15% of users. The fact is that today, and these are global users, so it's 3 billion users, the problem is that today only a percentage of the user is using only one Office Suite. Most of them are using two Office Suite. Sometimes one in the cloud and one on the desktop. Sometimes the same in the desktop and the cloud. Different ones. It depends from the work they're doing, the convenience. This is a fact. This is now a fact for everyone. But we can be one of the two. So we don't want to be the one. Let's say that we want to be one of the two Office Suite that are used. And if we are 15%, you have 80% opportunity of growing. Because these are the people that basically do not know Open Source. So we can do a lot to be there, and we have to do it together. As a project and therefore we have to do it as a foundation ecosystem, our friends, because this is the only way where we can inform the market of the opportunity. Because of course we cannot force anyone to use LibreOffice, but we can inform the market of the opportunity of using LibreOffice. And of using it in a correct way, so to adopt it for free, if they deserve to have it for free, and to pay some money, if they have to pay some money because they need it in a certain way. Size of the companies. These are the percentage, but you see we have a bigger opportunity. The smaller the company, or let's say the midsize the company, the bigger is the opportunity for us. Large companies of course have more difficulties. We all know that migrating 100,000 desktop is not a trivial task. So of course if you have 100,000 desktop, you probably think it about not 100,000 times about migrating, but you think a lot about migrating. If you are smaller, it's easier to make the change. So I'm not saying that we have to ignore the large companies, because in any case there is a 12% that may be 10% today, but anyway, it's by far more than we know. By far more than we know. But we can tell them, guys, we have certified people that can help you. We have companies that can sell you a product that is done for your needs. Can we sit around the table and discuss your opportunity? Never talk about a problem. The opportunity of moving to LibreOffice. And I think we have to work, of course, TDF as a charity cannot be a sales agent for ecosystem companies, of course, but we can chase the opportunities and then address the opportunities with the best mix of competencies that we have in the project. And I think that we have to start, and this is my opinion, so you can blame me as much as you want, but this is my opinion, we have to start thinking more really as an entity that can address different markets and therefore work together and work in a way that allows us to grow the LibreOffice share in the market. Because that is the only way that I see going forward, because if we continue to think, no, this is not my business, then the problem is that too many people think that it's not our business, and therefore we miss the opportunities. I will tell you a little bit more about, and sorry for being long, but I think it's important, at least I think it's important, if you don't think it's important, but I will tell you a little bit more about the history of the Italian Ministry of Defense, which I think is really a nice history on how it should be managed. Then it can be managed ten times as better, but at least it gave results. And this is interesting. Of course, these are public. I will share them, use them, because I think that gives us some insights. Look at where the dark blue is. Quality of customer support. We have to work here, guys. We have to work. Not that we have to, because the first answer is, OK, we hire 100 people. No, because this is perception. If you are down here, means that the perception is bad. Not the reality, because probably people think, there's basically no support. Let's improve it. For instance, we have never thought about sending automatic replies to user list. We send an automatic reply to the download list, which is suboptimal. We should probably improve it, because I've seen, I've had exchanges with some users that your first reply is a little bit misleading, so let's work at it, but for instance, in another mailing list, why don't you get an automatic reply that says, it has been received, but there are volunteers working on it, so don't expect an answer in two hours. But if you don't get an answer in five days, please resend your message, because we all have a job and we may have missed your message. Let's think about this kind of just care of the user, which is not doing anything wrong to people. We are not telling them that we profile them by outcoding all their data somewhere, but let's see if we can improve this. We have telegram groups. We do a good job on telegram groups in some areas, but I think we could probably do a better job. We have discourse, and discourse there is a large amount of questions. In some cases the questions maybe deserve an answer earlier, but of course if you don't have people looking at that, it's a problem, so even on discourse we should maybe make it clear that most of the answers are provided by volunteers and therefore people cannot... Because that is the perception, customer support. If you look at it, I would expect ease of setup to be lower. Because if you look at the image that we get as a whole library office, it's a nightmare to install. Of course it's a small number of people that says this, but our installation process is less straightforward than other office suites. This for sure. So we can either improve the installation process or make people aware that the installation process is a little bit more tedious than the other ones, but it's also a free software. So we want to assure you that all the details are processed in the right way. And I'm not, of course, cost-effectiveness, but that was trivial too. Easy to manage. Built for professionalism. We have to improve this. I mean, library office is as professional as any other office suite. Why does it have to be there? And you see the gap with Microsoft Office. It's not true. So let's use this and think how we can improve or send up the blue dots in the different areas. We have never really used security as a marketing tool and I agree that we shouldn't do. But maybe making more visible the security process that we apply to the software. I mean, I'm sure that if I talk to Kaolan in front of the ocean at night in front of the fire for... It will give me information on the security process that if we transform in a short text, we'll communicate a lot to users. Because I'm sure that you are doing a lot more than what is visible outside. Because what is visible are the patches, the CVS, and that is visible because it's communicated. But I'm sure that we do a lot more than that. And therefore we should be better at making people aware of all of this. And this is the last one. So these are the most important attributes when considering office productivity. So reliable, user-friendly, secure are the first three. And built for professionalism is the fourth. So we are not doing terribly well in these four areas. And we should improve. Let's do some more focused thinking, more focused communication altogether. Because I think this is useful not only for the LibreOffice community, but it's also useful for Collabora and Allotropia for their versions. They're free to ignore, of course, but I think it's important because the attributes are the same for all the software that is based on LibreOffice. So we should really work better together in our marketing to have a message that is really coherent between the different companies. And I think I'll task myself and Mike to work more on this because I think it's an opportunity, work better together, work on some messages, on some tools together, because that is an opportunity for all of us. And now sorry for being... But I think I hope you find it interesting. It's something that can help us. So we know our project model, so I will not... But basically when we started, we said it's a free office suite, so free software. But we don't want to have one company that is leading everything on the... So we try to have a community and an ecosystem of companies. We have... We should grow the ecosystem, of course, but let... I think let's be clear. If we don't grow the addressable market, it's difficult that the ecosystem will grow. Because growing the ecosystem without growing the addressable market means that the current companies will make less money and I don't think this is what we want. I think we want them to be as successful as they can and then other companies that are successful. So this means that we have to grow the addressable market. We have to, sorry, sell more libre office. All together again. Of course, with respect for the reciprocal tasks, responsibilities, but all together we have to increase, grow the market that we are addressing. Otherwise, there's no way that we can... It all stays theoretical. No, the exercise that we did the other day with Uwe, there was a grow the ecosystem, which was rather important. But grow the ecosystem means grow the project. Because otherwise, each one of us will have... I will have to slim down 40 kilos instead of 25 and each one has to eat a lot less than that because there won't be money for everyone and this is not what we want. And sorry to stress the money. I'm not a greedy person, but at the end of the month, I have to pay the bills like anyone else. So we need to allow people to pay their bills and to have fun and to grow the project and to do all the nice stuff that we are doing, but we can do better. So who are the stakeholders? Here, let's be clear also on this. We are stakeholders, of course. Community members, we have an incredible connection with the project. So of course, let's say we are not the ideal people to look at the project because we are so much into the project that our vision is not abstract enough from the project. But I've tried to be... to look at the project from outside, but it's difficult. And then we have users. Users have no personal involvement. Most of them, they don't even pay for the software and when you don't pay for something, your ties are almost nothing. So we have to create first an emotional tie with the product. We have to make the user more proud of being LibreOffice users. And the problem is that we are in a market where there are commodities. So the value of the product is, in general, small. It's perceived as a small value. Open source sustainability. This is something where there is a large discussion. Not every day, but every now and then there are people that come out with very interesting documents. Especially... ArtBlid was a turning point and we all agree on that, but let's focus on the last two. So in 2016 Nadia Egbal, she's a researcher, was funded by the Ford Foundation in the States to make a research following the ArtBlid bug. And it's basically a research paper, but it's a book. It's over 160 pages. It's roads and bridges, the unseen lab labor behind our digital infrastructure. You can download it free from the internet, but if you send me an email, I already have the PDF, so I'm happy to share the PDF. Second one. In 2019 Driz, and I will go a little bit over Driz words, has written this post, which is basically a long one, balancing makers and takers to scale and sustain open source. This is extremely interesting. Driz has done a hell of a job in looking at the problem under different point of view. The third, if you don't know him, is the guy that developed Drupal and then created Akuja. Akuja is the value-added... One of the value-added, the biggest one, value-added company on Drupal. So he's a brilliant developer. He lives in Belgium, I think. He is very friendly, but he did a very good job in studying the project, so I will steal Driz words because I think he has really got the core of the issue. So small communities can rely on volunteers, but as the project grows, you need... You see, the governance needs to be reformed so the project can be maintained more easily. So three models, self-governance, privatization, and centralization. So, of course, I think the problem is... Privatization, OK, is a choice, but it's not open source anymore. So if we go to self-governance or centralization, the reality is that what Driz suggests is to improve self-governance to the next level, which is a challenge, but it happens. It may happen. Just to make it clear the process that Driz makes this example. So the roads were created by volunteers because in the old days you have to reach the other village and you create the road. Then they are improved by businesses. You can make... Once upon a time you were paying taxes to go on the roads. So, of course, the business had an interest. And then the infrastructure at the end is managed by the government, so you go to centralization. Of course, the project can be similar, but if you want to maintain open source, you need to have a different privatization concept. So, he writes and says, first there is a caveat, I understand that my opinions may not be shared by everyone, but again, I think they are really interesting. Let's be very... My personal idea, but I think if we think really about the issue, the problem, we cannot have a project of the size of liberal office if there isn't some money associated somewhere. And that cannot just be donation money because our reach is far beyond the level of the money that we get with donations. There's no way. Either we stop the project, we reduce the project, we reduce the project as a global reach. And when you have global reach, it would be fantastic to run the project as a group of friends, but guys, there are 160 countries in the world and having a group of 160 friends that meet every week face to face is impossible. There are language issues. We know the issues that we have. So we need some professionalism that I think we are already applying to the project, but we need also the money to improve the professionalism to the next level. Otherwise, some of the challenges that we have and most of these challenges we are aware, we will never be able to reach the objective. So he told us a little bit about this and of course he says, I'm not saying that every community has to change the model, but of course there is a point where you have to think seriously about the model. And then he makes what I think is a really interesting, important definition. It makes a distinction between makers and takers. So makers are the companies that are born, of course the open source project, but also the company that are born out of open source. So they develop open source software and usually they invest a large chunk, he considered that by default 50%. Maybe may not be 50%, but of course he has to give up an estimation. So he says they invest 50% of their money in improving open source. Then of course with the other 50% they make business, they make money as it is normal for companies. And then there are the takers. The takers are the people that use leverage open source do a little bit and then take all the rest. And he says this is 10% and 90%. So they invest 10% on open source and they take 90% out of open source. I thought a little bit, I had a couple of discussion with the DRIS, we had a couple of calls. He convinced me to take his numbers as good. So let's say that makers are 50, 50, takers are 10 and 90. Then we can discuss for days if it's a different percentage. So the difference between makers and takers is not always clear because in some cases a taker can seem a good citizen of the open source environment. The reality is that he is not a really good citizen. But the difference, he says as a rule of thumb makers invest in growing the company and open source and takers are growing the business and let the other take care of the open source part, which I think is basically okay. And therefore, and that's the final one, and this is how makers can defend from takers. Because of course, if you invest 90%, you will have an unfair advantage of a company that is in the same market and invest 50%, because you invest 40% more. So he says the only way that makers can defend them is by, one of the choices of course is what several projects have done, they've changed their license. So they went away from open source like elastic, like others. And therefore that way you reduce the possibility of leveraging the software by takers. But if you want to stay open source, the only way is to improve the quality of the project. This is not written here, but if you read and again, you can download the three's blog, but if you want it, I have made a PDF out of it, and I will send you the PDF. The conclusion that he says is that only by growing the project as an entity, makers can defend from takers. Otherwise, the end will always be this one. So this is maker and these are takers. So if you see the visual representation of 50-50 against 10-90 means, you don't have any doubt. If that one doesn't work together with the project, so it doesn't work together with all the other members of the project ecosystem and volunteers with the project, this will crunch us. There's no way of doing it other way. I mean, this is pure being counting. You invest more, you do more advertising, you do more of whatever. So I think that this at LibreOffice, we don't have any other choice. I mean, if we want to stay open source, if we don't want to change our license, this is the only solution that we have. Is to continue to have ecosystem company investing 50-50 and as, let's say, I put myself on the side of volunteers at this moment, as work together with the companies to make their investment in open source as effective as this theory, of course. But if we don't work together, this will stay, will not grow in term of, you know, we will never grow the cloud around this 50%. We will never grow the perception around this 50% that, yes, that is the 50% that they're putting on their product, but behind them there is a community that is helping them. And we can find ways just to make examples. Of course, if you change, in this case, you change the license, okay. If you don't change the license, that means, and let's make the names. And let's say that Allotropia develops a feature that, and put into the basket of the open source, the LibreOffice basket of open source. This feature will improve collaboration product and vice versa. Collaboration feature will allow Allotropia, basically they will, let's say, support their competition by giving features to others and we volunteers, we give features to them and they give features to us. So only if we maintain this, you know, it's a positive spiral that grows because then hopefully there will be another ecosystem company that allows them, gives them features to add to their products and they back can build on those features and we can together have a better product for a better free software product and a better free software product for the businesses, which means that they will have to contribute back in some way back to the project by becoming another ecosystem members, by buying solutions, by buying development ways can be different. But this I think is the only way. Then you know where, no, you don't know where I live and I can give you my address. It's not a problem. If you want to blame me, do it, but I really try to think a lot about this because I think that if we don't improve as a group, that way we are losing our time. Mike, you have a question? Slide to non-companies Here you discuss company that is maker versus company that is taker, but I want to also say that the community does not consist only of companies. And when you extend it, there are makers who are volunteers and takers who are users, I'm sorry. So I wanted to say that too much focus on doing everything for users, not in any way, but we should balance here to not forget that this same picture may apply there too. So I totally understand why we should grow the user base and so on, but I also think that Uwe's idea that our audience as a project should be more focused on contributors, to be contributors should be not compromised, to not become detrimental to makers. But what I was saying is that we have to grow the project, so we have to grow contributors as well. At the moment I'm focusing on the, let's say the economics, but of course, I started before that we have to grow the ecosystem, which means grow volunteers and grow companies and grow contributors anyway. But I'm trying to focus on the economics because I think this is a key part. If we don't sort out the economy, then it's a risk for everyone. Said, let us improve the quality of user support on a previous slide. But well, the question was run against customers of what, I'm sorry. Maybe I mistook the previous slide, but there was a graph that told about perception between perception of who, who are those respondents. Who are respondents of this? This is done by analysts, they will never tell you. I just claim that this is not customer support in some very specific sense. I would claim that this means user support in this case. If I may add something, it is really, really important that you realize this is the picture that people have of us. This is not the reality. Believe me, I had a really nice ex-experience of having to install a Microsoft Office license, 364 locally on a PC of a customer. I tell you, in the time this needed, I could have installed about four or five Libra offices with no problems. So the ease of install is a fiction, but this is the perception of the people out there. This is not the reality, this is the perception. And this is about customers, not about users. Look where Microsoft Office is here in customer support. We all know that it's lousy. And it's just because the name is Microsoft, the perception is that it's okay. Okay. There was Eyal, sorry. Ah, okay, sorry. Okay, thank you. Apart from this, make a taker discussion, which is an important discussion with these consequences, but you can do it in days, I think. 90%, I'm pretty right with you with two things I want to disagree. I point this out. The concept of lobbying in this area, I think we have to rethink. Lobbing is per se not a bad thing. It's the way you are doing lobbying. You know I'm doing a lot of my time in doing... I'm a registered Italian PR professional, so even in Germany, lobbying, the thing lobbying have a really bad thing. And when we do lobbying in the way we understand it trustworthy, then we get a lot of answers saying, yes, I want to talk to you because I know that you are trustworthy. So don't disqualify the thing lobbying itself. We should disqualify how it is done by others with corruption. Absolutely, but I said that you can have lobby which is the monitoring part and the informing part, which is absolutely correct. The problem is that what is behind. I mean I can spend hours talking about lobby companies in Italy. We belong to the same association. I'm a member of FERPI, which is the Italian Association of PR Professional. And there is people that in the same time that I've been a member, which is almost 40 years, have kind of 10 to 20 claims to the probiviri per year. Because they obey behavior and people has been thrown out of the association and they go to a level where they caught a person with a brief case with all 50 euro cut in half. And he said, but it's normal. I don't trust to bring all the 50 euros with me, of course. This is not the lobby that we want to do. Yes, but a good lobby. And I want to motivate to do more lobbying. There's Paolo there. Second idea I got out of, or second few out of my lobbying work. There's also this under, this point out, this is very important because lobbying gets it results now with the ideas of digital sovereignty. But there's also a risk that if we are doing not this what you are mentioning, there's a window of opportunity and we have to handle expectations. Expectations are, okay, if I want to change to migrate to liberal office with the government, I need a thousand consultants to do that. So where are the thousand consultants? And we have to manage these expectations so that this window of opportunity will sometimes close and it will backfire to us and then this will happen. Paolo then. So I want to push back against not necessarily your conclusions but some of your assumptions or assertions. First is what the meaning of sustainability for a software project is. And I would say that the outcome or flow of money is not the essence of sustainability. It is secondary and the most important or the core measure of sustainability of the project is the time spent by developers maintaining and updating and expanding it. And of course it's beyond the certain size of a project and complexity there is need for money and other economic resources to make that happen but it's the wrong core measure, I would say, which also kind of echoes what Mike was saying. And that's one point. A second point is the partial assumption that work on software goes in the way of forming for-profit companies or even that office productivity should be conceived as a market. Usage of software is not a market. If anything our goal or part of our goal should be to destroy the market of software productivity to make it so that those 30 billion dollars or whatever disappear and are replaced by say 10%, 5% of that or whatever the amount that is necessary to is not paid for software mostly not paid for software but somehow indirectly goes into supporting free software that caters to these needs just like there isn't a market for browsers. People don't pay for web browsers although a lot of resources do go into making and updating browsers. I would say more but that's enough for a comment. I think Lothar already said some part of what I wanted to say in regards to lobbying in a way in doing a bit of that in Luxembourg well in the good way actually trying to promote open source in general and actually free office in various institutions and that I think is something that we should do more, so do the good lobbying going there and actually show them that there is a community there are alternatives viable alternatives because for years I've been talking with European institutions with European Commission and say well now there's no way out of Microsoft offices too complicated and things like that as you say in technical terms, bullshit but naturally they need to see the community out there they need to see the opportunity we consultants that allow them to make these migrations in that sense being able to form more consultants more professionals are able to engage in these activities what is quite important additional studies that probably you could put in that list in terms of open source funding there is a research to which I participated in 2021 so last year was being published just recently mechanism to fund open source projects even from the base even from very small groups and then going up so there is a lot being done from that point of view and we should be there present so maybe invest time for Italo to be present in Brussels me in Luxembourg and then exchange information to make sure that the European Commission actually sees us out there because if we are not seeing there we don't exist so that means that the only one that exists is Microsoft in a way and just one comment in terms of growing the project in a way I always told that we have to be seen we matter because we have a certain number of users so for us users are an asset so if we have ten user we don't matter if we have 100 million well it's already something we start getting 500 million users out there I mean we are powerful so then at that point we can even go out and get even more money for example European investments and that number is what allows us to expand the ecosystem if the users are not there companies cannot go there to make the migrations that's it thanks, I just wanted very quickly to say I love the presentation but beyond that I think the browser model of a totally demonetized paradise ignores the very serious privacy problems that underpin the whole browser ecosystem and the fund all browsers pretty much it's all very well saying that Firefox is this wonderful independent project but we know that Google props them up because the default, which is critically important is to give all your data to Google so you're basically it is a privacy funded ecosystem and I don't think and the desktop model is so radically different that we need to find I mean there are no giant search monopolies to pay us money to sell privacy if you see what I mean that was the first thing the second thing is I just want to agree with Paolo briefly just why not I know, I know, yes refreshing the use of economic advantage that TDF has, which is its users and I don't know that we exploit that as well as we could, there are many sort of partnerships we could make with other companies I think of the Gramalys of the world although they're proprietary but there's the language toolers of the world and there are people that print things and so on that we could work with to exploit that user base to make money and I think there are obvious business tie ups without sacrificing our charitable status or ethos that we could make to grow investment in TDF so let's go to the end I've already mentioned this this is not the right answer to make open source sustainable so this is what we did when we started I think now we have to relaunch our own relaunch of innovation after 10 years 12 years I think we we should probably restart with the same enthusiasm we add in in 2010 which is not easy but we should try to restart and being enthusiastic about the software I don't think we are as enthusiastic as we were in 2010 objectives you know the objective is to be the best free open source office suite use the leverage the LibreOffice which is now an umbrella brand LibreOffice with the concept of LibreOffice technology is an umbrella brand because there is the transactional engine all this is LibreOffice so most of what we do is based on the LibreOffice technology and LibreOffice is the main product based on the LibreOffice technology so I think we have to make it clear and we have to invest more on the LibreOffice technology because I think that this makes us different from the other office suite in general the next 10 years leverage the LibreOffice technology change the perception that we are a software vendor probably I think we have it's now time to develop something which is more visually distinctive being just a tagline on the LibreOffice logo so I have a TDF logo which is independent from the LibreOffice logo and then we leave the tagline under LibreOffice because that of course is our flagship technology and product but I think we have to go to the next step you know the LibreOffice technology but in general I think that this is what we should start because I've used this in many environments so with technical people and with non-technical people and I can tell you that the non-technical people that of course do not start the difference is that the technical people starts to look at the symbols so it's word processing engine ue dokex so the technical guy focus on the definitions the non-technical guy looks at the so the next question from the non-technical guy is does it mean that if I use it on the web and on the desktop is exactly the same and the answer is yes because I know that it's not the same for Microsoft Office they are different so they already catch the other because they have issues in transferring files from one version to the other so they showing this it's a very visual transferring a visual perception and of course you have to be in front of them but learn how to use it because this for non-technical people it's really easy to catch so start using and if you think that this is not enough write it alone you should elaborate the next one and I'll try to light up my own fire on my place, not go to Kaolan this time and at night assist me find the next marketing gimmick for the project but let's challenge each other I have to make a presentation in 10 days to 7 years old guy can you help me yes, I can try to help you then maybe I'm not good enough but let's work together if someone ask me to make a technical presentation I want a technical presentation on LibreOffice I will never prepare the slide I will probably call some developer and say do you have slides to lend me because I don't have the technical slides so let's work together all together developers and if you have the doubt that what I say is not correct I talk because I can ensure you that I don't invent anything of course I elaborate and I create stories on what you do and stories are stories are stories so stories are not code there are no objects and classes in a story there are humans and stuff and people and by the way I don't know what an object is in a class so this is just a monkey repeating the terms that I hear from developers so let's make this happen so these are our current users of course it's not precise but let's say that this reflects more or less the reality let's make them the ideal ones so individual small business mainly support with donation a few free riders we cannot avoid them but the majority of universities, enterprises governments and whatever have to give us some money some contribution and educate we have to educate them so I give you a few small story about the Italian Ministry of Defense when we we trained them we trained the trainers at the Ministry of Defense so Libre Italia volunteers a number of them trained the trainers we had people from the army from the navy and from the the aviation and at the end we trained the trainers so they started to deploy Libre Office and I for six months more or less every night at eight o'clock I could put an alarm on it Generale Sileo called me selling we have a couple of bucks on Libre Office we have more you should solve them impossible why impossible because if we solve for free the two bucks to you in one year you won't have Libre Office at all so do you prefer to pay for the two bucks or to pay for 100,000 micros of licenses ok next evening we have found another two bucks ok nice and this for and at the end what they did it's as you say but do you have a solution of course we have a solution there are companies that sell a version and they can solve you the bucks but this is not the document foundation because the document foundation is a charity so at the end they went to one of the ecosystem companies and made a contract I don't even know the numbers so for a number of which I think in general is about between 30 and 40% of their desktops it's less probably now ok so I think that if every large organization of the world using Libre Office gives us 40% enterprise paid desktops which were the non-strategic I told them just make an exercise you have to make it which are the strategic desktops and which are the non-strategic you have PCs where you write a letter every week this is non-strategic if you find a bug you will find a work around you know they have a huge amount of locations and there are locations where they have 2 PCs where they just print reports at the end of the week so if the report is not beautiful it's a report anyway so these are not strategies so they are paying for around 40% of the numbers and I think that if all the users paid for 40% of the numbers we would already be in a different condition in term of economy so when people ask don't do the mistake at least on our side then companies have their own commercial strategies and I don't want to discuss them but don't say oh you have to pay 100,000 desktops let's discuss on which is the best solution for your problem you have a problem you have numbers I can put you in touch with the right people to solve your problem but be let's say we have to be a little bit creative of course Microsoft answer would be either you buy 100,000 or nothing we have the luxury of having different answers so use the luxury of having different answers so communicate and this should be a responsibility of everyone we are not selling we just say if you deploy the community version today in 10 years you may not have a free office suite which fits your needs because we are not able to sustain anymore the growth of a software that is professional, secure and so on and so forth so I think and if you say this you are not selling anything so if you are not for profit you are not risking anything it's the reality people that invested the region Emilia Romagna that in 2012 because of some idiots the Italian community invested in Apache open office has no product today to deploy so and as of course a big failure like this they are going back to Microsoft office of course they are not going a second time to open source but this is exactly what has happened at Regione Emilia Romagna choose the wrong project the project is going is fading away you don't have a product after 10 years today Apache open office is unusable at professional level and let's work together it's difficult, it's terribly difficult I know that is terribly difficult but let's say that we find a way of mentioning people and customers or friends let's leverage that and this we have to leverage as a group because of course no one of us can know everyone so this is the end sorry for being a little bit longer but I think it was something that we had to discuss in a very open and frank way because we have to make this concept clear sustainability and yeah you can put it first or second economics but if we don't have enough money we don't have a project that's of this size then of course if the project is a small utility that is maintained by one person that is a different story that can happen but we have 120 languages how the hell a product with 120 language version of the software can live without having the money to support the reach of the 120 community that we are reaching it's just use a little bit of common sense in this we want to be part of a global project we need to have the economics that keeps a global project alive otherwise we all are around a small project that was open office in 2002 where it was just a small group of people supporting the project and the project grew so if we want really to support LibreOffice we have the numbers we can say unfortunately we are too big but we are too big we have to keep and grow and become better and anyway I will fight for us to grow until I will be part of the project so I will fight in this direction Kendi hello hello prezident, when you say that we need more money do you mean we as TDF or do you mean the entire ecosystem plus TDF as a project as a project so everyone ecosystem come I said we have to grow the addressable market because the addressable market means more money for the ecosystem means of course more money for TDF probably more donations it's the only way it's not just TDF I'm talking about a project the global project not just a portion of the project I don't think we can I mean it's not silos we all know that as much as we are at the same time volunteers and paid we cannot have a silos where we say this money is there this money is here either we grow the cloud around the project or it's not going to work even if the ecosystem grows too much and the community doesn't grow because at that point the ecosystem will be let's say eating the community at the time of sun taking the decisions everyone and so on either we grow together or I don't see a real nice future sorry for speaking too much again I have a question tricky one what is the role of ODF in the future of the project I think you know that I'm passionate about ODF so I think this is one of our assets this is part of the design about digital sovereignty because the users are total control over the file of course not a total technical control but for instance we have helped several people to recover their ODF files by unzipping them and sending them back to XML and telling them you now have the main components but I'm sure that you are able to rebuild the file easily and we all know that if you do this with Office Open XML apart from developers it's going to be impossible because the text is fractioned in a way that it's not user maybe technically perfect but it's not user accessible so I think is an important part also because on one side it is in this sense in this case it's European so it has different origin from the usual source of old technology and it's really standard under every point of view I mean again talking about quality of standard and not quality of formats I think that we have to invest on the quality of the standard not the quality of the format because the quality of the format you can have discussions me with Regina for probably for without stopping a minute but while on the quality of the standard there's no there's no discussion and of course but we have to push interoperability that is also a key a key need to add to add on this if you ask someone to open a file 20 years old I think no one expected to be open properly but thinking about ODF I could imagine that everyone thinks it is a proper format even after 20 years in the same time we failed to brings this into some perception of reliability as you showed in the picture which is of course result how and who you ask what people think about the products and it was not a question about liberal office was open source productivity software in general but I think we need to marketing this aspect better if we trust the numbers by the way in this specific point security companies help us because there is a Kaspecki research 2019 that says that 80% of all malware worldwide is carried by a docx file just a quick suggestion before we market our unchanging layouts of 20 year old ODF documents I think we should talk to Michael Stahl no sure but I mean I mean absolutely we have to if we entered into this kind of messages we will double check with competent people no problem you know that Michael as I said I tell stories I never give technical information