On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 19:23 +0100, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> Ross Johnson wrote:
>
> >> > Also, the Help - About window still shows OOo 2.0. This is a current
> >> > issue because users are finding it difficult to describe which version
> >> > they're using on the users lists. They're generally told
Ross Johnson wrote:
>> > Also, the Help - About window still shows OOo 2.0. This is a current
>> > issue because users are finding it difficult to describe which version
>> > they're using on the users lists. They're generally told to press an
>> > obscure key combination to display the build vers
On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 14:33 +1100, Daniel Kasak wrote:
> I am sure that if there were a
> *decent* icon set, it would change the way a large number of people view
> OOo. I haven't seen the new icons, but I find it hard to believe they
> are a step backwards.
So - the new icons are IMHO
On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 00:58 +0100, eric b wrote:
> Crystal is localized for de and en-US only (you can verify in svx/
> source/dialog/optgdlg.src, greping "Crystal " )
> but there is still no Crystal string in corresponding localize.sdf
> file in the same directory.
I see what you are talking
On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 00:58 +0100, eric b wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think I just have the answer about crystal icons, but I can be
> wrong...
>
> Le 1 mars 06 à 00:20, Ross Johnson a écrit :
> >
> > According to the spec document for this new feature, this is where an
> > Icon Style listbox is propose
Hi,
I think I just have the answer about crystal icons, but I can be
wrong...
Le 1 mars 06 à 00:20, Ross Johnson a écrit :
According to the spec document for this new feature, this is where an
Icon Style listbox is proposed to be located. So it looks like this
may
be coming but isn't the
On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 08:59 +0100, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> Ross Johnson wrote:
>
> > It may be a matter of getting used to them, but I thought the previous
> > icons more clearly conveyed what they represent.
>
> People wanted the "new" icons because they are more like the ones they
> have on the
Ross Johnson wrote:
> Some of this may be better put in an issue report, but ...
>
> This is not such a petty thing - all the icons seem to have changed from
> what they were in v2.0.1. Is this simply an aesthetic change, or was
> there a serious problem with the previous icons? Just wondering wh
On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 14:33 +1100, Daniel Kasak wrote:
> Ross Johnson wrote:
> > I know there have been a (very) few adverse comments in the user lists
> > about the previous icons,
> Well then ...
> Let me be amongst the 1st to complain :)
Congratulations :)
> The current ( 2.0.1 ) icons make OO
icons and About pane.
Ross Johnson wrote:
> I know there have been a (very) few adverse comments in the user lists
> about the previous icons,
Well then ...
Let me be amongst the 1st to complain :)
The current ( 2.0.1 ) icons make OOo look like a pre- Windows 95
application. I have had
Ross Johnson wrote:
I know there have been a (very) few adverse comments in the user lists
about the previous icons,
Well then ...
Let me be amongst the 1st to complain :)
The current ( 2.0.1 ) icons make OOo look like a pre- Windows 95
application. I have had *many* complaints from users - so
Some of this may be better put in an issue report, but ...
This is not such a petty thing - all the icons seem to have changed from
what they were in v2.0.1. Is this simply an aesthetic change, or was
there a serious problem with the previous icons? Just wondering why it's
worth confusing users at
12 matches
Mail list logo
