Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi :) This kinda reminds me of the story about 2 bulls on top of a hill both looking down at a herd of cows. The younger one says Lets race down the hill and dance with one of those ladies. The older one replies Lets walk down and dance with them all. If we follow MS's lead in keeping up with their latest formats then we might get short-term gains but we really stuff ourselves up in the longer term. Plus we end up trailing a long way behind MS. We need to work towards getting ahead of them in more and more ways. At the moment we already beat them in quite a few ways but we need more in order for more people to take notice. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it; users@global.libreoffice.org users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Saturday, 27 July 2013, 11:46 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 If we have to beat Microsoft then we need to focus only on what Microsoft provides and not on .odt format, etc. We cannot beat Microsoft by introducing a new format and expecting customers to use new formats (I use Microsoft formats only and whatever other formats is suported by Microsoft). We need to beat Microsoft at its own game by doing what they are doing in office suite. A new format is not going to change the game but being totally compatible and stable with the formats that Micorosoft supports (xls, xlsx, doc, docx, save as pdf, text, etc.) is going to change the game. Amit On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.ukwrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
When you get a new hammer, do you make the new hammer look like the old hammer? No! LibreOffice does not need to be micro$oft office, a bloated application that tries to be all things to all people and does none of them well. LO is a good office suite in its own right. People need to stop being lazy and learn something new for a change. Girvin Herr P.S. - Nice metaphor! On 08/04/2013 12:19 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) This kinda reminds me of the story about 2 bulls on top of a hill both looking down at a herd of cows. The younger one says Lets race down the hill and dance with one of those ladies. The older one replies Lets walk down and dance with them all. If we follow MS's lead in keeping up with their latest formats then we might get short-term gains but we really stuff ourselves up in the longer term. Plus we end up trailing a long way behind MS. We need to work towards getting ahead of them in more and more ways. At the moment we already beat them in quite a few ways but we need more in order for more people to take notice. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it; users@global.libreoffice.org users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Saturday, 27 July 2013, 11:46 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 If we have to beat Microsoft then we need to focus only on what Microsoft provides and not on .odt format, etc. We cannot beat Microsoft by introducing a new format and expecting customers to use new formats (I use Microsoft formats only and whatever other formats is suported by Microsoft). We need to beat Microsoft at its own game by doing what they are doing in office suite. A new format is not going to change the game but being totally compatible and stable with the formats that Micorosoft supports (xls, xlsx, doc, docx, save as pdf, text, etc.) is going to change the game. Amit On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.ukwrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable
OT: Defraggers...Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Someone had asked about a free/FOSS defragger... There is UltraDefrag: http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html I don't use it much, but thats only because disk fragmentation is not nearly as big of a problem on modern systems as it used to be. Windows7+ does a pretty good job of avoiding fragmentation all on its own. On 2013-07-31 6:42 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Tom No it's payware https://www.disktrix.com/ but well worth the $30.00, and only necessary for Windows. If you do want to care again, and want a very good free version then Piriform's Defraggler is a great product http://www.piriform.com/. They've recently gone to a payware model, but still keep to their freeware versions, and they have three other great tools, CCleaner, Recuva and Speccy, also freeware or payware versions. I use them all in Windows (except Defraggler on my system as this is replaced with UD) as well as for friends and clients, and have never needed their payware versions. And they have never let me down, in trashing any systems I have used them on for the last five years. Yep, my Ubuntu, with the pause at the login screen included and the fastest I can type my password, takes all of 20 seconds, shutdown about 10 seconds. Agreed Windows still has it's place, and I have to be familiar with it due to my business and support of my clients. I even have an old PowerMac to keep up to date with my few clients using Macs. Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 12:25 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Is Disktrix UltimateDefrag free? FOSS? Lol, somehow i doubt it but i keep an ear out jic. I tend to use the inbuilt Windows one. I don't really care enough anymore to go beyond that. When i did used to care i used PerfectDisk. it usually has a 1 month free trial and that was usually enough for me. Nowadays i just really prefer to just do a reasonably good job and since that is far, far ahead of the way most systems are set-up i just settle for that. I've even found a tendency for ones in England to be set to US localisation and such. If i want a fast system i just reboot into GnuLinux. Windows has other advantages but speed and security are not top of the list! Eskimos have a lot of words for snow and ice because they see a lot of it all. Windows has a lot of words for different security issues because it suffers from tons of different things. [shrugs] I still use Windows quite a bit though because when you know a thing's flaws it's usually easier to cope. Like going round to see a cat owner who insists their cat is always free of fleas, you just know you are going to get bitten so you just deal with it. Regards from Tom :) *From:* Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za *To:* Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk *Cc:* users@global.libreoffice.org *Sent:* Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 23:01 *Subject:* Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi Tom Ah Ok, I see, this is the same methodology I'm using. I generally turn off the swap file for a badly defragged drive, including any hibernation files etc if active or used on a laptop, then defrag (Disktrix UltimateDefrag, possibly the best I've used to date). After a good clean-up I then set the pagefile and any hibernation files if necessary. With UD's FragProtect, this only has to be done every few months, and they are one of the few defraggers that can defrag and place the MFT at the beginning of the drive along with the folders entries, ahead of any data. But this has to be done with a reboot and MS pre-install mode (UD does it all automatically) to complete this task. And I've benched my drives on all of my systems, it certainly makes for very fast boot and shutdown times, and better stability. Regards Andrew Brown On 31/07/2013 10:52 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) wrt Virtual Memory/pagefile.sys/Swap on Windows the trick seems to be to set it as a fixed value. Find System Properties - Advanced tab - Performance (top 3rd) Settings - Performance Settings - Advanced tab here too - Virtual Memory (bottom section) Change There will be about 3 pop-ups open around now. Use the radio buttons there to change to a Custom size. This really needs to be greater than Ram but not more than 2xRam (else it gets confused and may even reduce performance while tripping over it's own shoelaces). It has to be greater than Ram because when hibernating (perhaps sleeping too?) the contents of Ram gets written to Virtual Memory. But giving it too much just confuses space just confuses things so just under 2xRam is good but over that might get annoying. Make sure the same number is in both the top and bottom boxes. Often there is a recommendation for how much to set it too and it's usually not a bad idea to follow that advice
Re: OT: Defraggers...Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Tanstaafl Yes, a good choice, I forgot about UltraDefrag. Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 01:26 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Someone had asked about a free/FOSS defragger... There is UltraDefrag: http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html I don't use it much, but thats only because disk fragmentation is not nearly as big of a problem on modern systems as it used to be. Windows7+ does a pretty good job of avoiding fragmentation all on its own. On 2013-07-31 6:42 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Tom No it's payware https://www.disktrix.com/ but well worth the $30.00, and only necessary for Windows. If you do want to care again, and want a very good free version then Piriform's Defraggler is a great product http://www.piriform.com/. They've recently gone to a payware model, but still keep to their freeware versions, and they have three other great tools, CCleaner, Recuva and Speccy, also freeware or payware versions. I use them all in Windows (except Defraggler on my system as this is replaced with UD) as well as for friends and clients, and have never needed their payware versions. And they have never let me down, in trashing any systems I have used them on for the last five years. Yep, my Ubuntu, with the pause at the login screen included and the fastest I can type my password, takes all of 20 seconds, shutdown about 10 seconds. Agreed Windows still has it's place, and I have to be familiar with it due to my business and support of my clients. I even have an old PowerMac to keep up to date with my few clients using Macs. Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 12:25 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Is Disktrix UltimateDefrag free? FOSS? Lol, somehow i doubt it but i keep an ear out jic. I tend to use the inbuilt Windows one. I don't really care enough anymore to go beyond that. When i did used to care i used PerfectDisk. it usually has a 1 month free trial and that was usually enough for me. Nowadays i just really prefer to just do a reasonably good job and since that is far, far ahead of the way most systems are set-up i just settle for that. I've even found a tendency for ones in England to be set to US localisation and such. If i want a fast system i just reboot into GnuLinux. Windows has other advantages but speed and security are not top of the list! Eskimos have a lot of words for snow and ice because they see a lot of it all. Windows has a lot of words for different security issues because it suffers from tons of different things. [shrugs] I still use Windows quite a bit though because when you know a thing's flaws it's usually easier to cope. Like going round to see a cat owner who insists their cat is always free of fleas, you just know you are going to get bitten so you just deal with it. Regards from Tom :) *From:* Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za *To:* Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk *Cc:* users@global.libreoffice.org *Sent:* Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 23:01 *Subject:* Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi Tom Ah Ok, I see, this is the same methodology I'm using. I generally turn off the swap file for a badly defragged drive, including any hibernation files etc if active or used on a laptop, then defrag (Disktrix UltimateDefrag, possibly the best I've used to date). After a good clean-up I then set the pagefile and any hibernation files if necessary. With UD's FragProtect, this only has to be done every few months, and they are one of the few defraggers that can defrag and place the MFT at the beginning of the drive along with the folders entries, ahead of any data. But this has to be done with a reboot and MS pre-install mode (UD does it all automatically) to complete this task. And I've benched my drives on all of my systems, it certainly makes for very fast boot and shutdown times, and better stability. Regards Andrew Brown On 31/07/2013 10:52 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) wrt Virtual Memory/pagefile.sys/Swap on Windows the trick seems to be to set it as a fixed value. Find System Properties - Advanced tab - Performance (top 3rd) Settings - Performance Settings - Advanced tab here too - Virtual Memory (bottom section) Change There will be about 3 pop-ups open around now. Use the radio buttons there to change to a Custom size. This really needs to be greater than Ram but not more than 2xRam (else it gets confused and may even reduce performance while tripping over it's own shoelaces). It has to be greater than Ram because when hibernating (perhaps sleeping too?) the contents of Ram gets written to Virtual Memory. But giving it too much just confuses space just confuses things so just under 2xRam is good but over that might get annoying. Make sure the same number is in both the top and bottom
Re: OT: Defraggers...Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Please don't send to me directly, I'm on the list. Thanks On 2013-08-01 7:44 AM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Tanstaafl Yes, a good choice, I forgot about UltraDefrag. Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 01:26 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Someone had asked about a free/FOSS defragger... There is UltraDefrag: http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html I don't use it much, but thats only because disk fragmentation is not nearly as big of a problem on modern systems as it used to be. Windows7+ does a pretty good job of avoiding fragmentation all on its own. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: OT: Defraggers...Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Apologies Tanstaafl, I replied to all. I must have replied directly to you as well as the list Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 01:51 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Please don't send to me directly, I'm on the list. Thanks On 2013-08-01 7:44 AM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Tanstaafl Yes, a good choice, I forgot about UltraDefrag. Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 01:26 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Someone had asked about a free/FOSS defragger... There is UltraDefrag: http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html I don't use it much, but thats only because disk fragmentation is not nearly as big of a problem on modern systems as it used to be. Windows7+ does a pretty good job of avoiding fragmentation all on its own. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: OT: Defraggers...Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
And you did it again. Best is to use an email client that actually supports Reply-To-List (like Thunderbird). On 2013-08-01 8:11 AM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Apologies Tanstaafl, I replied to all. I must have replied directly to you as well as the list Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 01:51 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Please don't send to me directly, I'm on the list. Thanks On 2013-08-01 7:44 AM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Tanstaafl Yes, a good choice, I forgot about UltraDefrag. Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 01:26 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Someone had asked about a free/FOSS defragger... There is UltraDefrag: http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html I don't use it much, but thats only because disk fragmentation is not nearly as big of a problem on modern systems as it used to be. Windows7+ does a pretty good job of avoiding fragmentation all on its own. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: OT: Defraggers...Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi :) It is awkward but it's the way the list has been set-up. We just need to delete twice per message rather than just once. We can't really expect people to change email-clients just in order to post to this list! That would be absurd. It might be good to start-up a petition about getting the list set-up back to the way it was when it all worked magically whichever emailer people used. Btw good call re: NOT feeding the troll. Regards from Tom :) From: Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Thursday, 1 August 2013, 13:36 Subject: Re: OT: Defraggers...Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 And you did it again. Best is to use an email client that actually supports Reply-To-List (like Thunderbird). On 2013-08-01 8:11 AM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Apologies Tanstaafl, I replied to all. I must have replied directly to you as well as the list Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 01:51 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Please don't send to me directly, I'm on the list. Thanks On 2013-08-01 7:44 AM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Tanstaafl Yes, a good choice, I forgot about UltraDefrag. Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 01:26 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Someone had asked about a free/FOSS defragger... There is UltraDefrag: http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html I don't use it much, but thats only because disk fragmentation is not nearly as big of a problem on modern systems as it used to be. Windows7+ does a pretty good job of avoiding fragmentation all on its own. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: OT: Defraggers...Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Heh! Heh! yes force of habit clicking Reply All when I see multiple names, instead of Reply to list as I have done now, and I do use Thunderbird :-P Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 02:36 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: And you did it again. Best is to use an email client that actually supports Reply-To-List (like Thunderbird). On 2013-08-01 8:11 AM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Apologies Tanstaafl, I replied to all. I must have replied directly to you as well as the list Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 01:51 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Please don't send to me directly, I'm on the list. Thanks On 2013-08-01 7:44 AM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Tanstaafl Yes, a good choice, I forgot about UltraDefrag. Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 01:26 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Someone had asked about a free/FOSS defragger... There is UltraDefrag: http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html I don't use it much, but thats only because disk fragmentation is not nearly as big of a problem on modern systems as it used to be. Windows7+ does a pretty good job of avoiding fragmentation all on its own. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Tom Interesting post. Agree, sometimes these software wars becomes irksome, as my late mother and father used to say and raised us with this motto how do you know you don't like it if you have not tried it. This was from our young years with foodstuffs that traditionally many young children don't / have never tried, up to the real things in life. But I am in a similiar vein in what MS charge for their O/S and Office suites when they are riddled with known and unknown bugs. At least I have always tried to keep an open mind, and thankfully was raised on other O/S's (not necessarily desktop/workstation friendly) and systems pre-dating MS. I cut my teeth on IBM VAX, Pick, LISP, FORTRAN, COBOL, ATT and SCO Unix, CP/M, BASIC and Xerox GEM, before the adventure into IBM and MS systems with the very first and crude DOS, and then Apple O/S starting some 36 years ago. I can with experience say I have tried them all, and why my entire business and home office is OSS and FOSS, even to desktop. I give my staff the choice of MS or FOSS, thankfully they all eventually migrate to FOSS, which allows me to plow the monies recovered from ongoing and unnecessary licensing fees into better, faster and more up to date hardware. Even to the level of my servers. To end off, the major difference I have between MS software and FOSS, and you covered briefly in your reply, is that when one discovers a bug, or has a problem, one can get a solution or have it fixed promptly without waiting for a major release or service pack, unlike proprietory and closed code. This is the same for malware, it takes so long for the commercial software to produce a fix and prevention compared to it almost being a non-entity in FOSS. I would be intrigued and grateful, if you could email me privately, your tweaks you do for the virtual memory slowdown of it's fragmentation (by the way MS refers to it as the pagefile). And that's another feather in FOSS's cap, one never has fragmentation or needs to defragment it, unlike MS. I might know or remember them, but it's not coming to memory as I type this. Regards On 30/07/2013 03:27 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) I think disdain is possibly closer than hatred. I think bioth are quite far away from the reality though. I think it's simply that people would rather develop tools that are more robust and less susceptible to malware and slow-downs. I think once you start using OpenSource tools you begin to realise that MS seem to have deliberately built-in vulnerabilities and their slow-downs. FOSS doesn't seem to suffer anything like as much, although a bit of system rot is inevitable in almost any system. I'm just installing Win7 on a handfull of machines and am able to make a couple of tweaks that prevent their Virtual Memory from getting so heavily fragmented. In previous versions of their OS i have found it significantly reduces the slow-downs if you can do this early on. On Win7 it takes an extra couple of clicks but it's still really easy. I always wonder why the default is to set it to fragment as quickly as possible. It's only with Win7 that their de-fragger tool can defrag system files such as the Virtual Memory (err that is Swap to GnuLinux geeks lol). Regards from Tom :) From: Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com To: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com; users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Monday, 29 July 2013, 20:30 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 I certainly hope the primary motive for FOSS such as LO is not a disdain for MS. I personally don't care how much money MS makes. I hope the LO developers are motivated by a desire to produce a great product that can be used worldwide. Hatred usually doesn't provide a very effective motive for productive action. Virgil -Original Message- From: Amit Choudhary Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 10:47 AM To: users@global.libreoffice.org Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Amit I understand where you are coming from, and the good news is, in your favour, that MS in both it's O/S and office suite are losing market share in a big way. Here's an article from Ubuntu founder and my countryman Mark Shuttelworth on his take on MS and Ubuntu. I like his statement that the no.1 bug in Linux has now been fixed/closed, in that MS no longer dominates majority market share. But the numbers don't lie. I checked MS revenues and profits on finance.yahoo.com and it doesn't look like MS is losing market share. MS losing share might be an illusion. Period Ending Jun 30, 2012 Jun 30, 2011 Jun 30, 2010 Net Income Applicable To Common Shares $16,978,000 $23,150,000 $18,760,000 (All numbers in thousands
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi :) I have to disagree. Amit does have some good points even if some minor details are not entirely accurate. It's a subject we often argue about here. Yes we do need to follow MS's lead and keep working at greater and greater compatibility with their formats and their ways of doing things. That is why we do invest a LOT of time and resources into doing exactly that. Amit is right. However their format does keep changing around a bit between one release of their program and the next. It's unpredictable despite the name of their format staying the same and despite them having acquired the ISO stamp of approval for the name of their ever-changing format. So they make 1 small tweak here or there and keep everyone busy trying to guess where the change is and how to read it now. The main problem is that if we always follow MSO's lead then they will always be in the lead. Regards from Tom :) From: Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za To: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com Cc: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk; la10...@iperbole.bologna.it; users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Sunday, 28 July 2013, 11:36 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Amit Your knowledge of the document standards is limited by your reply here. This issue of the document standards and naming convention was covered by a world body of multinationals and the preservation of all things in human digital text etc. This was to allow anyone, alien or earthly, thousands of years from now, to decode and read and modify the history in the digital world of mankind. So the open document standards were born and ratified and accepted by the majority of the world that counts. MS did not agree and tried to introduce their own so-called opens standard with the .xml base, i.e.x docx, xlsx, and so forth. But it has not been accepted by the world bodies, even though the MS document standard does survive. As you will now notice MSO 2007 (partially), MSO 2010 and 2013 all can reads and write in the ODS standard used by OOo, AOO and LO. MS had no choice but to fit in and follow suit, so it's not the other way around that we and all other s outside of the use of MSO, must fit in. The ODS standard is here to stayt and will dominate over time, no matter what the masses say and want. It's about education that we all have choices and many efficient and useful alternatives in the digital world. Regards Andrew Brown On 27/07/2013 12:46 PM, Amit Choudhary wrote: If we have to beat Microsoft then we need to focus only on what Microsoft provides and not on .odt format, etc. We cannot beat Microsoft by introducing a new format and expecting customers to use new formats (I use Microsoft formats only and whatever other formats is suported by Microsoft). We need to beat Microsoft at its own game by doing what they are doing in office suite. A new format is not going to change the game but being totally compatible and stable with the formats that Micorosoft supports (xls, xlsx, doc, docx, save as pdf, text, etc.) is going to change the game. Amit On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
in /home) on a separate partition is not to do with routine performance. it's more about making the system more robust. it allows you to install a completely new OS without any risk to your data (but still back-up anyway of course). In theory you can have several different OSes all using the same /home although that gets a bit messy if they have the same DE. it works a bit better if you have 1 KDE one, 1 Gnome(ish), and maybe 1 of any of the rarer ones (does Unity count as 1 of the rarer ones? i'd say it does but i'm sure others disagree). Otherwise you find all your different OSes use the same wallpaper and look the same (big yawn that is) and you don't get the benefit of the different design teams interesting work. Something i haven't really tried much, or at least can't remember the result, is putting all the Virtual Memory on a separate physical hard-drive. There is an option to split Virtual Memory across several different hard-drives/partitions some of which might be physically different drives but i'm not sure whether doing that is good or bad. Errr, i haven't mentioned Bsd or Apple because i just haven't played around with them that much. They don't seem to slow down as much as Windows so i guess they have a similar set-up to GnuLinux or have some neat work-around that might not translate well to GnuLinux let alone Windows. Regards from Tom :) From: Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com; users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 8:48 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi Tom Interesting post. Agree, sometimes these software wars becomes irksome, as my late mother and father used to say and raised us with this motto how do you know you don't like it if you have not tried it. This was from our young years with foodstuffs that traditionally many young children don't / have never tried, up to the real things in life. But I am in a similiar vein in what MS charge for their O/S and Office suites when they are riddled with known and unknown bugs. At least I have always tried to keep an open mind, and thankfully was raised on other O/S's (not necessarily desktop/workstation friendly) and systems pre-dating MS. I cut my teeth on IBM VAX, Pick, LISP, FORTRAN, COBOL, ATT and SCO Unix, CP/M, BASIC and Xerox GEM, before the adventure into IBM and MS systems with the very first and crude DOS, and then Apple O/S starting some 36 years ago. I can with experience say I have tried them all, and why my entire business and home office is OSS and FOSS, even to desktop. I give my staff the choice of MS or FOSS, thankfully they all eventually migrate to FOSS, which allows me to plow the monies recovered from ongoing and unnecessary licensing fees into better, faster and more up to date hardware. Even to the level of my servers. To end off, the major difference I have between MS software and FOSS, and you covered briefly in your reply, is that when one discovers a bug, or has a problem, one can get a solution or have it fixed promptly without waiting for a major release or service pack, unlike proprietory and closed code. This is the same for malware, it takes so long for the commercial software to produce a fix and prevention compared to it almost being a non-entity in FOSS. I would be intrigued and grateful, if you could email me privately, your tweaks you do for the virtual memory slowdown of it's fragmentation (by the way MS refers to it as the pagefile). And that's another feather in FOSS's cap, one never has fragmentation or needs to defragment it, unlike MS. I might know or remember them, but it's not coming to memory as I type this. Regards On 30/07/2013 03:27 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) I think disdain is possibly closer than hatred. I think bioth are quite far away from the reality though. I think it's simply that people would rather develop tools that are more robust and less susceptible to malware and slow-downs. I think once you start using OpenSource tools you begin to realise that MS seem to have deliberately built-in vulnerabilities and their slow-downs. FOSS doesn't seem to suffer anything like as much, although a bit of system rot is inevitable in almost any system. I'm just installing Win7 on a handfull of machines and am able to make a couple of tweaks that prevent their Virtual Memory from getting so heavily fragmented. In previous versions of their OS i have found it significantly reduces the slow-downs if you can do this early on. On Win7 it takes an extra couple of clicks but it's still really easy. I always wonder why the default is to set it to fragment as quickly as possible. It's only with Win7 that their de-fragger tool can defrag system files such as the Virtual Memory (err that is Swap to GnuLinux geeks lol). Regards from Tom
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
and the next file B is 10. Then you delete A and write a file C that is 30 units. Now you have 20units of C followed by 10 units of B followed by the remaining 10 of C. If you now delete B and copy A back then you get 20 of C, followed by 10 of A followed by the 10 remaining of C and then the last 10 of A. So when you try reading a file the read/write head lurches around the drive trying to find the various shopped up parts of the file. If that file is a frequently accessed system file such as Virtual Memory then it can significantly reduce performance. In GnuLinux it is reckoned that you can significantly increase performance by putting your system files, particularly your log files, on a different hard-drive from your data. i mean a proper hard-drive not just a different partition on the same physical device. The main reason for putting your data (all in /home) on a separate partition is not to do with routine performance. it's more about making the system more robust. it allows you to install a completely new OS without any risk to your data (but still back-up anyway of course). In theory you can have several different OSes all using the same /home although that gets a bit messy if they have the same DE. it works a bit better if you have 1 KDE one, 1 Gnome(ish), and maybe 1 of any of the rarer ones (does Unity count as 1 of the rarer ones? i'd say it does but i'm sure others disagree). Otherwise you find all your different OSes use the same wallpaper and look the same (big yawn that is) and you don't get the benefit of the different design teams interesting work. Something i haven't really tried much, or at least can't remember the result, is putting all the Virtual Memory on a separate physical hard-drive. There is an option to split Virtual Memory across several different hard-drives/partitions some of which might be physically different drives but i'm not sure whether doing that is good or bad. Errr, i haven't mentioned Bsd or Apple because i just haven't played around with them that much. They don't seem to slow down as much as Windows so i guess they have a similar set-up to GnuLinux or have some neat work-around that might not translate well to GnuLinux let alone Windows. Regards from Tom :) *From:* Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za *To:* Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk *Cc:* Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com; users@global.libreoffice.org *Sent:* Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 8:48 *Subject:* Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi Tom Interesting post. Agree, sometimes these software wars becomes irksome, as my late mother and father used to say and raised us with this motto how do you know you don't like it if you have not tried it. This was from our young years with foodstuffs that traditionally many young children don't / have never tried, up to the real things in life. But I am in a similiar vein in what MS charge for their O/S and Office suites when they are riddled with known and unknown bugs. At least I have always tried to keep an open mind, and thankfully was raised on other O/S's (not necessarily desktop/workstation friendly) and systems pre-dating MS. I cut my teeth on IBM VAX, Pick, LISP, FORTRAN, COBOL, ATT and SCO Unix, CP/M, BASIC and Xerox GEM, before the adventure into IBM and MS systems with the very first and crude DOS, and then Apple O/S starting some 36 years ago. I can with experience say I have tried them all, and why my entire business and home office is OSS and FOSS, even to desktop. I give my staff the choice of MS or FOSS, thankfully they all eventually migrate to FOSS, which allows me to plow the monies recovered from ongoing and unnecessary licensing fees into better, faster and more up to date hardware. Even to the level of my servers. To end off, the major difference I have between MS software and FOSS, and you covered briefly in your reply, is that when one discovers a bug, or has a problem, one can get a solution or have it fixed promptly without waiting for a major release or service pack, unlike proprietory and closed code. This is the same for malware, it takes so long for the commercial software to produce a fix and prevention compared to it almost being a non-entity in FOSS. I would be intrigued and grateful, if you could email me privately, your tweaks you do for the virtual memory slowdown of it's fragmentation (by the way MS refers to it as the pagefile). And that's another feather in FOSS's cap, one never has fragmentation or needs to defragment it, unlike MS. I might know or remember them, but it's not coming to memory as I type this. Regards On 30/07/2013 03:27 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi :) Is Disktrix UltimateDefrag free? FOSS? Lol, somehow i doubt it but i keep an ear out jic. I tend to use the inbuilt Windows one. I don't really care enough anymore to go beyond that. When i did used to care i used PerfectDisk. it usually has a 1 month free trial and that was usually enough for me. Nowadays i just really prefer to just do a reasonably good job and since that is far, far ahead of the way most systems are set-up i just settle for that. I've even found a tendency for ones in England to be set to US localisation and such. If i want a fast system i just reboot into GnuLinux. Windows has other advantages but speed and security are not top of the list! Eskimos have a lot of words for snow and ice because they see a lot of it all. Windows has a lot of words for different security issues because it suffers from tons of different things. [shrugs] I still use Windows quite a bit though because when you know a thing's flaws it's usually easier to cope. Like going round to see a cat owner who insists their cat is always free of fleas, you just know you are going to get bitten so you just deal with it. Regards from Tom :) From: Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 23:01 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi Tom Ah Ok, I see, this is the same methodology I'm using. I generally turn off the swap file for a badly defragged drive, including any hibernation files etc if active or used on a laptop, then defrag (Disktrix UltimateDefrag, possibly the best I've used to date). After a good clean-up I then set the pagefile and any hibernation files if necessary. With UD's FragProtect, this only has to be done every few months, and they are one of the few defraggers that can defrag and place the MFT at the beginning of the drive along with the folders entries, ahead of any data. But this has to be done with a reboot and MS pre-install mode (UD does it all automatically) to complete this task. And I've benched my drives on all of my systems, it certainly makes for very fast boot and shutdown times, and better stability. Regards Andrew Brown On 31/07/2013 10:52 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) wrt Virtual Memory/pagefile.sys/Swap on Windows the trick seems to be to set it as a fixed value. Find System Properties - Advanced tab - Performance (top 3rd) Settings - Performance Settings - Advanced tab here too - Virtual Memory (bottom section) Change There will be about 3 pop-ups open around now. Use the radio buttons there to change to a Custom size. This really needs to be greater than Ram but not more than 2xRam (else it gets confused and may even reduce performance while tripping over it's own shoelaces). It has to be greater than Ram because when hibernating (perhaps sleeping too?) the contents of Ram gets written to Virtual Memory. But giving it too much just confuses space just confuses things so just under 2xRam is good but over that might get annoying. Make sure the same number is in both the top and bottom boxes. Often there is a recommendation for how much to set it too and it's usually not a bad idea to follow that advice. I've only seen it give a crazy suggestion once or twice out of hundreds of machines. Ok, now it gets a bit fiddly. You have to click on the Set button before clicking on Ok otherwise it forgets and you have to re-type the numbers again. Then you click Ok on each of the pop-ups in turn. Again if you don't it's not harmful, just annoying because it forgets. Of course if you have already been using your machine for a while then Virtual Memory is already quite fragmented so this will only 'stop' it getting worse. It wont improve things. Also when i say 'stop' it will continue to suffer normal system rot and there are other factors such as registry fragmentation that will continue. So, it fixes just 1 problem out of many. When trying to resurrect an ancient and much used machine i would initially set Virtual Memory to 0. Then defrag quite a lot and then plonk a fairly huge file onto the system. Then reset the Virtual Memory to a respectable size and get rid of the huge file. In theory i hoped that would force all the Virtual Memory file to be contiguous and out of the way. GnuLinux does NOT SUFFER from fragmentation until the drive is something like 96% full, not sure of the exact figure but definitely over 90% (it's always that extra just 1 episode/movie of Star Trek). Files might well be fragmented much lower than that despite the elegant way that files are carefully placed in Ext2,3,4 with plenty of room all around them to allow them to grow. There is a limit to how much that policy can really work of course. However even when files are fragmented there seems to be a better system
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Tom No it's payware https://www.disktrix.com/ but well worth the $30.00, and only necessary for Windows. If you do want to care again, and want a very good free version then Piriform's Defraggler is a great product http://www.piriform.com/. They've recently gone to a payware model, but still keep to their freeware versions, and they have three other great tools, CCleaner, Recuva and Speccy, also freeware or payware versions. I use them all in Windows (except Defraggler on my system as this is replaced with UD) as well as for friends and clients, and have never needed their payware versions. And they have never let me down, in trashing any systems I have used them on for the last five years. Yep, my Ubuntu, with the pause at the login screen included and the fastest I can type my password, takes all of 20 seconds, shutdown about 10 seconds. Agreed Windows still has it's place, and I have to be familiar with it due to my business and support of my clients. I even have an old PowerMac to keep up to date with my few clients using Macs. Regards Andrew Brown On 01/08/2013 12:25 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Is Disktrix UltimateDefrag free? FOSS? Lol, somehow i doubt it but i keep an ear out jic. I tend to use the inbuilt Windows one. I don't really care enough anymore to go beyond that. When i did used to care i used PerfectDisk. it usually has a 1 month free trial and that was usually enough for me. Nowadays i just really prefer to just do a reasonably good job and since that is far, far ahead of the way most systems are set-up i just settle for that. I've even found a tendency for ones in England to be set to US localisation and such. If i want a fast system i just reboot into GnuLinux. Windows has other advantages but speed and security are not top of the list! Eskimos have a lot of words for snow and ice because they see a lot of it all. Windows has a lot of words for different security issues because it suffers from tons of different things. [shrugs] I still use Windows quite a bit though because when you know a thing's flaws it's usually easier to cope. Like going round to see a cat owner who insists their cat is always free of fleas, you just know you are going to get bitten so you just deal with it. Regards from Tom :) *From:* Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za *To:* Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk *Cc:* users@global.libreoffice.org *Sent:* Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 23:01 *Subject:* Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi Tom Ah Ok, I see, this is the same methodology I'm using. I generally turn off the swap file for a badly defragged drive, including any hibernation files etc if active or used on a laptop, then defrag (Disktrix UltimateDefrag, possibly the best I've used to date). After a good clean-up I then set the pagefile and any hibernation files if necessary. With UD's FragProtect, this only has to be done every few months, and they are one of the few defraggers that can defrag and place the MFT at the beginning of the drive along with the folders entries, ahead of any data. But this has to be done with a reboot and MS pre-install mode (UD does it all automatically) to complete this task. And I've benched my drives on all of my systems, it certainly makes for very fast boot and shutdown times, and better stability. Regards Andrew Brown On 31/07/2013 10:52 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) wrt Virtual Memory/pagefile.sys/Swap on Windows the trick seems to be to set it as a fixed value. Find System Properties - Advanced tab - Performance (top 3rd) Settings - Performance Settings - Advanced tab here too - Virtual Memory (bottom section) Change There will be about 3 pop-ups open around now. Use the radio buttons there to change to a Custom size. This really needs to be greater than Ram but not more than 2xRam (else it gets confused and may even reduce performance while tripping over it's own shoelaces). It has to be greater than Ram because when hibernating (perhaps sleeping too?) the contents of Ram gets written to Virtual Memory. But giving it too much just confuses space just confuses things so just under 2xRam is good but over that might get annoying. Make sure the same number is in both the top and bottom boxes. Often there is a recommendation for how much to set it too and it's usually not a bad idea to follow that advice. I've only seen it give a crazy suggestion once or twice out of hundreds of machines. Ok, now it gets a bit fiddly. You have to click on the Set button before clicking on Ok otherwise it forgets and you have to re-type the numbers again. Then you click Ok on each of the pop-ups in turn. Again if you don't it's not harmful, just
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Agreed Paul Amit, sn increasing or high revenue stream can indicate that the prices of the saleable goods have increased (and in my country a fact, up 30% on software and hardware in the last three months), currency fluctuations and exchange rates between source manufacturing country and recipient etc. and as Paul pointed out shares are just a number of people or companies buying them against a stock market. Market share is the amount of widgets/units you move and place and are used in that market, besides it's saleable value. Plus I would not trust much in the way of reported finances from Yahoo. Forbes would be more trustworthy and then any of the internationally recognised stock markets. Paul again covered it well, you cannot trust the majority of garbage on the internet these days. Just know that they are taking a knock, what with Windows 8 only migrating into less than 2% of the world market of their existing XP and Windows 7 base, another failure along the same lines as Vista. And the mobile version of the Windows 8 O/S on their devices such as Surface and their mobile phone, plus others such as Nokia etc. a mere 0,02% of the mobile market share. Regards Andrew Brown On 29/07/2013 08:48 PM, Paul wrote: Hi Amit, Revenues and profits (and shares for that matter), are not the same as market share. Just because revenue is increasing, doesn't mean they aren't losing market share. If they are losing market share, it just means their revenue isn't increasing as much as it could be. So I'm not sure that I checked MS revenues and profits on finance.yahoo.com tells us anything useful in this regard. But the numbers don't lie. Not always true. As they say: Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Regards Paul On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 20:14:53 +0530 Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Amit I understand where you are coming from, and the good news is, in your favour, that MS in both it's O/S and office suite are losing market share in a big way. Here's an article from Ubuntu founder and my countryman Mark Shuttelworth on his take on MS and Ubuntu. I like his statement that the no.1 bug in Linux has now been fixed/closed, in that MS no longer dominates majority market share. But the numbers don't lie. I checked MS revenues and profits on finance.yahoo.com and it doesn't look like MS is losing market share. MS losing share might be an illusion. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi :) I think disdain is possibly closer than hatred. I think bioth are quite far away from the reality though. I think it's simply that people would rather develop tools that are more robust and less susceptible to malware and slow-downs. I think once you start using OpenSource tools you begin to realise that MS seem to have deliberately built-in vulnerabilities and their slow-downs. FOSS doesn't seem to suffer anything like as much, although a bit of system rot is inevitable in almost any system. I'm just installing Win7 on a handfull of machines and am able to make a couple of tweaks that prevent their Virtual Memory from getting so heavily fragmented. In previous versions of their OS i have found it significantly reduces the slow-downs if you can do this early on. On Win7 it takes an extra couple of clicks but it's still really easy. I always wonder why the default is to set it to fragment as quickly as possible. It's only with Win7 that their de-fragger tool can defrag system files such as the Virtual Memory (err that is Swap to GnuLinux geeks lol). Regards from Tom :) From: Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com To: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com; users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Monday, 29 July 2013, 20:30 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 I certainly hope the primary motive for FOSS such as LO is not a disdain for MS. I personally don't care how much money MS makes. I hope the LO developers are motivated by a desire to produce a great product that can be used worldwide. Hatred usually doesn't provide a very effective motive for productive action. Virgil -Original Message- From: Amit Choudhary Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 10:47 AM To: users@global.libreoffice.org Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Amit I understand where you are coming from, and the good news is, in your favour, that MS in both it's O/S and office suite are losing market share in a big way. Here's an article from Ubuntu founder and my countryman Mark Shuttelworth on his take on MS and Ubuntu. I like his statement that the no.1 bug in Linux has now been fixed/closed, in that MS no longer dominates majority market share. But the numbers don't lie. I checked MS revenues and profits on finance.yahoo.com and it doesn't look like MS is losing market share. MS losing share might be an illusion. Period Ending Jun 30, 2012 Jun 30, 2011 Jun 30, 2010 Net Income Applicable To Common Shares $16,978,000 $23,150,000 $18,760,000 (All numbers in thousands) Regards, Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi :) Many projects have 2 branches so that; 1 is stable (because it has been around for longer and received more service packs, bug-fixes, patches and all the rest). Generally it continues to recieve more updates and people do continue to work on it because whatever issue they were working on is easier to finish without starting again from scratch or radically re-thinking it. Hopefully after their work has been completed they and others are able to convert it to work on another branch. It's difficult to drag people away just as it's difficult to drag a gamer away from just completing ths 1 more level. I'm nearly there, honest The other takes whatever is already done or near enough finished and then adds tons of new features without having to worry to much about how usable the new branch is going to be. It's where new devs are initially attracted to, where the greatest excitement and activity is generated. Then once that new branch has been around a while, and the people working on the newer features have fixed any problems they hadn't anticipated or solved completely unrelated breakages, then that starts to become the stable branch. That usually seems to happen around x.x.3. The x.x.4 is usually fairly rock-solid. Big cheers all round. So there are 2 very different types of devs at any 1 time and if we don't supply the type of activity they get a real buzz from then many may well just wander off to some other project that does. It's not really the case that taking people off one thing means they will focus on what you want them to do. It's better to just have them all and make the most of what they do 'enjoy'. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za Cc: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk; la10...@iperbole.bologna.it; users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Monday, 29 July 2013, 9:33 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Amit Your knowledge of the document standards is limited by your reply here. This issue of the document standards and naming convention was covered by a world body of multinationals and the preservation of all things in human digital text etc. This was to allow anyone, alien or earthly, thousands of years from now, to decode and read and modify the history in the digital world of mankind. So the open document standards were born and ratified and accpeted by the majority of the world that counts. MS did not agree and tried to introduce their own so-called opens standard with the .xml base, i.e.x docx, xlsx, and so forth. But it has not been accepted by the world bodies, even though the MS document standard does survive. As you will now notice MSO 2007 (partially), MSO 2010 and 2013 all can reads and write in the ODS standard used by OOo, AOO and LO. MS had no choice but to fit in and follow suit, so it's not the other way around that we and all other s outside of the use of MSO, must fit in. The ODS standard is here to stayt and will dominate over time, no matter what the masses say and want. It's about education that we all have choices and many efficient and useful alternatives in the digital world. I might be out-of-date of what had been decided. But what I see is this: MS Office everywhere I worked which translates to possibly billions of doallars in MS pcokets. My agenda with whatever I have wrote till now is: Why should MS get billions of dollars? The open formats should be supported, I am not against that, I am against the timing. MS Office will win because 90% of computers have Windosws on them. Until Linux desktops/laptops become popular people will not switch to open document format. My strategy would be similar to MS: Make users switch to LO and then give them open dcoument format and remove MS formats. Since 90% of the installations will have LO, no one is going to complain and they will happily settle for open document format and MS can't do anything. It is the strategy and timing I am talking about. Doing both together (MS compatibility + Open document) is a strain on developers and QA. Given that LO has very few developers and QA, then why should LO focus on two product lines. It is not correct strategy. Regards, Amit PS: I am not pushing my ideas but I do not want to pay MS. Also, I will be using LO but if the person who is receiving my document has MS Office, then what? MS is a clever, arm-twisting company. You never know what they can come up with. Bill Gates knew about monopoly and that's why all MS components are intertwined with each other so that if you remove one component then other component will not work properly. Bill Gates did this even before question arose about breaking up MS, and after this happened in Europe, MS avoided it easily by stating that if they remove IE then Windows
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Amit Your knowledge of the document standards is limited by your reply here. This issue of the document standards and naming convention was covered by a world body of multinationals and the preservation of all things in human digital text etc. This was to allow anyone, alien or earthly, thousands of years from now, to decode and read and modify the history in the digital world of mankind. So the open document standards were born and ratified and accpeted by the majority of the world that counts. MS did not agree and tried to introduce their own so-called opens standard with the .xml base, i.e.x docx, xlsx, and so forth. But it has not been accepted by the world bodies, even though the MS document standard does survive. As you will now notice MSO 2007 (partially), MSO 2010 and 2013 all can reads and write in the ODS standard used by OOo, AOO and LO. MS had no choice but to fit in and follow suit, so it's not the other way around that we and all other s outside of the use of MSO, must fit in. The ODS standard is here to stayt and will dominate over time, no matter what the masses say and want. It's about education that we all have choices and many efficient and useful alternatives in the digital world. I might be out-of-date of what had been decided. But what I see is this: MS Office everywhere I worked which translates to possibly billions of doallars in MS pcokets. My agenda with whatever I have wrote till now is: Why should MS get billions of dollars? The open formats should be supported, I am not against that, I am against the timing. MS Office will win because 90% of computers have Windosws on them. Until Linux desktops/laptops become popular people will not switch to open document format. My strategy would be similar to MS: Make users switch to LO and then give them open dcoument format and remove MS formats. Since 90% of the installations will have LO, no one is going to complain and they will happily settle for open document format and MS can't do anything. It is the strategy and timing I am talking about. Doing both together (MS compatibility + Open document) is a strain on developers and QA. Given that LO has very few developers and QA, then why should LO focus on two product lines. It is not correct strategy. Regards, Amit PS: I am not pushing my ideas but I do not want to pay MS. Also, I will be using LO but if the person who is receiving my document has MS Office, then what? MS is a clever, arm-twisting company. You never know what they can come up with. Bill Gates knew about monopoly and that's why all MS components are intertwined with each other so that if you remove one component then other component will not work properly. Bill Gates did this even before question arose about breaking up MS, and after this happened in Europe, MS avoided it easily by stating that if they remove IE then Windows will not work properly and got away with not breaking up. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
I too am an end user and not a developer. From my perspective it is not at all difficult to generally keep up to date with the latest software (although the 4.1. desktop-integration thing threw me for a while). All new releases are clearly badged: don't use on production machines. So don't then. This is not the fault of the developers if people install software that is not to be used on production machines on production machines. If your sysadmin is chasing the latest releases, s/he needs to decide on stability versus the latest gizmo that may well lead to a broader instability elsewhere. Nothing is anyone's fault. I am not complaining. But as some people suggested yesterday and before, there should be a last known stable releases page where all the stable releases should be mentioned so that the user can make an informed choice. Regards, Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Amit I understand where you are coming from, and the good news is, in your favour, that MS in both it's O/S and office suite are losing market share in a big way. Here's an article from Ubuntu founder and my countryman Mark Shuttelworth on his take on MS and Ubuntu. I like his statement that the no.1 bug in Linux has now been fixed/closed, in that MS no longer dominates majority market share. As you'll notice in the supplied link article and the chart, MS has toppled since 2011 in market share, and I believe will continue to do so with Android, Firefox O/S for mobiles and shortly Ubuntu Touch for mobiles. And along with a launch shortly of their own device the Ubuntu Edge, a great looking device from the pics so far, second link. http://memeburn.com/2013/05/microsoft-dominance-is-over-mark-shuttleworth-declares-ubuntu-bug-no-1-fixed/ http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ubuntu-edge Anyway I am off-topic here, I see a great future even now for all opensourced Office suites, and it will grow along with the above mentioned software and hardware. Regards http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ubuntu-edge On 29/07/2013 10:33 AM, Amit Choudhary wrote: On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za mailto:andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Amit Your knowledge of the document standards is limited by your reply here. This issue of the document standards and naming convention was covered by a world body of multinationals and the preservation of all things in human digital text etc. This was to allow anyone, alien or earthly, thousands of years from now, to decode and read and modify the history in the digital world of mankind. So the open document standards were born and ratified and accpeted by the majority of the world that counts. MS did not agree and tried to introduce their own so-called opens standard with the .xml base, i.e.x docx, xlsx, and so forth. But it has not been accepted by the world bodies, even though the MS document standard does survive. As you will now notice MSO 2007 (partially), MSO 2010 and 2013 all can reads and write in the ODS standard used by OOo, AOO and LO. MS had no choice but to fit in and follow suit, so it's not the other way around that we and all other s outside of the use of MSO, must fit in. The ODS standard is here to stayt and will dominate over time, no matter what the masses say and want. It's about education that we all have choices and many efficient and useful alternatives in the digital world. I might be out-of-date of what had been decided. But what I see is this: MS Office everywhere I worked which translates to possibly billions of doallars in MS pcokets. My agenda with whatever I have wrote till now is: Why should MS get billions of dollars? The open formats should be supported, I am not against that, I am against the timing. MS Office will win because 90% of computers have Windosws on them. Until Linux desktops/laptops become popular people will not switch to open document format. My strategy would be similar to MS: Make users switch to LO and then give them open dcoument format and remove MS formats. Since 90% of the installations will have LO, no one is going to complain and they will happily settle for open document format and MS can't do anything. It is the strategy and timing I am talking about. Doing both together (MS compatibility + Open document) is a strain on developers and QA. Given that LO has very few developers and QA, then why should LO focus on two product lines. It is not correct strategy. Regards, Amit PS: I am not pushing my ideas but I do not want to pay MS. Also, I will be using LO but if the person who is receiving my document has MS Office, then what? MS is a clever, arm-twisting company. You never know what they can come up with. Bill Gates knew about monopoly and that's why all MS components are intertwined with each other so that if you remove one component then other component will not work properly. Bill Gates did this even before question arose about breaking up MS, and after this happened in Europe, MS avoided it easily by stating that if they remove IE then Windows will not work properly and got away with not breaking up. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Amit I understand where you are coming from, and the good news is, in your favour, that MS in both it's O/S and office suite are losing market share in a big way. Here's an article from Ubuntu founder and my countryman Mark Shuttelworth on his take on MS and Ubuntu. I like his statement that the no.1 bug in Linux has now been fixed/closed, in that MS no longer dominates majority market share. But the numbers don't lie. I checked MS revenues and profits on finance.yahoo.com and it doesn't look like MS is losing market share. MS losing share might be an illusion. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Amit I understand where you are coming from, and the good news is, in your favour, that MS in both it's O/S and office suite are losing market share in a big way. Here's an article from Ubuntu founder and my countryman Mark Shuttelworth on his take on MS and Ubuntu. I like his statement that the no.1 bug in Linux has now been fixed/closed, in that MS no longer dominates majority market share. But the numbers don't lie. I checked MS revenues and profits on finance.yahoo.com and it doesn't look like MS is losing market share. MS losing share might be an illusion. Period Ending Jun 30, 2012 Jun 30, 2011 Jun 30, 2010 Net Income Applicable To Common Shares $16,978,000 $23,150,000 $18,760,000 (All numbers in thousands) Regards, Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Amit, Revenues and profits (and shares for that matter), are not the same as market share. Just because revenue is increasing, doesn't mean they aren't losing market share. If they are losing market share, it just means their revenue isn't increasing as much as it could be. So I'm not sure that I checked MS revenues and profits on finance.yahoo.com tells us anything useful in this regard. But the numbers don't lie. Not always true. As they say: Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Regards Paul On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 20:14:53 +0530 Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Amit I understand where you are coming from, and the good news is, in your favour, that MS in both it's O/S and office suite are losing market share in a big way. Here's an article from Ubuntu founder and my countryman Mark Shuttelworth on his take on MS and Ubuntu. I like his statement that the no.1 bug in Linux has now been fixed/closed, in that MS no longer dominates majority market share. But the numbers don't lie. I checked MS revenues and profits on finance.yahoo.com and it doesn't look like MS is losing market share. MS losing share might be an illusion. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
I certainly hope the primary motive for FOSS such as LO is not a disdain for MS. I personally don't care how much money MS makes. I hope the LO developers are motivated by a desire to produce a great product that can be used worldwide. Hatred usually doesn't provide a very effective motive for productive action. Virgil -Original Message- From: Amit Choudhary Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 10:47 AM To: users@global.libreoffice.org Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za wrote: Hi Amit I understand where you are coming from, and the good news is, in your favour, that MS in both it's O/S and office suite are losing market share in a big way. Here's an article from Ubuntu founder and my countryman Mark Shuttelworth on his take on MS and Ubuntu. I like his statement that the no.1 bug in Linux has now been fixed/closed, in that MS no longer dominates majority market share. But the numbers don't lie. I checked MS revenues and profits on finance.yahoo.com and it doesn't look like MS is losing market share. MS losing share might be an illusion. Period Ending Jun 30, 2012 Jun 30, 2011 Jun 30, 2010 Net Income Applicable To Common Shares $16,978,000 $23,150,000 $18,760,000 (All numbers in thousands) Regards, Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
On 29/07/13 20:30, Virgil Arrington wrote: I certainly hope the primary motive for FOSS such as LO is not a disdain for MS. I personally don't care how much money MS makes. I hope the LO developers are motivated by a desire to produce a great product that can be used worldwide. Hatred usually doesn't provide a very effective motive for productive action. Virgil snip +1 (and some more too :-) ) -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
On 27/07/13 17:28, Ernie Kurtz wrote: Hi Amit and Paul and . . . I am just an ordinary user -- historian by training, academic researcher in medicine by profession. I, and most with whom I work and come into contact, wish for, hope for, and strongly prefer stable releases in a work environment that requires interoperability with M$ products. One difficulty: it is not always -- in fact, it is rarely -- clear what is the latest stable release. I use both OO and LO, and that seems true of both. My wish is that the developer-types and other enthusiasts think more carefully, tolerantly, and generously about the technologically unsophisticated ordinary user. Thank you. ernie kurtz ernestkurtz.com On Jul 27, 2013, at 5:51 AM, Amit Choudhary wrote: snip Hi all I too am an end user and not a developer. From my perspective it is not at all difficult to generally keep up to date with the latest software (although the 4.1. desktop-integration thing threw me for a while). All new releases are clearly badged: don't use on production machines. So don't then. This is not the fault of the developers if people install software that is not to be used on production machines on production machines. If your sysadmin is chasing the latest releases, s/he needs to decide on stability versus the latest gizmo that may well lead to a broader instability elsewhere. Unfortunately, MS tends to make its own products backward incompatible, forcing businesses to fork out resources chasing the upgrade cycle, or to lock in with a given OS version and the tools which work with it, and patching it up for security holes and with service packs (which also don't always work as expected!) and biding time until the licenses expire. MS is also not known for its kindly disposition towards sharing (unless, of course, its your data and remote access to your machine by the NSA), which makes it difficult for OSS developers to keep their software up to date and interoperable, exacerbated by companies like MS which will continue to pour resources specifically to stay ahead in market dominance and exclude any potential rivals. So, there will always be catching up and new releases with bug fixes, features and the inevitable bugs. If you want to use LibO, there are certain responsibilities a user would benefit from assuming: be responsible for what you install - don't use new releases for production work that demands stability. If you want the latest MS interoperability feature, then you trade stability for innovation. Your call. As Kracked and Tom and Paul wrote previously, select a conservative update value or just go with the version packaged by your distro if using GNU/ Linux or your BSD flavour. The LibO developers have put together a great suite of software that is stable, flexible, scalable, fast, stays out of the way of the user (for the most part, but I still prefer greater flexibility with the bullets and numbering format option, and still struggle with multiple user styles! :-) ), and so we, as users, need to step forward a bit in their direction too by being more responsible for our own interactions with the software. There is no good need for you to chase the upgrade cycle unless the benefits of doing so outweigh the benefits of maintaining a stable system. This is just good management whether someone is or is not technologically unsophisticated: don't mess with what is mission critical unless you have a damn good reason to do so and can do so knowing how to reverse the process if needs be. As a user, especially in this day and age, this is your responsibility, not the developers. £0.02 -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Amit Your knowledge of the document standards is limited by your reply here. This issue of the document standards and naming convention was covered by a world body of multinationals and the preservation of all things in human digital text etc. This was to allow anyone, alien or earthly, thousands of years from now, to decode and read and modify the history in the digital world of mankind. So the open document standards were born and ratified and accpeted by the majority of the world that counts. MS did not agree and tried to introduce their own so-called opens standard with the .xml base, i.e.x docx, xlsx, and so forth. But it has not been accepted by the world bodies, even though the MS document standard does survive. As you will now notice MSO 2007 (partially), MSO 2010 and 2013 all can reads and write in the ODS standard used by OOo, AOO and LO. MS had no choice but to fit in and follow suit, so it's not the other way around that we and all other s outside of the use of MSO, must fit in. The ODS standard is here to stayt and will dominate over time, no matter what the masses say and want. It's about education that we all have choices and many efficient and useful alternatives in the digital world. Regards Andrew Brown On 27/07/2013 12:46 PM, Amit Choudhary wrote: If we have to beat Microsoft then we need to focus only on what Microsoft provides and not on .odt format, etc. We cannot beat Microsoft by introducing a new format and expecting customers to use new formats (I use Microsoft formats only and whatever other formats is suported by Microsoft). We need to beat Microsoft at its own game by doing what they are doing in office suite. A new format is not going to change the game but being totally compatible and stable with the formats that Micorosoft supports (xls, xlsx, doc, docx, save as pdf, text, etc.) is going to change the game. Amit On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.ukwrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 3:35 Subject: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi, I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not as stable as 4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4. I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional) software rather than frequently released software. Stablility is very important because a non-stable software / software having many bugs results in loss of time and frustartion. Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Amit, While your CV is impressive, this is still just your opinion. For open source software, it seems that this isn't true. Release early and release often is a mantra that is oft repeated; it seems that several open source projects have found this to be the most effective way of keeping interest from dying down. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software Hardly likely, given the speed and amount of innovation occuring in software, hardware and OSes. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. Well, this is hardly the reason the open source community are striving for alternatives. It may be the main reason for some people (and I'll admit I am one of them. I couldn't afford to stay in business if I had to pay Microsoft's prices for every little piece of software I used), but there are other equally (some would say more) important reasons. Like competition promotes innovation, and standards are a good thing. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only As stated above, I don't think this is true. Stable versions *are* released, if people wish to stick to them, but newer versions are also released so that people can adopt them early if they wish for newer features. This does mean people are implicitly accepting that there may be a few bugs still left around. And this is actuall a *part* of the QA process. With open source software the consumer is part of the process, rather than just someone that gets the end product and complains loudly if things don't work, and perhaps doesn't pay. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES I don't know where you have worked, but the customers where I have worked were always expecting things ASAP, and sooner if possible :) And in open source, again, there are no paying customers. The customers are simply the users, and they often do want frequent releases. Though you are right, not all of them do. Just some of my thoughts. Regards Paul On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 15:21:58 +0530 Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
I have joined libreoffice for contributing to development. Amit On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.ukwrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 3:35 Subject: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi, I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not as stable as 4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4. I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional) software rather than frequently released software. Stablility is very important because a non-stable software / software having many bugs results in loss of time
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
If we have to beat Microsoft then we need to focus only on what Microsoft provides and not on .odt format, etc. We cannot beat Microsoft by introducing a new format and expecting customers to use new formats (I use Microsoft formats only and whatever other formats is suported by Microsoft). We need to beat Microsoft at its own game by doing what they are doing in office suite. A new format is not going to change the game but being totally compatible and stable with the formats that Micorosoft supports (xls, xlsx, doc, docx, save as pdf, text, etc.) is going to change the game. Amit On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.ukwrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 3:35 Subject: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi, I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not as stable as 4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4. I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional) software rather than frequently released software. Stablility is very important because a non-stable software / software having many bugs results in loss of time and frustartion. Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Paul, Please find my answers below. Regards, Amit On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Paul paulste...@afrihost.co.za wrote: Hi Amit, While your CV is impressive, this is still just your opinion. For open source software, it seems that this isn't true. Release early and release often is a mantra that is oft repeated; it seems that several open source projects have found this to be the most effective way of keeping interest from dying down. You are right that it is my opinion but I believe that it will benefit open source software. We should not apply Release early and release often to Libree office because Libre office is a very important piece of software that's going to save billions of dollars from going into Microsoft's pockets. We cannot afford to fail in this one. For me, this is the most important free software, even more important than linux because it saves me money. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only As stated above, I don't think this is true. Stable versions *are* released, if people wish to stick to them, but newer versions are also released so that people can adopt them early if they wish for newer features. This does mean people are implicitly accepting that there may be a few bugs still left around. And this is actuall a *part* of the QA process. With open source software the consumer is part of the process, rather than just someone that gets the end product and complains loudly if things don't work, and perhaps doesn't pay. The main problem here is that the user does not know wheher the next release is more stable than previous one or not. And the user will get caught in the conflict in the sense that he will think that may be if he does not upgrade then he might be losing out on some features. This conflict makes him try to use the new release and then he gets frustrated. The same thing had happened to me when I was using Open Office. I ENDED UP BUYING MICROSOFT OFFICE BECAUSE OPENOFFICE WAS NOT STABLE. A customer can compromise on fetaures but not on stability. A stable release with less formatting options is much more desirable than an unstable software with lots of formatting options. With an un-stable software, a customer cannot get anything done and he might go back to buying Microsoft office. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES I don't know where you have worked, but the customers where I have worked were always expecting things ASAP, and sooner if possible :) And in open source, again, there are no paying customers. The customers are simply the users, and they often do want frequent releases. Though you are right, not all of them do. The customers are always demanding something because they don't get anything because of which they can keep quiet for six months. If we give them good stable product with less features then they will be quiet for six months. Just some of my thoughts. Thanks for your comments. I really appreciate them. Regards Paul -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
they can avoid the issues in the early adopters releases. . On 07/27/2013 05:51 AM, Amit Choudhary wrote: Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) __**__ From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) __**__ From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.india@**gmail.comcontact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 3:35 Subject: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi, I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not as stable as 4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4. I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional) software rather than frequently released software. Stablility is very important because a non-stable software / software having many bugs results in loss of time and frustartion. Amit
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Amit, I am very much appreciate your opinion and it is absolutely true. As a user a rather want to have these little nasty bugs eliminated, still in LO. (i.e. spelling correction, ..). You dont need to reinvent the wheel every month. Atlhough I work in totally different business, I made the same experience as you mentioned for programmers. The pharma industry wants to put new products in the market with exorbitant prices, dicouraging the old drugs with known side effects and repeat the cycle before the side effects of the new ones become apparent. Walther Am Samstag, 27. Juli 2013 schrieb Amit Choudhary: Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.ukwrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 3:35 Subject: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi, I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not as stable as 4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4. I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional) software rather than frequently released software. Stablility is very important because a non-stable software / software having many bugs results in loss of time and frustartion. Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Amit wrote: The main problem here is that the user does not know wheher the next release is more stable than previous one or not. And the user will get caught in the conflict in the sense that he will think that may be if he does not upgrade then he might be losing out on some features. This conflict makes him try to use the new release and then he gets frustrated. The same thing had happened to me when I was using Open Office. I ENDED UP BUYING MICROSOFT OFFICE BECAUSE OPENOFFICE WAS NOT STABLE. A customer can compromise on fetaures but not on stability. A stable release with less formatting options is much more desirable than an unstable software with lots of formatting options. I fully agree with Amit. I'm just a user, not a developer. As a user, my primary concern is knowing my program will do what I need faithfully and without bugs. I will gladly substitute advanced features for stability. And, it really frosts me to see a new release resurrect bugs that had been previously fixed. Nothing feels worse than going backwards with a program. Until recently, like many, I was confused by the LO release cycle, always thinking that the latest release would be the best and most stable. But, recently, I saw the graph showing how it all works. It appears to me as if, with LO, we users are doing the testing that commercial companies do in-house. I honestly don't like it and I suspect that this way of doing things will drive users away. Virgil -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Virgil, Just to comment on one aspect: It appears to me as if, with LO, we users are doing the testing that commercial companies do in-house. Well, yes, kind of. You see, the open source world doesn't have lots of paid developers to do this sort of testing, so it does in part rely on the user base for this. Some of the users like being involved, some, like you, may not. Having so many people involved does, in many people's opinion, result in a better, more stable product faster than with commercial software. I honestly don't like it and I suspect that this way of doing things will drive users away. Unfortunately it may drive some away. There isn't much to be done about that, I fear, given that there isn't a budget for doing all the testing in-house, and any bugs that got missed would still be left for the user to find, just like with commercial software. Open source is just more up-front about admitting that the user may encounter bugs. The best we can hope for is that those that don't want to risk bugs, and don't mind sacrificing features, will stick to more stable versions. And perhaps being clearer on the website will help users make that choice. You can't have both stability and features in one version. Either a new version with the feature is released early, possibly with other bugs in it, or it is released late when more bugs have been found, but then you have to just do without it until it is released. I do think that there should be a better way to install side-by-side versions, such that users can easily try out the new features of a newer release, to see if any feature they desire has been added (or any bug they found has been fixed), without giving up the stability of their current, stable version. A recent thread spoke of how AOO doesn't uninstall previous versions, while LO does. I feel LO should clearly give you the choice during the install, allowing you to simply upgrade if you wish (removing the old version), or install next to the old version, giving you both. Something for the devs to think about? Just my thoughts. Paul On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 08:26:07 -0400 Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com wrote: Amit wrote: The main problem here is that the user does not know wheher the next release is more stable than previous one or not. And the user will get caught in the conflict in the sense that he will think that may be if he does not upgrade then he might be losing out on some features. This conflict makes him try to use the new release and then he gets frustrated. The same thing had happened to me when I was using Open Office. I ENDED UP BUYING MICROSOFT OFFICE BECAUSE OPENOFFICE WAS NOT STABLE. A customer can compromise on fetaures but not on stability. A stable release with less formatting options is much more desirable than an unstable software with lots of formatting options. I fully agree with Amit. I'm just a user, not a developer. As a user, my primary concern is knowing my program will do what I need faithfully and without bugs. I will gladly substitute advanced features for stability. And, it really frosts me to see a new release resurrect bugs that had been previously fixed. Nothing feels worse than going backwards with a program. Until recently, like many, I was confused by the LO release cycle, always thinking that the latest release would be the best and most stable. But, recently, I saw the graph showing how it all works. It appears to me as if, with LO, we users are doing the testing that commercial companies do in-house. I honestly don't like it and I suspect that this way of doing things will drive users away. Virgil -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi Amit and Paul and . . . I am just an ordinary user -- historian by training, academic researcher in medicine by profession. I, and most with whom I work and come into contact, wish for, hope for, and strongly prefer stable releases in a work environment that requires interoperability with M$ products. One difficulty: it is not always -- in fact, it is rarely -- clear what is the latest stable release. I use both OO and LO, and that seems true of both. My wish is that the developer-types and other enthusiasts think more carefully, tolerantly, and generously about the technologically unsophisticated ordinary user. Thank you. ernie kurtz ernestkurtz.com On Jul 27, 2013, at 5:51 AM, Amit Choudhary wrote: Hi Tom, I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and Microsoft for one reason or other. This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc. We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite. The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can be done by increasing the QA cycle period. I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management. And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc. This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end, the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill the product. THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM. I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something every month then it becomes a headache to me. RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD. THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED. AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO. Amit On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
A customer can compromise on fetaures but not on stability Actually, from what I've gathered from this list, it seems the problems half the time are new features that users want, and half the time bugs. Well, maybe not exactly a 50-50 split, but still. Yes, there are a few complaints about things that work in MS Office that don't work in LO, and users could end up going back to MS Office if they can't do what they are used to in LO. But there are also things users want to do that don't exist in MS Office. Those features would make a compelling reason to switch, if LO could do stuff that MS Office couldn't that people found usefull. I think there is enough demand from users for new features that devs are caught in a catch-22. If they develop new features and forget about the bugs, people complain the software is not stable, if they only fix bugs, people demand new features and complain the product is stagnating. There are only so many devs, so they do the best they can. And in order to get new features *and* new bug fixes out, they need to release often. I say kudos to them, I think they're doing a great job. So no, I don't think users *can* compromise on features. Some can, but others can't. The devs need to balance the two. The customer will always demand for something. If we treat customers like a baby the we will know quickly that all that the customer demands is not good for the customer but since we are treating the customer like a baby we will give him goodies that he will appreciate later. We should not give into what the customer wants now (at least not with LO) because in the end LO is going to very stable and popular. So, why we should take a risk by giving into customers demands and make LO a non-stable product. I have worked with a customer who wanted 24 hours monitoring of his systems and I really didn't like because I knew that it is not going to solve his problems. So, I raised this issue everytime and eventually he relented and then I fixed many bugs (crashes, etc) because I got time to fix them and eventually the customer became happy. This customer was not all happy for more than a year but when I arrived, I knew what was good for the customer and I didn't give into his demands but I gave him but he wanted in 4 months and he was very happy in the end. Regards, Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com wrote: A customer can compromise on fetaures but not on stability Actually, from what I've gathered from this list, it seems the problems half the time are new features that users want, and half the time bugs. Well, maybe not exactly a 50-50 split, but still. Yes, there are a few complaints about things that work in MS Office that don't work in LO, and users could end up going back to MS Office if they can't do what they are used to in LO. But there are also things users want to do that don't exist in MS Office. Those features would make a compelling reason to switch, if LO could do stuff that MS Office couldn't that people found usefull. I think there is enough demand from users for new features that devs are caught in a catch-22. If they develop new features and forget about the bugs, people complain the software is not stable, if they only fix bugs, people demand new features and complain the product is stagnating. There are only so many devs, so they do the best they can. And in order to get new features *and* new bug fixes out, they need to release often. I say kudos to them, I think they're doing a great job. So no, I don't think users *can* compromise on features. Some can, but others can't. The devs need to balance the two. Lots of typo in the last reply, so sending again.. The customer will always demand for something. If we treat customers like a baby then we will know quickly that all that which customer demands is not good for the customer but since we are treating the customer like a baby we will give him goodies that he will appreciate later. We should not give into what the customer wants now (at least not with LO) because in the end LO is going to be very stable and popular product. So, why should we take a risk by giving into customers demands and make LO a non-stable product. I have worked with a customer who wanted 24 hours monitoring of his systems and I really didn't like it because I knew that it was not going to solve his problems. So, I raised this issue everytime and eventually he relented and then I fixed quite a few bugs (crashes, etc.) and also got few bugs implemented from my team because I got time to fix them and eventually the customer became happy. This customer was not all happy for more than a year but when I arrived, I knew what was good for the customer and I didn't give into his demands. But I gave him what he wanted in 4 months and he was very happy in the end. Regards, Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 3:35 Subject: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi, I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not as stable as 4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4. I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional) software rather than frequently released software. Stablility is very important because a non-stable software / software having many bugs results in loss of time and frustartion. Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 3:35 Subject: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi, I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not as stable as 4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4. I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional) software rather than frequently released software. Stablility is very important because a non-stable software / software having many bugs results in loss of time and frustartion. Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
I currently am running 4.0.4 on all my systems - Ubuntu and Windows. Currently, in the pas month, versions 3.6.7 and 4.1.0 have come out. 3.6.7 is the end-of-line release for that line and it very stable, but does not have some of the features of the 4.0.x line. 4.1.0 is the first of that line and has some features that 4.0.4 does not. These include better MS XML filters to read/write the file formats like .docx and the others with x in their name. If you follow the information in the release plan image [link] then you may be happy. https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:LibOReleaseLifecycle.png For some people, they wait till the release ends with .4 or .5. i.e. go from the 4.0.x line when you reach 4.0.4 or 4.0.5 Then go to the 4.1.x line when 4.1.4 or 4.1.5 comes out. 4.0.4 is out now and 4.0.5 comes out in about 2 weeks. 3.6.7 is also out now, but I would stick with 4.0.4 and its newer versions, for now. On 07/26/2013 05:31 AM, la10...@iperbole.bologna.it wrote: Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 3:35 Subject: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi, I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not as stable as 4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4. I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional) software rather than frequently released software. Stablility is very important because a non-stable software / software having many bugs results in loss of time and frustartion. Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi :) I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches. The 3.6.7 might be better. if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that. Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base. It's not flashy enough! Regards from Tom :) From: la10...@iperbole.bologna.it la10...@iperbole.bologna.it To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Unfortunately, the 3rd digit rule doesn't work as goog as expected... I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and report builder no more works (crash in opening). thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at the end Federico Quadri Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk ha scritto: Hi :) That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of Service pack. So usually the higher it is the more stable it is. Of course even just bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems that might not get caught by QA. The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily. Then on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional beta-test versions before it gets released. Preferably do about 1 per branch. The problem is that things you might care about deeply might not even be getting used by other people at all. So it's only you that might notice. So if you didn't test-drive then the problem might never be found. Also it's better to do your testing on a beta release rather than a full release because it's during the early beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single version and trying to solve the most problems quickly. Also it's when the fewest other people are making bug-reports. There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1 version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works. Regards from Tom :) From: Amit Choudhary contact.amit.choudhary.in...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 3:35 Subject: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 Hi, I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not as stable as 4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4. I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional) software rather than frequently released software. Stablility is very important because a non-stable software / software having many bugs results in loss of time and frustartion. Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] 4.0.3
Hi, I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not as stable as 4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4. I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional) software rather than frequently released software. Stablility is very important because a non-stable software / software having many bugs results in loss of time and frustartion. Amit -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did notI
Hi :) Have you been able to post a bug-report about this yet or been given a work-around or reason why it happened? Regards from Tom :) From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Saturday, 11 May 2013, 2:15 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did notI Here is the error I got when I tried to install 4.0.3 on an Ubuntu 13.04 with MATE de. I installed the files without errors till I got to the desktop-integration part. Here is the listing from the terminal. timothy@timothy-Inspiron-1525:~/Lib/DEBS/desktop-integration$ sudo dpkg -i *.deb Selecting previously unselected package libreoffice-debian-menus. dpkg: regarding libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb containing libreoffice-debian-menus: libreoffice-core conflicts with libreoffice-unbundled libreoffice-debian-menus provides libreoffice-unbundled and is to be installed. dpkg: error processing libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb (--install): conflicting packages - not installing libreoffice-debian-menus Errors were encountered while processing: libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb timothy@timothy-Inspiron-1525:~/Lib/DEBS/desktop-integration$ -- So, to get rid of the issue, I went to the Package Manager and removed all of installed LO files. Then I reinstalled LO 4.0.3 and the menu part. libreoffice-core conflicts with libreoffice-unbundled seems to tell me that I must uninstall the previous version on 13.04 before I install the next one. I got this with installing 4.0.2 as well on this system. This is the second laptop that was upgraded from 12.04 or 12.10 to 13.04, with this system being a clean install over an upgrade. On 05/10/2013 10:30 AM, Don C. Myers wrote: Hopefully there are some folks out there who are using the other desktops who can help you and give you some feedback. I don't know anybody who is using them to check with. Sorry. On 05/10/2013 10:05 AM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: YES, it works for you but I am not using Unity. How many users with MATE are having the same issues? Do anyone using KDE or the other desktop have any issues. I know that there has been work done to make the DEB install work properly with Unity. Has there been any work to make sure it works as well with the other desktops? That might be the issue here. MATE and Cinnamon are the desktops for people who liked GNOME 2.x style of desktop and did not want to switch to Unity, GNOME 3.x, KDE or the others. I hate Unity and GNOME 3.x. The same reasons I hate Win8's desktop. If you read the articles, you will find many users went to Mint Linux and other distros to get away from Unity. Mint having both MATE and Cinnamon desktop versions, got a lot of users from Ubuntu. I stuck with Ubuntu, but chose MATE desktop environment. SO it may be a MATE issue, or may not. So I ask if any MATE or Cinnamon desktop users are having the same issues. On 05/09/2013 10:25 PM, Don Myers wrote: I installed LO 4.0.3.3 tonight on a third computer, also with Ubuntu 13.04 and with Unity. No problems there either. On 05/09/2013 08:19 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I extract them to the /home folder then rename it to Lib then I cd Lib cd DEBS then sudo dpkg -i *.deb I tend to not run an command on a folder that I am not in. I learned that in my mainframe days as a safety feature. So far, I have installed it on Ubuntu 12.04 and 13.04 with MATE desktop. I HATE Unity and GNOME 3.x. Been using Ubuntu since 9.04 or 9.10 for a few months till 10.04 LTS came out. I skipped 11.xx and when to 12.04 and 13.04. 13.04 gave me errors when I tried the desktop-integration install. Kept giving me errors stating it was not matching the core install. The only fix I came up with, for it on 13.04 was to remove the current version of LO then install the new one over again. On 05/09/2013 06:55 PM, Don Myers wrote: Hi, I installed LO 4.0.3.3 on two machines running Ubuntu 13.04 with Unity today. I always download LO from the LO site, extract it to the desktop, and then run the following commands in the terminal: 1. sudo apt-get remove libreoffice*.* 2. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/*.deb 3. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/desktop-integration/libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb Everything was fine with both. I've used this method since Ubuntu 9.04 in the days of OpenOffice, and I've never had a problem with anything missing or failing. Don On 05/09/2013 06:00 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 05/09/2013 05:16 PM, Dan Lewis wrote: On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did notI
YES, it works for you but I am not using Unity. How many users with MATE are having the same issues? Do anyone using KDE or the other desktop have any issues. I know that there has been work done to make the DEB install work properly with Unity. Has there been any work to make sure it works as well with the other desktops? That might be the issue here. MATE and Cinnamon are the desktops for people who liked GNOME 2.x style of desktop and did not want to switch to Unity, GNOME 3.x, KDE or the others. I hate Unity and GNOME 3.x. The same reasons I hate Win8's desktop. If you read the articles, you will find many users went to Mint Linux and other distros to get away from Unity. Mint having both MATE and Cinnamon desktop versions, got a lot of users from Ubuntu. I stuck with Ubuntu, but chose MATE desktop environment. SO it may be a MATE issue, or may not. So I ask if any MATE or Cinnamon desktop users are having the same issues. On 05/09/2013 10:25 PM, Don Myers wrote: I installed LO 4.0.3.3 tonight on a third computer, also with Ubuntu 13.04 and with Unity. No problems there either. On 05/09/2013 08:19 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I extract them to the /home folder then rename it to Lib then I cd Lib cd DEBS then sudo dpkg -i *.deb I tend to not run an command on a folder that I am not in. I learned that in my mainframe days as a safety feature. So far, I have installed it on Ubuntu 12.04 and 13.04 with MATE desktop. I HATE Unity and GNOME 3.x. Been using Ubuntu since 9.04 or 9.10 for a few months till 10.04 LTS came out. I skipped 11.xx and when to 12.04 and 13.04. 13.04 gave me errors when I tried the desktop-integration install. Kept giving me errors stating it was not matching the core install. The only fix I came up with, for it on 13.04 was to remove the current version of LO then install the new one over again. On 05/09/2013 06:55 PM, Don Myers wrote: Hi, I installed LO 4.0.3.3 on two machines running Ubuntu 13.04 with Unity today. I always download LO from the LO site, extract it to the desktop, and then run the following commands in the terminal: 1. sudo apt-get remove libreoffice*.* 2. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/*.deb 3. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/desktop-integration/libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb Everything was fine with both. I've used this method since Ubuntu 9.04 in the days of OpenOffice, and I've never had a problem with anything missing or failing. Don On 05/09/2013 06:00 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 05/09/2013 05:16 PM, Dan Lewis wrote: On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. It is a little difficult to say since you did not say what version of LibreOffice you had installed on the two systems. That is likely to be important. Also from where did you download LibreOffice 4.0.3? I have installed 4.0.3.3 (Debian 64 Bit) that I downloaded from the LibreOffice website. I did not notice any problems. But this might have been because I already had 4.0.3.2 installed. --Dan Version 4.0.3.3 (Build ID: 0eaa50a932c8f2199a615e1eb30f7ac74279539) I downloaded it today from the LO site, after it was announced. I try not to download RCversions. I had a different problem with the 13.04 Ubuntu I have on my laptop, which is an issue with 13.04 [I think since it effects more than LO]. I run Ubuntu with MATE desktop environment. But on my Ubuntu 12.04 desktop, I had the problem withthe loss of the extensions and persona. On 13.04 I did not have that issue, but an install problem until I removed all of the LO files with the Package Manager. But it kept the extensions and persona. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did notI
On 05/10/2013 07:05 AM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: YES, it works for you but I am not using Unity. How many users with MATE are having the same issues? Do anyone using KDE or the other desktop have any issues. Honestly in this case it's unlikely that the DE is the issue as this is really just an installation bug and the front end of Linux (DE) shouldn't affect this one bit. There was work done for Unity for Unity integration but this wouldn't affect installation at all. This being said, what I would recommend is reporting a bug as this would indeed be a bug, over at https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/bug/. Make sure to include exact steps (even if they seem basic), what you observed, and what you expected. Include your system info (including distro, DE, etc...) and LibreOffice versions. Also include the extensions you had installed and which ones (or all) disappeared. This way someone from QA (possibly myself) will look into the bug. I have a debian based machine but it uses Enlightenment, I suspect that this wouldn't cause any difference for installation issues so -- I should be able to test. Best, Joel -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did notI
Hopefully there are some folks out there who are using the other desktops who can help you and give you some feedback. I don't know anybody who is using them to check with. Sorry. On 05/10/2013 10:05 AM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: YES, it works for you but I am not using Unity. How many users with MATE are having the same issues? Do anyone using KDE or the other desktop have any issues. I know that there has been work done to make the DEB install work properly with Unity. Has there been any work to make sure it works as well with the other desktops? That might be the issue here. MATE and Cinnamon are the desktops for people who liked GNOME 2.x style of desktop and did not want to switch to Unity, GNOME 3.x, KDE or the others. I hate Unity and GNOME 3.x. The same reasons I hate Win8's desktop. If you read the articles, you will find many users went to Mint Linux and other distros to get away from Unity. Mint having both MATE and Cinnamon desktop versions, got a lot of users from Ubuntu. I stuck with Ubuntu, but chose MATE desktop environment. SO it may be a MATE issue, or may not. So I ask if any MATE or Cinnamon desktop users are having the same issues. On 05/09/2013 10:25 PM, Don Myers wrote: I installed LO 4.0.3.3 tonight on a third computer, also with Ubuntu 13.04 and with Unity. No problems there either. On 05/09/2013 08:19 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I extract them to the /home folder then rename it to Lib then I cd Lib cd DEBS then sudo dpkg -i *.deb I tend to not run an command on a folder that I am not in. I learned that in my mainframe days as a safety feature. So far, I have installed it on Ubuntu 12.04 and 13.04 with MATE desktop. I HATE Unity and GNOME 3.x. Been using Ubuntu since 9.04 or 9.10 for a few months till 10.04 LTS came out. I skipped 11.xx and when to 12.04 and 13.04. 13.04 gave me errors when I tried the desktop-integration install. Kept giving me errors stating it was not matching the core install. The only fix I came up with, for it on 13.04 was to remove the current version of LO then install the new one over again. On 05/09/2013 06:55 PM, Don Myers wrote: Hi, I installed LO 4.0.3.3 on two machines running Ubuntu 13.04 with Unity today. I always download LO from the LO site, extract it to the desktop, and then run the following commands in the terminal: 1. sudo apt-get remove libreoffice*.* 2. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/*.deb 3. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/desktop-integration/libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb Everything was fine with both. I've used this method since Ubuntu 9.04 in the days of OpenOffice, and I've never had a problem with anything missing or failing. Don On 05/09/2013 06:00 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 05/09/2013 05:16 PM, Dan Lewis wrote: On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. It is a little difficult to say since you did not say what version of LibreOffice you had installed on the two systems. That is likely to be important. Also from where did you download LibreOffice 4.0.3? I have installed 4.0.3.3 (Debian 64 Bit) that I downloaded from the LibreOffice website. I did not notice any problems. But this might have been because I already had 4.0.3.2 installed. --Dan Version 4.0.3.3 (Build ID: 0eaa50a932c8f2199a615e1eb30f7ac74279539) I downloaded it today from the LO site, after it was announced. I try not to download RCversions. I had a different problem with the 13.04 Ubuntu I have on my laptop, which is an issue with 13.04 [I think since it effects more than LO]. I run Ubuntu with MATE desktop environment. But on my Ubuntu 12.04 desktop, I had the problem withthe loss of the extensions and persona. On 13.04 I did not have that issue, but an install problem until I removed all of the LO files with the Package Manager. But it kept the extensions and persona. -- *~~* Don C. Myers Manager, Farm and Rural Property Division e-PRO Certified by the National Association of Realtors Don's Cell Phone: 814-571-9518, Don's Home Phone: 814-422-8111 Don's E-mail: donmy...@myersfarm.com mailto:donmy...@myersfarm.com *RE/MAX Centre Realty **1375 Martin Street, State College, PA 16803* Office Phone: 814-231-8200 Fax: 814-231-8220 Visit the Farm and Rural Property Division web site at _www.CentralPaRuralProperty.com http://www.CentralPaRuralProperty.com/ _ Visit the RE/MAX Centre Realty main web site at _www.StateCollegeHomeSales.com
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did notI
Here is the error I got when I tried to install 4.0.3 on an Ubuntu 13.04 with MATE de. I installed the files without errors till I got to the desktop-integration part. Here is the listing from the terminal. timothy@timothy-Inspiron-1525:~/Lib/DEBS/desktop-integration$ sudo dpkg -i *.deb Selecting previously unselected package libreoffice-debian-menus. dpkg: regarding libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb containing libreoffice-debian-menus: libreoffice-core conflicts with libreoffice-unbundled libreoffice-debian-menus provides libreoffice-unbundled and is to be installed. dpkg: error processing libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb (--install): conflicting packages - not installing libreoffice-debian-menus Errors were encountered while processing: libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb timothy@timothy-Inspiron-1525:~/Lib/DEBS/desktop-integration$ -- So, to get rid of the issue, I went to the Package Manager and removed all of installed LO files. Then I reinstalled LO 4.0.3 and the menu part. libreoffice-core conflicts with libreoffice-unbundled seems to tell me that I must uninstall the previous version on 13.04 before I install the next one. I got this with installing 4.0.2 as well on this system. This is the second laptop that was upgraded from 12.04 or 12.10 to 13.04, with this system being a clean install over an upgrade. On 05/10/2013 10:30 AM, Don C. Myers wrote: Hopefully there are some folks out there who are using the other desktops who can help you and give you some feedback. I don't know anybody who is using them to check with. Sorry. On 05/10/2013 10:05 AM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: YES, it works for you but I am not using Unity. How many users with MATE are having the same issues? Do anyone using KDE or the other desktop have any issues. I know that there has been work done to make the DEB install work properly with Unity. Has there been any work to make sure it works as well with the other desktops? That might be the issue here. MATE and Cinnamon are the desktops for people who liked GNOME 2.x style of desktop and did not want to switch to Unity, GNOME 3.x, KDE or the others. I hate Unity and GNOME 3.x. The same reasons I hate Win8's desktop. If you read the articles, you will find many users went to Mint Linux and other distros to get away from Unity. Mint having both MATE and Cinnamon desktop versions, got a lot of users from Ubuntu. I stuck with Ubuntu, but chose MATE desktop environment. SO it may be a MATE issue, or may not. So I ask if any MATE or Cinnamon desktop users are having the same issues. On 05/09/2013 10:25 PM, Don Myers wrote: I installed LO 4.0.3.3 tonight on a third computer, also with Ubuntu 13.04 and with Unity. No problems there either. On 05/09/2013 08:19 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I extract them to the /home folder then rename it to Lib then I cd Lib cd DEBS then sudo dpkg -i *.deb I tend to not run an command on a folder that I am not in. I learned that in my mainframe days as a safety feature. So far, I have installed it on Ubuntu 12.04 and 13.04 with MATE desktop. I HATE Unity and GNOME 3.x. Been using Ubuntu since 9.04 or 9.10 for a few months till 10.04 LTS came out. I skipped 11.xx and when to 12.04 and 13.04. 13.04 gave me errors when I tried the desktop-integration install. Kept giving me errors stating it was not matching the core install. The only fix I came up with, for it on 13.04 was to remove the current version of LO then install the new one over again. On 05/09/2013 06:55 PM, Don Myers wrote: Hi, I installed LO 4.0.3.3 on two machines running Ubuntu 13.04 with Unity today. I always download LO from the LO site, extract it to the desktop, and then run the following commands in the terminal: 1. sudo apt-get remove libreoffice*.* 2. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/*.deb 3. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/desktop-integration/libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb Everything was fine with both. I've used this method since Ubuntu 9.04 in the days of OpenOffice, and I've never had a problem with anything missing or failing. Don On 05/09/2013 06:00 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 05/09/2013 05:16 PM, Dan Lewis wrote: On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. It is a little difficult to say since you did not say what version of LibreOffice you had installed on the two systems. That is likely to be
[libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did not
I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did not
On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. It is a little difficult to say since you did not say what version of LibreOffice you had installed on the two systems. That is likely to be important. Also from where did you download LibreOffice 4.0.3? I have installed 4.0.3.3 (Debian 64 Bit) that I downloaded from the LibreOffice website. I did not notice any problems. But this might have been because I already had 4.0.3.2 installed. --Dan -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did not
Fedora 18. Previous version 4.0.2.2. tar.gz downloaded via bit torrent from website. All good On 05/10/2013 07:16 AM, Dan Lewis wrote: On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. It is a little difficult to say since you did not say what version of LibreOffice you had installed on the two systems. That is likely to be important. Also from where did you download LibreOffice 4.0.3? I have installed 4.0.3.3 (Debian 64 Bit) that I downloaded from the LibreOffice website. I did not notice any problems. But this might have been because I already had 4.0.3.2 installed. --Dan -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did not
On 05/09/2013 05:16 PM, Dan Lewis wrote: On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. It is a little difficult to say since you did not say what version of LibreOffice you had installed on the two systems. That is likely to be important. Also from where did you download LibreOffice 4.0.3? I have installed 4.0.3.3 (Debian 64 Bit) that I downloaded from the LibreOffice website. I did not notice any problems. But this might have been because I already had 4.0.3.2 installed. --Dan Version 4.0.3.3 (Build ID: 0eaa50a932c8f2199a615e1eb30f7ac74279539) I downloaded it today from the LO site, after it was announced. I try not to download RCversions. I had a different problem with the 13.04 Ubuntu I have on my laptop, which is an issue with 13.04 [I think since it effects more than LO]. I run Ubuntu with MATE desktop environment. But on my Ubuntu 12.04 desktop, I had the problem withthe loss of the extensions and persona. On 13.04 I did not have that issue, but an install problem until I removed all of the LO files with the Package Manager. But it kept the extensions and persona. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did not
Hi, I installed LO 4.0.3.3 on two machines running Ubuntu 13.04 with Unity today. I always download LO from the LO site, extract it to the desktop, and then run the following commands in the terminal: 1. sudo apt-get remove libreoffice*.* 2. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/*.deb 3. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/desktop-integration/libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb Everything was fine with both. I've used this method since Ubuntu 9.04 in the days of OpenOffice, and I've never had a problem with anything missing or failing. Don On 05/09/2013 06:00 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 05/09/2013 05:16 PM, Dan Lewis wrote: On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. It is a little difficult to say since you did not say what version of LibreOffice you had installed on the two systems. That is likely to be important. Also from where did you download LibreOffice 4.0.3? I have installed 4.0.3.3 (Debian 64 Bit) that I downloaded from the LibreOffice website. I did not notice any problems. But this might have been because I already had 4.0.3.2 installed. --Dan Version 4.0.3.3 (Build ID: 0eaa50a932c8f2199a615e1eb30f7ac74279539) I downloaded it today from the LO site, after it was announced. I try not to download RCversions. I had a different problem with the 13.04 Ubuntu I have on my laptop, which is an issue with 13.04 [I think since it effects more than LO]. I run Ubuntu with MATE desktop environment. But on my Ubuntu 12.04 desktop, I had the problem withthe loss of the extensions and persona. On 13.04 I did not have that issue, but an install problem until I removed all of the LO files with the Package Manager. But it kept the extensions and persona. -- ** -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did not
I extract them to the /home folder then rename it to Lib then I cd Lib cd DEBS then sudo dpkg -i *.deb I tend to not run an command on a folder that I am not in. I learned that in my mainframe days as a safety feature. So far, I have installed it on Ubuntu 12.04 and 13.04 with MATE desktop. I HATE Unity and GNOME 3.x. Been using Ubuntu since 9.04 or 9.10 for a few months till 10.04 LTS came out. I skipped 11.xx and when to 12.04 and 13.04. 13.04 gave me errors when I tried the desktop-integration install. Kept giving me errors stating it was not matching the core install. The only fix I came up with, for it on 13.04 was to remove the current version of LO then install the new one over again. On 05/09/2013 06:55 PM, Don Myers wrote: Hi, I installed LO 4.0.3.3 on two machines running Ubuntu 13.04 with Unity today. I always download LO from the LO site, extract it to the desktop, and then run the following commands in the terminal: 1. sudo apt-get remove libreoffice*.* 2. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/*.deb 3. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/desktop-integration/libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb Everything was fine with both. I've used this method since Ubuntu 9.04 in the days of OpenOffice, and I've never had a problem with anything missing or failing. Don On 05/09/2013 06:00 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 05/09/2013 05:16 PM, Dan Lewis wrote: On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. It is a little difficult to say since you did not say what version of LibreOffice you had installed on the two systems. That is likely to be important. Also from where did you download LibreOffice 4.0.3? I have installed 4.0.3.3 (Debian 64 Bit) that I downloaded from the LibreOffice website. I did not notice any problems. But this might have been because I already had 4.0.3.2 installed. --Dan Version 4.0.3.3 (Build ID: 0eaa50a932c8f2199a615e1eb30f7ac74279539) I downloaded it today from the LO site, after it was announced. I try not to download RCversions. I had a different problem with the 13.04 Ubuntu I have on my laptop, which is an issue with 13.04 [I think since it effects more than LO]. I run Ubuntu with MATE desktop environment. But on my Ubuntu 12.04 desktop, I had the problem withthe loss of the extensions and persona. On 13.04 I did not have that issue, but an install problem until I removed all of the LO files with the Package Manager. But it kept the extensions and persona. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did notI
I installed LO 4.0.3.3 tonight on a third computer, also with Ubuntu 13.04 and with Unity. No problems there either. On 05/09/2013 08:19 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I extract them to the /home folder then rename it to Lib then I cd Lib cd DEBS then sudo dpkg -i *.deb I tend to not run an command on a folder that I am not in. I learned that in my mainframe days as a safety feature. So far, I have installed it on Ubuntu 12.04 and 13.04 with MATE desktop. I HATE Unity and GNOME 3.x. Been using Ubuntu since 9.04 or 9.10 for a few months till 10.04 LTS came out. I skipped 11.xx and when to 12.04 and 13.04. 13.04 gave me errors when I tried the desktop-integration install. Kept giving me errors stating it was not matching the core install. The only fix I came up with, for it on 13.04 was to remove the current version of LO then install the new one over again. On 05/09/2013 06:55 PM, Don Myers wrote: Hi, I installed LO 4.0.3.3 on two machines running Ubuntu 13.04 with Unity today. I always download LO from the LO site, extract it to the desktop, and then run the following commands in the terminal: 1. sudo apt-get remove libreoffice*.* 2. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/*.deb 3. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/desktop-integration/libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb Everything was fine with both. I've used this method since Ubuntu 9.04 in the days of OpenOffice, and I've never had a problem with anything missing or failing. Don On 05/09/2013 06:00 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 05/09/2013 05:16 PM, Dan Lewis wrote: On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. It is a little difficult to say since you did not say what version of LibreOffice you had installed on the two systems. That is likely to be important. Also from where did you download LibreOffice 4.0.3? I have installed 4.0.3.3 (Debian 64 Bit) that I downloaded from the LibreOffice website. I did not notice any problems. But this might have been because I already had 4.0.3.2 installed. --Dan Version 4.0.3.3 (Build ID: 0eaa50a932c8f2199a615e1eb30f7ac74279539) I downloaded it today from the LO site, after it was announced. I try not to download RCversions. I had a different problem with the 13.04 Ubuntu I have on my laptop, which is an issue with 13.04 [I think since it effects more than LO]. I run Ubuntu with MATE desktop environment. But on my Ubuntu 12.04 desktop, I had the problem withthe loss of the extensions and persona. On 13.04 I did not have that issue, but an install problem until I removed all of the LO files with the Package Manager. But it kept the extensions and persona. -- ** -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did notI
Hi :) Errr, the User Profile changed with the 4.0.x. Under 3.x.x the path was blah...blah/3/blah under 4.0.x it's changed to blah...blah/4/blah So if you are upgrading from 3.x.x to 4.0.x then your Extensions, galleries, backups, templates and all the rest might not get picked up by the newer version. Copypaste or dragdrop are good options to fix it! It's more about the last version the machine had rather than which platform you are running it on. However it's a fairly unusual problem because most of the time the 4.0.x install picks up the old stuff for you. Regards from Tom :) From: Don Myers donmy...@myersfarm.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Friday, 10 May 2013, 3:25 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3 64-bit DEB removed my extensions, but Windows version did notI I installed LO 4.0.3.3 tonight on a third computer, also with Ubuntu 13.04 and with Unity. No problems there either. On 05/09/2013 08:19 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I extract them to the /home folder then rename it to Lib then I cd Lib cd DEBS then sudo dpkg -i *.deb I tend to not run an command on a folder that I am not in. I learned that in my mainframe days as a safety feature. So far, I have installed it on Ubuntu 12.04 and 13.04 with MATE desktop. I HATE Unity and GNOME 3.x. Been using Ubuntu since 9.04 or 9.10 for a few months till 10.04 LTS came out. I skipped 11.xx and when to 12.04 and 13.04. 13.04 gave me errors when I tried the desktop-integration install. Kept giving me errors stating it was not matching the core install. The only fix I came up with, for it on 13.04 was to remove the current version of LO then install the new one over again. On 05/09/2013 06:55 PM, Don Myers wrote: Hi, I installed LO 4.0.3.3 on two machines running Ubuntu 13.04 with Unity today. I always download LO from the LO site, extract it to the desktop, and then run the following commands in the terminal: 1. sudo apt-get remove libreoffice*.* 2. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/*.deb 3. sudo dpkg -i ~/Desktop/LibreOffice_4.0.3.3_Linux_x86-64_deb/DEBS/desktop-integration/libreoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.0.3-3_all.deb Everything was fine with both. I've used this method since Ubuntu 9.04 in the days of OpenOffice, and I've never had a problem with anything missing or failing. Don On 05/09/2013 06:00 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 05/09/2013 05:16 PM, Dan Lewis wrote: On 05/09/2013 03:40 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: I just installed 4.0.3 on two systems The 64-bit DEB install removed my extensions and the persona I has setup. The Windows install did not do this. Any idea way the 64-bit DEB install in Ubuntu 12.04 would remove my added items, but Windows did not? I do not know if it is a bug, or not. If other have seen this, than it might be. It is a little difficult to say since you did not say what version of LibreOffice you had installed on the two systems. That is likely to be important. Also from where did you download LibreOffice 4.0.3? I have installed 4.0.3.3 (Debian 64 Bit) that I downloaded from the LibreOffice website. I did not notice any problems. But this might have been because I already had 4.0.3.2 installed. --Dan Version 4.0.3.3 (Build ID: 0eaa50a932c8f2199a615e1eb30f7ac74279539) I downloaded it today from the LO site, after it was announced. I try not to download RCversions. I had a different problem with the 13.04 Ubuntu I have on my laptop, which is an issue with 13.04 [I think since it effects more than LO]. I run Ubuntu with MATE desktop environment. But on my Ubuntu 12.04 desktop, I had the problem withthe loss of the extensions and persona. On 13.04 I did not have that issue, but an install problem until I removed all of the LO files with the Package Manager. But it kept the extensions and persona. -- ** -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
