Re: [tdf-discuss]
Can we ban this guy On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 10:12 PM, Marius Popa marius.mar...@gmail.comwrote: http://snappdapp.diamondstorepharmacy.net/?camp=rubern -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Sean White, I've Seen the Cow Level -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] New LibreOffice Reader Eliminates Need for PDF Reader
I dont thinks thats normal somehow, i have been using Adobe Reader for years and have NEVER had it come past 200MB. Back to discussion, what's with all the PDF hate. It serves a very good purpose a standard, editable document that shows up exactly how you want it WHEREVER you are and whatever OS you are using. this has always been its use and so it falls in a different document category to ODF. ODF is an office format created to compete with MSO's doc, xls an ppt formats. to essentially modify the underlying purpose to make it behave more like a PDF would waste most of what we have put into it. On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 5:04 AM, Robert Derman robert.der...@pressenter.com wrote: Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: My Windows 7 C:\Program Files (x86)\Adobe\Reader 10.0\ folder is 181 MB. Where do you get the 6 GB? I simply right clicked on the folder that contains adobe reader 9 and nothing else, the rest of the Adobe products are in a folder one level up that also contains the reader folder, in any case when I click properties, that is the size it lists, in fact to be more exact 6.2 gigabytes. I did the same with the folder containing LibreOffice, and it listed the size of that as 475 megabytes. So I am pretty much forced to believe it. Perhaps Adobe is going in the right direction again in the transition from reader 9 to reader 10, and dumping some unnecessary crap. -Original Message- From: Robert Derman [mailto:robert.der...@pressenter.com] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 21:24 To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] New LibreOffice Reader Eliminates Need for PDF Reader [ ... ] What I meant by HUGE when I referred to Adobe Reader was the more than 6 Gigs of hard drive space it takes up! By contrast all of the LibreOffice suite of programs takes up 475 Megs of space. That means that a mere reader takes up more than a dozen times the space of an entire office suite. If that isn't mega-bloat I don't know what is. It has been a long time, but I seem to remember Adobe Reader only taking 12 Megs of space at one time. It used to come included on almost all driver disks, now it is just too big for that. [ ... ] -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Sean White, I've Seen the Cow Level -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format
@Larry Gusaas During the last 12 months alot of of big businesses have changed over to Windows 7 and MSO 2007/2010. As most people dont care about the format they will just save it as docx. Most will not even know the difference because they will buy the software that their business has. LibreOffice being able to write to .doc isn't going to be enough when everyone around you is using the format equivalent of Win7 and you're still using the equivalent of Win98/2000. The vibe i got from the original poster and a few subsequent posters was that of stopping support entirely, both read and write, rather than just write. gStreamer is a de-facto media framework. Some programs you use everyday probably use it. If my use of gStreamer was to hard for you then replace it with FFMpeg. It achieves the same objective. And dont just think that because i know a few computer terms that you don't that I run Linux. Not every smart person uses it even though it is a better system than Windows. The reason it fails is really the same as why OOo/LO struggle against MSO, people dont see it as a viable alternative. In linux's case its because people think that it HAS to be advanced and that it isn't user friendly. In OOo/LO's case people see that it doesn't have the features they need (.docx support) and, camparative to MSO, looks a-shambles, with a GUI akin to the MSO 97-2003 era. On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.comwrote: On 2010/12/31 1:02 AM Sean White wrote: IF LibreOffice pulls .docx support then people WONT congratulate us on the strength of our morals. Nobody suggest not being able to read .docx files, only that LibO should no be able to write to that format. They will instead see an 'office suite' that doesn't support the formats they have and will go Well thats USELESS and delete it from their system and install an office suite which DOES have support, MS Office still can read and write to .doc format. LibO ability to write to .doc format if necessary is sufficient for interchange with MS office users we happen to support a format that is used by 80+% of all 'Office Suite' users. Older versions of MS office do not use the new formats. Many users of MS Office 2007 and newer still save in the older formats. Nowhere near 80+% of MS Office users the new file formats. Its kinda like going to the gStreamer forums and saying I'm going to iTunes because you support WMA. Totally irrelevant comment. What is gStreamer? Oh, wait a minute, it is probably a Linuts program. Larry -- _ Larry I. Gusaas Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada Website: http://larry-gusaas.com An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs. - Edgard Varese -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Sean White, I've Seen the Cow Level -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format
I have come into this thread a little late but i may just have a slightly clearer view of things. In the world of office suites, MS almost has a monopoly. They have the power to to make their formats the standard. IF LibreOffice pulls .docx support then people WONT congratulate us on the strength of our morals. They will instead see an 'office suite' that doesn't support the formats they have and will go Well thats USELESS and delete it from their system and install an office suite which DOES have support, which in this case is MSO thus strengthening MS position in the market. This is the opposite of what we want to happen with LibreOffice. The validity of the standard and the fact that its a proprietary format aside, if LibreOffice doesn't play ball, the we get shoved of the court. As a side note, I find it slightly hypocritical that the original poster advocates going back to OO.o, which is now controlled by Oracle who are in a bigger campaign of open-source destruction than MS is at the moment, because we happen to support a format that is used by 80+% of all 'Office Suite' users. Its kinda like going to the gStreamer forums and saying I'm going to iTunes because you support WMA. On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.comwrote: On 2010/12/30 7:09 PM Carl Symons wrote: One minor point here...OOo also supports writing to docx format. Official OpenOffice.org builds do not support writing to the .docx format. The Go-OO derivative does write to the .docx format (probably because of the agreement between Microsoft and Novell). Go-OO is the version used on many Linux distros. There are many reports on OOo forums of problems caused by the poorly tested additions included in Go-OO. LibreOffice is based on Go-OO. -- _ Larry I. Gusaas *Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada Website: http://larry-gusaas.com An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs. - Edgard Varese * -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Sean White, I've Seen the Cow Level -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Version Numbers?
Thanks for that link, it was a real help. I can't say I'm pleased, but the decision has been made and I will not go against the steering community. Something I did note was that a-lot of the points we have raised match theirs concept-for-concept if not word-for-word. On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Christoph Noack christoph.no...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi Sean, since it is a bit hard for me to find the right place to jump in, here some decision on the version numbers question - the Steering Committee discussed that some weeks ago. http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Steering_Committee_Meetings#Version_Numbering_Scheme_for_LibreOffice : Hope that helps! Christoph Am Samstag, den 20.11.2010, 10:26 +1100 schrieb Sean White: As a concerned user, if LibreOffice is meant a independent office project derived from the OpenOffice code then why do we still use their version numbering system. Wouldn't it be better to start from 1 to reinforce in peoples minds that we are a separate project. -- Sean White, Concerned User -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Sean White, I've Seen the Cow Level -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] after beta3
lets hope not, as god as LO is it is still not ready for general release. The coding is not yet finished, the interface is still that clunky thing thats been around since the 90's and is a little old and, most importantly, a good marketing strategy is yet to appear. The success of this sort of product isn't in the coding or the interface though they may be attributing factors. Without a good marketing strategy even the best piece of software can go unnoticed and undervalued. An example of this is linux. Linux as a whole doesn't get marketed, individual distro's do, and this, from the public eye, makes linux look like it lacks direction and purpose. Compare that to Windows where the underlining code isn't the best BUT it has a killer marketing team who have made it a well advertised and in the public domain all the time. the better product from the public perspective is a clear win for windows On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 2:45 AM, Jih-Yao Lin jih...@gmail.com wrote: Will beta3 be the last beta version of LO 3.3 ? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Sean White, I've Seen the Cow Level -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Version Numbers?
One of the things i LOVE about open source software is the ability for me to ask someone else to code something or port something that i cant do myself. So my solution to your problem of incompatible extensions is to set up a new mailing list for OO to LO extension porting. the public can send the extension which the people on the mailing list can then port over. On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:13 PM, bastik.public.mailingl...@gmx.de wrote: On Nov 21, 2010, at 22:31 , jonathon wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/21/2010 09:15 PM, James Wilde wrote: ...and? Is LibO going to upgrade the version number every time OOo does? And only then? Unless there is a compatibility tag for extensions, the way that there is for firefox, LibO is stuck with the version numbering that OOo uses, if it wants to retain compatibility with those extensions. Well, I appreciate that it would mean two sets of numbers for extensions, but I can imagine that, in a not too distant future, OOo and LibO are going to grow apart, possibly sufficiently that an extension for the one will not work with the other. Why not accept that from day 1? //James I'm willing to accept that extensions wont work in future if OO and LO grow apart, but I think this shouldn't be done artificially by changing the version number. It could be bad for OO users that want to use LO, but miss some extensions because they are no longer compatible because the version number of LO differs. Whenever there is a release with a changes for version 4.x.x I accept incompatibilities. not to you James: Most people don't take version numbers serious anymore. Look at Chrome for example. The rapid change of major versions is ridiculous. LO is not build from scratch, so for me it can stick to 3.x.x and move onward. Regards, bastik -- GRATIS! Movie-FLAT mit über 300 Videos. Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Sean White, I've Seen the Cow Level -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Version Numbers?
because the underlining code inst changing overly-much, most of the extensions should be easy to port and in th odd case where an extension is truely broken by LO's remakes then we can rewrite the plugin from scratch. As a side not we will probably need a page on the document foundation site that is for these ported plugins On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 11:01 PM, bastik.public.mailingl...@gmx.de wrote: That's a good solution, that will have to come in place whenever incompatibles arise. BTW: I depend totally on others when there's something to code or port. Regards, bastik Sean White wrote: One of the things i LOVE about open source software is the ability for me to ask someone else to code something or port something that i cant do myself. So my solution to your problem of incompatible extensions is to set up a new mailing list for OO to LO extension porting. the public can send the extension which the people on the mailing list can then port over. I wrote previously: I'm willing to accept that extensions wont work in future if OO and LO grow apart, but I think this shouldn't be done artificially by changing the version number. It could be bad for OO users that want to use LO, but miss some extensions because they are no longer compatible because the version number of LO differs. Whenever there is a release with a changes for version 4.x.x I accept incompatibilities. not to you James: Most people don't take version numbers serious anymore. Look at Chrome for example. The rapid change of major versions is ridiculous. LO is not build from scratch, so for me it can stick to 3.x.x and move onward. Regards, bastik -- GRATIS! Movie-FLAT mit über 300 Videos. Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Sean White, I've Seen the Cow Level -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Version Numbers?
The UI improvements look good and might just make it easier for people who liked the MSOffice Ribbon and/or dislike the current UI. I think the design could go along way On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Ron Faile rmfa...@bellsouth.net wrote: On 11/20/2010 2:30 AM, Ron Faile wrote: NoOP is right, I wrote the quoted text. Your explanation is well noted and I can see the reasoning behind it. The sooner we can change the interface and feel of LibreOffice then the better, as I for one don't want such a Oracle aligning feature as version numbers staring me in the face every time I start up my non-proprietary office suite On 11/20/10, NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 11/19/2010 06:22 PM, Michel Gagnon wrote: Le 2010-11-19 19:35, NoOp a écrit : On 11/19/2010 03:26 PM, Sean White wrote: As a concerned user, if LibreOffice is meant a independent office project derived from the OpenOffice code then why do we still use their version numbering system. Wouldn't it be better to start from 1 to reinforce in peoples minds that we are a separate project. Take a look at the UI improvements page, http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Default_UI_Improvements I just uploaded a file (item 11) with some ideas that might set LibO apart. Namely a new menu structure. Would be interested in your comments. Ron -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived *** -- Sean White, I've Seen the Cow Level -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
[tdf-discuss] Version Numbers?
As a concerned user, if LibreOffice is meant a independent office project derived from the OpenOffice code then why do we still use their version numbering system. Wouldn't it be better to start from 1 to reinforce in peoples minds that we are a separate project. -- Sean White, Concerned User -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Version Numbers?
NoOP is right, I wrote the quoted text. Your explanation is well noted and I can see the reasoning behind it. The sooner we can change the interface and feel of LibreOffice then the better, as I for one don't want such a Oracle aligning feature as version numbers staring me in the face every time I start up my non-proprietary office suite On 11/20/10, NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 11/19/2010 06:22 PM, Michel Gagnon wrote: Le 2010-11-19 19:35, NoOp a écrit : On 11/19/2010 03:26 PM, Sean White wrote: As a concerned user, if LibreOffice is meant a independent office project derived from the OpenOffice code then why do we still use their version numbering system. Wouldn't it be better to start from 1 to reinforce in peoples minds that we are a separate project. ... I wrote none of that. Please mind your attributions. -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived *** -- Sean White, I've Seen the Cow Level -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
