G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
On Sun, 2005-04-10 at 18:58 -0600, Doug Thompson wrote:Yeah, somewhere along the way I picked up a clue that you're an OF, too. ;-)
Gerry,
The attachments speak for themselves. Well, I did put a few words in them. Main point is that I had used Landscape/Landscape. I just captured the image at the wrong point and didn't notice when I built the document. Not that it matters, because the settings are never saved so I have to set them every time, anyway.
I even went so far as to locate my old CD with MSO '97 and re-install Word just to make sure I recalled it correctly. I did. You get pictures and commentary. Also, of the results with my Xerox/Tektronix Phaser 860DP. Just like Holiday Inn used to advertise: No surprises. At least, not to me.
In case you're unaware, I started working with computers in 1964 (FORTRAN II on an IBM 1620) and built my first PC in 1978. I also spent nearly 20 years specifying, designing, and testing Command and Control, Aircraft Navigation, Aircraft Flight Control, Flight Data Instrumentation data collection and reduction systems, and aircraft-launched Weapons control and delivery systems. I think I have sufficient experience to be able to identify when a system is functioning correctly and when there is a bona fide problem. Take my word for it, there is a problem here that no amount of fussing with the documentation is going to get around.
I maintain that there shouldn't be any need to select orientation. Nobody else needs it. The program should derive size and orientation from the printer settings. As conditions presently are, at least on my computers, manipulating the printer settings for envelope feed and paper size are redundant "monkey motion." If this were new ground, I might listen to an argument to the contrary, but everyone else has been handling envelopes without these kinds of problems for years.
I just tried it with Linux and OOo 1.9.84 on my laptop. Same results. I didn't try to capture any of that.
Doug
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.5 - Release Date: 4/7/05
That is why I opened the RFE. I agree that the requirement to double
specify is illogical.
What you should know about me is that we are contemporaries wrt start time and so on. My first was a 6502 homebrew and then a Kim-1 in 1975. After that a number of machines.
I will look at the new set and get back to you. Let's play off-line as there has to be something going on with a driver or something that is making it extra difficult for you. Please add yourself to the cc list on the issue as I do not know your OOo login.
Before you say nuts to the RFE, remember it is a good way to keep track of things and when we get closer to what is causing the problem we can change it to defect or whatever is current at the time for a bug.
ger
I didn't make a big point of it in my documentation of the problem, and I don't recall you emphasizing the matter of repetitive entries. Maybe it needs to be revisited.
I just updated the RFE, although I can now state definitively it is a bug fix. Just for grins, I spun up 1.1.4 for the first time in a while. Guess what works! At least for the simple, one-off test I did, which is a lot better than 1.9.x. I think the last time I tried to print an envelope with OOo was using 1.1.1 No wonder you cannot duplicate the problem if you're trying it in 1.1.4.
Long story made short, I actually need some of the enhanced compatibility with Excel that's now in Calc. I have a fairly robust spreadsheet that I use for job estimating. It was grown over a couple of years using Excel. It uses the in-cell drop down selection function extensively and there is no equivalent in 1.1.x. Thus my rush to put beta software into a production environment. I certainly know the risks, and so far we're way ahead of the game.
As for envelope printing, it really isn't the big deal for me I make it sound like. Over 90% of my business size mailing uses window envelopes with invoices, statements, and checks from my accounting program. Most of the rest are oversized mailings of pamphlets and brochures and those get labels. But.... OOo is so good in so many ways, that it is unseemly to have a simple function that EVERYbody uses detract from all the stuff that is right. Kinda like the damage one aw-sh** does to a thousand attaboys. I can't get overwrought if some of the more advanced and obscure functions that are used by 5% of the user base have problems; but the functions your (grand)mother uses, those belong at the top of the list.
Doug
P.S. My login ID is 7kaltoid. 7k - altitude at which I live. altoid - right outside Alto, NM.
