Talks Cheap and Results Count.
Well rather than "just talk" about this, I think I will start up a
"conversion group"...
The more I use this program, the more I see it as being a clone of the,
"This is the way we have always done it" process.
And then look at the shit that Microsoft produces.....
Backwards and Forwards incomparability, and cheap shit, piece meal -
"free" ? programs with the office suites...
And without a detailed surmisation of it all, basically none of them
work within each other....
Copying this - well it's enabled US to get the "composite program" all
more or less working pretty well, but now I think is the time to make
the apps work as a single program.
It has to change and I am going to change it.
Cheers
Shane
The more I
Thorsten Behrens wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 05:42:25PM +0100, mike scott wrote:
I commented a while ago about the lack of consistency between
components - for a supposedly "integrated" suite it actually seems
quoite atrocious. Fields are restricted to a tiny set in Draw (try
doing a mail-merge of a Christmas card!!), you've commented on
tables; grouping of objects isn't possible in writer (try lining up
inserted pictures), as isn't text flow between text boxes. The list
goes on.
Dare one ask why?
You may ask - and the answer would be, that despite of numerous
shared functionality, OOo is still four big (and two smaller)
different applications, with *considerable* amount of code that is
*not* shared among them.
For the life of me, I can't see why /all/ the facilities shouldn't be
available in some form to /all/ components - even if the UIs are
different to reflect the differing emphases of those components.
Pure technical (and age-old) design decisions. Even ODF would
support your proposal flawlessly.
Cheers,
-- Thorsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
