-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 08/10/2011 05:23 PM, Simon Cropper wrote: > It is obvious that you do not like OO or LO Calc, and that you don't > like the fact that your data is continually corrupted. LO is a tool. I neither like or dislike it. As a tool, it has a major defect in that it periodically destroys the product which was built using it. You're right in that I don't like the tool I'm using to destroy my work.
> You also say you continuously have to rebuild your spreadsheet and that > the process can take several days. Just spent 2 long days recreating the spreadsheet using 2 machines. Not fun. > If you are so unhappy with the format, corruption and dirty code, my > question is "why do you persist?" I've got a lot of investment in my macro code (9000 lines of it) that can only function within LO. I can't migrate it to something else as is. Had I known about the corruption when I started the project 6 years ago, I would have chosen a different platform. I would have never imagined that over the course of several years that corruption issues would be ignored. That's just inconceivable to me as a professional software developer, but that's apparently the reality. Change packages. Can't, as was mentioned above, unless I rewrite everything. Sad to say, LO is the only real competitor to MS Office and given its corruption history it will turn a lot of people off that might have moved away from MS Windows to Linux had the product been reliable. My real interest is in moving people away from a lousy operating system like Windows to something near bullet proof like Linux. We all need applications tools like word processing, spreadsheet, etc, so a tool like LO is vitally important to Linux adoption. If I could get MS Office compiled to run on Linux as a native application, I'd forget about LO in a heartbeat. MS Office is the best thing Microsoft has. It works well in its native environment. I wish I could say the same for LO, and that's why I'm critical of it. With the time and effort you have already put into recreating corrupted spreadsheets you > could of written your own application or mastered alternative packages. I guess you don't write code for a living. I estimate a rewrite of my POS system would take well over a year of my time. While that's going on, I need something reliable to help run a business. I have sketched out a web based replacement much much more sophisticated than what I'm using now, and plan on developing it when I have the time. Wasting time reporting OO / LO bugs that never get taken seriously and recreating a spreadsheet periodically helps keeps me from such a new development effort. My wife (also a professional software developer) keeps telling me to stop wasting time reporting issues - that I'm tilting at windmills. She may be right. > I am not trying to be rude here it just if I had a package that caused > me so much wasted time I would just move on. I will move on in time, but in the interim, I'd like LO to thrive in the market, and that won't happen unless it becomes reliable. My problem is really with LO management. There isn't any. Despite what you may think, I'm more interested in LO's success than most people are, and I know it won't be successful long term unless its reliable. It hasn't been reliable for years and that's a problem. - -- Bill Gradwohl Roatan, Honduras -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk5EEGMACgkQ7Orvev+eC8rvIACgly5u6U6eM9DeiCbJJ5++k8rf BpUAoIy9kOViLVFCssIwmN3BfCGnR+Dy =ct68 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@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