Thank you, Jonathon, for giving us something specific. I get so weary of
LO people (and most of the media world it seems) spouting how much better
LO is but I fail to see it in my use cases. Most of what you have pointed
out is not applicable to the vast majority of users I would guess. I keep
waiting to see the open source world quit copying the latest gimic from MS
and start rolling out really useful features -- and, no, I don't have
enough imagination to know what those might be.
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 1:43 AM, toki <toki.kant...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 01/12/2017 04:52 PM, Chuck Davis wrote:
> > tell me half a dozen things that LO can do that OO cannot do?
> From a corporate POV, the two most significant differences are:
> * TSCP/BAILS classification;
> * PDF signing;
> For linguists, and users of endangered/minority languages, the most
> significant differences are:
> * LibO 5.3 more accurately displays non-horizontal writing systems than
> AOo 4.1.3;
> * LibO 5.3 more accurately displays Indus Valley writing systems than
> AOo 4.1.3;
> Neither LibO nor AOo can handle reverse boustrophedon writing systems. :(
> For the rest of use, the most significant differences are:
> * Table Styles;
> * Swapping out custom palettes --- gradients, hashes, colours --- is
> much easier in LibO 5.3 than AOo 4.1.3.
> Semi-related, but keeping track of 500 different palettes in LibO 5.3 is
> much easier than with AOo 4.1.3.
> > LO choked (version 18.104.22.168 on Linux), OO (version 4.1.2 on same machine)
> opened it perfectly and gave me
> AOo is far more tolerant of malformed documents than LibO is.
> OTOH, LibO can import from, and export to more file formats than AOo.
> I am not saying that LibO correctly imports/exports said file formats.
> > And now, I hear, they are going to add that stupid "ribbon" thingy to be
> even more annoying and counter-productive.
> I'm not sure if you are referring to MUFFIN in general, or the
> NoteBookBar in specific.
> Regardless, with a slight increase in complexity, user customization
> increases dramatically. You have a choice of:
> * NetbookBar;
> * SideBar;
> * TopBar;
> * Sidebar with TopBar;
> * None of the above. (This requires the user to do a lot of mucking
> about in the "Expert Configuration" part of LibO. It requires even more
> time and patience to correctly configure everything to be keystroke
> reachable. I haven't tested this part out. Misconfiguration can require
> complete uninstallation of all files, then re-installing the program.);
> At least initially, use of the NetBookBar is _discouraged_. Odds are the
> only support it will see, is from third party extensions.
> Wondering how long before somebody creates a theme for LibO, that
> includes a NetBookBar. AFAIK, custom themes are not yet possible for AOo.
> > So code quantity or quality aside, what can LO do for me as a common
> The most important thing to know, is what the use-case is:
> * Do you really need an office suite?
> * Would a stand alone program be more suitable?
> If your cyberlife consists of:
> * Playing games, then GoDot is a better alternative;(^1)
> * Dwelling in spreadsheets, perhaps Gnumeric is more suitable;
> * Writing scientific reports, a TeX solution might be more suitable;
> * Creating pretty charts, R is more suitable;
> * Drawing pretty pictures, GIMP is more suitable;
> * Creating movies, Cinelerra is more suitable;
> * Animating things, do the whole thing with Blender;
> * Databases, then Python and SQLite, PostGres, or MariaDB is more suitable;
> ^1: All of the games (Flight Simulator, Space Invaders, Tick Tack Toe)
> have been removed from LibO and AOo. However, templates for various
> games are available.
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org