Harold Fuchs wrote: > 2009/9/9 Charles Partridge <cpartri...@chipeval.org> > > >> Greetings, >> >> Does there exists a method to identify and delete duplicate rows in Calc? >> >> Thanks in advance. >> >> Chip Partridge >> >> >> Dr. Charles R. Partridge >> Independent Evaluator & Human Ecologist >> CHIP Evaluation Consulting >> cpartri...@chipeval.org >> www.linkedin.com/in/charlespartridge >> >> > > First, please in future do not "hijack threads" by replying to an existing > topic and simply changing the Subject line. It is considered to be extremely > impolite, exactly similar to completely changing the subject during a normal > conversation. Instead, start a new discussion by using the Create Mail > button, or whatever it is called, in your mail program. I have left intact, > below this reply, the discussion thread you hijacked so that you can see > what I'm talking about.. > > Now, to your question: > > 1. Select the entire range of data on which you want to operate > 2. Go to the menu option Data>Filter>Standard Filter > 3. In the pane that opens there's a column labelled "Field name". Select > "-none-" from the drop down list for *only* the first row. > 4. Click the More button > 5. If it is ticked (checked), uncheck the box labelled "Range contains > column labels" > 6. Select "No duplication" > 7. Click OK. > 8. Done > > > > > >> users-digest-h...@openoffice.org wrote: >> >>> users Digest 8 Sep 2009 20:16:44 -0000 Issue 7160 >>> >>> Topics (messages 201485 through 201514): >>> >>> Re: formula in Calc >>> 201485 by: Brian Barker >>> 201488 by: Walter Hildebrandt >>> >>> Re: UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> 201486 by: Cor Nouws >>> 201492 by: Lars Nooden >>> 201493 by: Lars Nooden >>> 201498 by: M Henri Day >>> 201499 by: NoOp >>> 201501 by: M Henri Day >>> 201502 by: Lars Nooden >>> 201506 by: Per >>> 201510 by: Lars Nooden >>> 201513 by: Per >>> >>> Re: Missing Writer Ch 12 >>> 201487 by: Andy >>> >>> Reverse numbering? >>> 201489 by: L Duperval >>> >>> ooauthors on Gmane? >>> 201490 by: L Duperval >>> >>> page numbering in PDF exported document >>> 201491 by: SonrisaLisa >>> 201494 by: Gene Young >>> 201495 by: SonrisaLisa >>> >>> Re: Spreadsheet update automation >>> 201496 by: James E. Lang >>> 201500 by: Johnny Rosenberg >>> >>> [Solved] expanding one record into many in calc >>> 201497 by: Jonathan Kaye >>> >>> UI Goals (Re: UI work) >>> 201503 by: Lars Nooden >>> 201505 by: M Henri Day >>> 201507 by: Lars Nooden >>> 201508 by: John Boyle >>> 201509 by: Lars Nooden >>> 201511 by: Per >>> 201514 by: Lars Nooden >>> >>> Re: Installing Font >>> 201504 by: Mark Miller >>> >>> UI Work - Calc - Engineering notation >>> 201512 by: Lars Nooden >>> >>> Administrivia: >>> >>> To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: >>> users-digest-subscr...@openoffice.org >>> >>> To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: >>> users-digest-unsubscr...@openoffice.org >>> >>> To post to the list, e-mail: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] formula in Calc >>> From: >>> Brian Barker <b.m.bar...@btinternet.com> >>> Date: >>> Mon, 07 Sep 2009 21:38:44 +0100 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> At 08:13 07/09/2009 -0600, Walter Hildebrandt wrote: >>> >>>> The following formula works to give a Yes or a No in C1 >>>> >>>> IF(AND(A1>=0;B1>=0);"Yes";"No") >>>> >>>> How can that formula be increased so that not only A1 and B1 is used >>>> but that C1, D1 and E1 be included >>>> >>>> In other words, what formula can be used when A1>=0 and B1>=0, and >>>> C1>=0 and D1>=0 and E1>=0 so that Yes or No appears in F1 >>>> >>> The AND() function accepts up to thirty arguments, so - as has already >>> been suggested - you can just add more conditions as required: >>> =IF(AND(A1>=0;B1>=0;C1>=0;D1>=0;E1>=0);"Yes";"No") >>> >>> I trust this helps. >>> >>> Brian Barker >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] Formula in Calc >>> From: >>> Walter Hildebrandt <wh2...@gmail.com> >>> Date: >>> Mon, 7 Sep 2009 16:59:49 -0600 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> Yes I was confused. I am still confused about some of the formulas I am >>> using but enough for now. Thank you for all the help. >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Brian Barker <b.m.bar...@btinternet.com >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> At 08:49 07/09/2009 -0600, Walter Hildebrandt wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Sorry that I was not clear in my question. *I do not care if any of >>>>> >> the >> >>>>> cells are empty. I only want to determine if all the cells (A1 B1, C1 >>>>> >> D1 >> >>>>> and F1) are equal to 0 (zero) or are greater than 0, then F1 will be >>>>> >> Yes. If >> >>>>> any of the cells are a negative number then F1 will be No* >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Brian Barker < >>>>> >> b.m.bar...@btinternet.com >> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> At 09:39 23/08/2009 -0600, Walter Hildebrandt wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Is there a formula that will do the following? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 1 If A1 is empty, Emt appears in C1 >>>>>>> 2 If A1 is a negative number, Neg appears in C1 >>>>>>> 3 If A1 has a 0 (a zero), Zero appears in C1 >>>>>>> 4 If 1, 2, and 3, above, do not exist then C1 is the percentage by >>>>>>> which A1 is greater then B1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Try: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> =IF(ISBLANK(A1);"empty";IF(A1<0;"negative";IF(A1=0;"zero";(A1-B1)/B1*100))) >> >>>>>> I trust this helps. >>>>>> >>>>>> Brian Barker >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> You'll have to excuse my giggling! You posted a question earlier. But >>>> then you apparently found a fifteen-day-old reply from me to a quite >>>> different question you had also posed, and have now interpreted this as >>>> >> a >> >>>> surprisingly prescient reply to your current question. Perhaps you were >>>> confused by the fact that you gave the two questions almost identical >>>> subjects? >>>> >>>> >>>> Brian Barker >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> From: >>> Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl> >>> Date: >>> Mon, 07 Sep 2009 10:31:23 +0200 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> Mathias Bauer wrote (6-9-2009 22:58) >>> >>> >>>> Thanks, finally someone understood what I meant. [...] >>>> >>> Well, I guess it's not that bad. There must be some, ehh, much more >>> who understand ;-) >>> >>> Cor >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> From: >>> Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 12:53:46 +0300 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> Cor Nouws wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Lars Nooden wrote (7-9-2009 10:01) >>>> >>>> >>>>> If it looks like duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>> To make it easier for you, to see a bit of the latest prototype (0.16), >>>> a Dutch journalist was so friendly to publish this: >>>> >>>> >> http://webwereld.nl/gallery/63487/openoffice-kiest-ribbon-combinatie--foto-s-.html >> >>> Not so friendly. It's "the ribbon" all over again. >>> >>> UI work is needed, we know that without the survey. >>> However, specifics are needed and this Microsoft-style >>> solution-in-search-of-a-problem is bullshit. (Poo on your virgin ears) >>> The survey points to no specifics: >>> >>> >>> >> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/File:OOoUserSurvey2009_Final.ods >> >>> In fact, there seems to be general satisfaction with the product and its >>> components. How about a survey asking what is missing or what could be >>> improved. >>> >>> "the ribbon" by any other name is still a failed attempt at contextual >>> menus. Even assuming deIcaza shares some of the magic M$ pixie dust and >>> we all become so stoned, stupid or soporiphic that everything seems fine >>> with contextual menus, where will the processing cycles come from? OOo, >>> IMHO, is not slow but it sure is not fast. User experience could be >>> very much improved by removing or reducing the latency. >>> >>> There have been *lots* of suggestions over the years, especially in >>> regards to performance. Adding slow stuff will not make OOo faster. >>> >>> Regards >>> -Lars >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> From: >>> Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:00:10 +0300 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> M Henri Day wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> I should have nothing against an updating to the OOo GUI, but I can't >>>> >> help >> >>>> thinking that it's what's under the hood that is most important. Still, >>>> >> we - >> >>>> the developers - do have to keep in mind that new users to OOo are often >>>> going to have a background in MS Office 2007 and later, rather than in >>>> versions 1997 -2003.... >>>> >>>> >>> Oh bullshit again. Just because a small cluster of deIcaza types wants >>> OOo to stop UI work, turn around and spend effort copying MSO simply >>> because it's MSO, doesn't mean we should. Copying is stupid. Copying >>> failure is more stupid. M$ has virtually made a trademark of suckitude. >>> Don't go the route of trademark infringement. >>> >>> Quick quiz: >>> >>> Q: What is the goal of OOo? >>> >>> a) a deIcaza-style M$ love-in, dutifully copying every >>> aspect of MSO >>> >>> b) providing a good productivity suite >>> >>> Updating the UI is very good idea. Updating without specific goals is a >>> waste of resources. Updating it to copy a failure is not very nice to >>> those who wish to use OOo. >>> >>> If the ideal is more general, improvement of the "User Experience", then >>> it may not be UI work that is needed so much as streamlining and >>> modularization. Faster program == more ( enjoyable && productive ). >>> >>> Regards >>> -Lars >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> From: >>> M Henri Day <mhenri...@gmail.com> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 8 Sep 2009 18:04:45 +0200 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> 2009/9/8 Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>> >>> >>> >>>> M Henri Day wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> I should have nothing against an updating to the OOo GUI, but I can't >>>>> >>>>> >>>> help >>>> >>>> >>>>> thinking that it's what's under the hood that is most important. Still, >>>>> >>>>> >>>> we - >>>> >>>> >>>>> the developers - do have to keep in mind that new users to OOo are >>>>> >> often >> >>>>> going to have a background in MS Office 2007 and later, rather than in >>>>> versions 1997 -2003.... >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Oh bullshit again. Just because a small cluster of deIcaza types wants >>>> OOo to stop UI work, turn around and spend effort copying MSO simply >>>> because it's MSO, doesn't mean we should. Copying is stupid. Copying >>>> failure is more stupid. M$ has virtually made a trademark of suckitude. >>>> Don't go the route of trademark infringement. >>>> >>>> Quick quiz: >>>> >>>> Q: What is the goal of OOo? >>>> >>>> a) a deIcaza-style M$ love-in, dutifully copying every >>>> aspect of MSO >>>> >>>> b) providing a good productivity suite >>>> >>>> Updating the UI is very good idea. Updating without specific goals is a >>>> waste of resources. Updating it to copy a failure is not very nice to >>>> those who wish to use OOo. >>>> >>>> If the ideal is more general, improvement of the "User Experience", then >>>> it may not be UI work that is needed so much as streamlining and >>>> modularization. Faster program == more ( enjoyable && productive ). >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> -Lars >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Lars, before characterising your fellow users' posting as «bullshit», >>> >> you >> >>> might want to consider reading them more carefully. Nowhere in my post >>> >> above >> >>> do I suggest that the MS «ribbon» or other elements of their GUI should >>> >> be >> >>> copied - as I point out, it's what's under the hood - which to me, at >>> >> least, >> >>> includes such matters as the streamlining and modularisation you mention >>> >> - >> >>> that matters. When I read your statement to the effect that «Faster >>> >> program >> >>> == more ( enjoyable && productive )», the impression I get is that we, >>> >> in >> >>> fact, are in substantial agreement. At the same time, given MS's present >>> dominance of the field, we are going to have to take into account that >>> >> many >> >>> who will be considering whether or not to install OOo will have an MS >>> >> Office >> >>> background, a fact which should have consequences for the design of the >>> former. You seem to have interpreted this as a suggestion that OOo >>> >> «copy» >> >>> MSO, but that was not at all my point, which was rather that we have to >>> offer a *better*, more user-friendly alternative then the legacy maker, >>> >> in >> >>> which such aspects as speed and simplicity of use certainly play an >>> important role. Again, from what you write, you seem to agree with this. >>> These are, of course, the goals of any update - but to make them >>> >> operational >> >>> we must, as you point out, make them specific. Let us then discuss these >>> specifics, instead of dismissing - and indeed, misrepresenting - others' >>> opinions as «[u]pdating [OOo] to copy a failure». I, for one, would >>> >> like to >> >>> be able to change the language I'm inputting directly from the toolbar, >>> instead of having to go via a menu. Perhaps if we confine ourselves to >>> discussing such concrete matters, we'll not need to refer to each other >>> >> in a >> >>> manner which tends to wake opposition rather than cooperation.... >>> >>> Henri >>> >>> PS : Thanks for the remark about «delcaza types» - uninitiated as I am, >>> >> I'm >> >>> not sure I follow, but I choose to take it as a compliment !... >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> From: >>> NoOp <gl...@sbcglobal.net> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 09:35:00 -0700 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> On 09/08/2009 09:04 AM, M Henri Day wrote: >>> ... >>> >>> >>>> PS : Thanks for the remark about «delcaza types» - uninitiated as I >>>> >> am, I'm >> >>>> not sure I follow, but I choose to take it as a compliment !... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_de_Icaza >>> >>> Gnome rocks! :-) >>> >>> I suppose that Lars may have been referring to the Mono project? KDE/QT, >>> Gnome/Mono, etc., but that's another thread for another list. >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] Re: UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> From: >>> M Henri Day <mhenri...@gmail.com> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 8 Sep 2009 18:45:10 +0200 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> 2009/9/8 NoOp <gl...@sbcglobal.net> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 09/08/2009 09:04 AM, M Henri Day wrote: >>>> ... >>>> >>>> >>>>> PS : Thanks for the remark about «delcaza types» - uninitiated as I >>>>> >> am, >> >>>> I'm >>>> >>>> >>>>> not sure I follow, but I choose to take it as a compliment !... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_de_Icaza >>>> >>>> Gnome rocks! :-) >>>> >>>> I suppose that Lars may have been referring to the Mono project? KDE/QT, >>>> Gnome/Mono, etc., but that's another thread for another list. >>>> >>>> >>> For this relief much thanks, Gary ! What a difference a space makes - and >>> the distinction between an «l» and an «I» ! I, too, like Gnome.... >>> >>> Henri >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] Re: UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> From: >>> Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:29:26 +0300 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> There is no profit in copying failure. I, for one, moved to OOo after >>> testing all the alternatives I could get hold of for spreadsheets and >>> word processors. Even though I was used to MSO, it sucked donkey balls >>> so badly that a change was needed in order to stay productive with >>> reports and calculations. I'm glad to have left. I'm not glad for >>> idiotic yammering that there is recently some kind of obligation to >>> begin copying that crap. >>> >>> If you want to make progress on the OOo UI, then find some specifics to >>> work on. >>> >>> It has already been mentioned that full mouseless operation is needed >>> for the word processor and spreadsheet. That's one of the reasons you >>> still find WordPerfect word processor floating around. Professional >>> typists can use it quickly. >>> >>> + For the spreadsheet, that's a more mature tool and there are still >>> characteristics and conventions that are legacies from Visicalc. >>> >>> + For the presentation graphics, Keynote is very relevant. I used the >>> presentation graphics extensively for 2.5 years. It does what I needed, >>> but there are many things that can be fixed, especially in slide sorting >>> and managing templates. None of that can be address by finding new >>> combinations of words to create the semantic equivalent of 'copying "the >>> ribbon"' >>> >>> The survey really says almost nothing about what needs work. You'll >>> notice that most of the questions were actually left unanswered. That >>> goes especially for the >>> >>> - equation editor >>> - draw >>> - base >>> - chart >>> >>> For those, a negligible amount of answers were turned in. Some aspects >>> of these may be under-marketed. Or there may be showstoppers that turn >>> people off. >>> >>> What will not work is the Microsoft-style solution -in -search -of -a >>> -problem approach, especially the deIcaza sub-style where the apparent >>> goal is copying crap with religious vigor. >>> >>> Regards >>> -Lars >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] Re: UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> From: >>> Per <perj...@gmail.com> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:07:49 +0200 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> This is going to be in Swedish... >>> >>> Lars... är du den Lars som är namngiven som kontaktperson på den >>> svenska delen av den Office-svit som vi använder... >>> >>> På den sidan så har e:et en fnutt över sig.. >>> >>> Det finns även e-post i denna lista från Lars och där är det även en >>> fnutt över e:et.... >>> >>> Hur som haver... >>> >>> Jag tycker i alla fall det är en väldigt massa hårda ord och med alla >>> dessa hårda ord ... bullshit-ande hit och dit och all annan bullshit >>> som skrivs i upprörda? arga? förbannade? eller bara uppgivna svar och >>> inlägg...... >>> >>> >>> netiquette ??? vart tog det vägen ??? >>> >>> >>> My few cents.... >>> >>> >>> // Per >>> >>> >>> >>> Lars Nooden skrev: >>> >>>> There is no profit in copying failure. I, for one, moved to OOo after >>>> testing all the alternatives I could get hold of for spreadsheets and >>>> word processors. Even though I was used to MSO, it sucked donkey balls >>>> so badly that a change was needed in order to stay productive with >>>> reports and calculations. I'm glad to have left. I'm not glad for >>>> idiotic yammering that there is recently some kind of obligation to >>>> begin copying that crap. >>>> >>>> If you want to make progress on the OOo UI, then find some specifics to >>>> work on. >>>> >>>> It has already been mentioned that full mouseless operation is needed >>>> for the word processor and spreadsheet. That's one of the reasons you >>>> still find WordPerfect word processor floating around. Professional >>>> typists can use it quickly. >>>> >>>> + For the spreadsheet, that's a more mature tool and there are still >>>> characteristics and conventions that are legacies from Visicalc. >>>> >>>> + For the presentation graphics, Keynote is very relevant. I used the >>>> presentation graphics extensively for 2.5 years. It does what I needed, >>>> but there are many things that can be fixed, especially in slide sorting >>>> and managing templates. None of that can be address by finding new >>>> combinations of words to create the semantic equivalent of 'copying "the >>>> ribbon"' >>>> >>>> The survey really says almost nothing about what needs work. You'll >>>> notice that most of the questions were actually left unanswered. That >>>> goes especially for the >>>> >>>> - equation editor >>>> - draw >>>> - base >>>> - chart >>>> >>>> For those, a negligible amount of answers were turned in. Some aspects >>>> of these may be under-marketed. Or there may be showstoppers that turn >>>> people off. >>>> >>>> What will not work is the Microsoft-style solution -in -search -of -a >>>> -problem approach, especially the deIcaza sub-style where the apparent >>>> goal is copying crap with religious vigor. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> -Lars >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] Re: UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> From: >>> Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:50:03 +0300 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> Per wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> netiquette ??? vart tog det vägen ??? >>>> >>>> >>> I have long been an advocate of netiquette. And I have grown up in a >>> region, as well as community, where kids could and did get their mouths >>> washed out with soap. My mouth remained soap-free FWIW. >>> >>> The bullshit (1) won't stop as long as people who know better either >>> acquiesce, fold, back-down or simply hold quiet when they should speak >>> up. Enough is enough, however. It needs to be called for what it is. >>> If it hurts, or you actually wish to copy failed products, then tough, >>> fork the code and go somewhere else. >>> >>> Politeness and naivite have been exploited for a long time. Yes, >>> politeness is best, but let's stop these dickwhacks from walking all >>> over the best FOSS projects. >>> >>> -Lars >>> >>> (1) for example: >>> http://www.cydeweys.com/blog/tag/miguel-de-icaza/ >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] Re: UI work (Re: [users] Petition against OOo Renaissance) >>> From: >>> Per <perj...@gmail.com> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:02:39 +0200 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Lars Nooden skrev: >>> >>>> Per wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> netiquette ??? vart tog det vägen ??? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I have long been an advocate of netiquette. And I have grown up in a >>>> region, as well as community, where kids could and did get their mouths >>>> washed out with soap. My mouth remained soap-free FWIW. >>>> >>>> The bullshit (1) won't stop as long as people who know better either >>>> acquiesce, fold, back-down or simply hold quiet when they should speak >>>> up. Enough is enough, however. It needs to be called for what it is. >>>> If it hurts, or you actually wish to copy failed products, then tough, >>>> fork the code and go somewhere else. >>>> >>>> >>> *Yepp, I have to think over it, but maybe I should do it.... go >>> somewhere else..... * >>> >>> >>> >>>> Politeness and naivite have been exploited for a long time. Yes, >>>> politeness is best, but let's stop these dickwhacks from walking all >>>> over the best FOSS projects. >>>> >>>> -Lars >>>> >>>> (1) for example: >>>> http://www.cydeweys.com/blog/tag/miguel-de-icaza/ >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] Missing Writer Ch 12 >>> From: >>> Andy <a...@the-martin-byrd.net> >>> Date: >>> Mon, 07 Sep 2009 14:53:18 -0700 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> James Knott wrote: >>> >>>> I've noticed on the documentation site, that Writer chapter 12 is >>>> missing. I sent a note to the admin a while ago, but no response. The >>>> link for the missing chapter is: >>>> >>>> >> http://documentation.openoffice.org/manuals/userguide3/0212WG3-TablesOfContentsIndexesBibilographies.pdf >> >>>> >>> For everyones info. >>> Seems there was a typo, that is being corrected. The correct link is >>> >>> >> http://documentation.openoffice.org/manuals/userguide3/0212WG3-TablesOfContentsIndexesBibliographies.pdf >> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Reverse numbering? >>> From: >>> L Duperval <lduper...@yahoo.com> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 8 Sep 2009 01:32:24 +0000 (UTC) >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Is it possible to have reverse numbering? That is, to start a list at N >>> and the next item is (N-1)? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> L >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> ooauthors on Gmane? >>> From: >>> L Duperval <lduper...@yahoo.com> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 8 Sep 2009 01:42:22 +0000 (UTC) >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> Does anyone know if the ooauthors list is available on gmane or on >>> another mail to news gateway? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> L >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> [users] page numbering in PDF exported document >>> From: >>> SonrisaLisa <vida.nueva.l...@gmail.com> >>> Date: >>> Mon, 7 Sep 2009 18:55:25 -0700 (PDT) >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> I worked very hard to figure out how to change the styles so that my >>> >> first 5 >> >>> pages (cover, table of contents etc.) of my book are not numbered. Now >>> >> when >> >>> I export it in PDF the table of contents does not match the way the pages >>> are numbered in the PDF viewer. It calls page 1- page 6. >>> >>> Can I change the way the PDF export is done or is there some way to >>> >> change >> >>> its starting page numbering? >>> Thank you. >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] page numbering in PDF exported document >>> From: >>> Gene Young <n2...@cfl.rr.com> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 07:22:14 -0400 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> SonrisaLisa wrote: >>> >>>> I worked very hard to figure out how to change the styles so that my >>>> first 5 >>>> pages (cover, table of contents etc.) of my book are not numbered. >>>> Now when >>>> I export it in PDF the table of contents does not match the way the >>>> pages >>>> are numbered in the PDF viewer. It calls page 1- page 6. >>>> >>>> Can I change the way the PDF export is done or is there some way to >>>> change >>>> its starting page numbering? >>>> Thank you. >>>> >>>> >>> The page numbers you see in a PDF viewer are the literal pages. >>> The pages you have numbered as you want are still numbered the way you >>> numbered them. The PDF viewer has no way of knowing how you numbered >>> your pages so it can only count the number of pages in the document >>> and number them sequentially, starting at one. >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] page numbering in PDF exported document >>> From: >>> SonrisaLisa <vida.nueva.l...@gmail.com> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 8 Sep 2009 05:44:39 -0700 (PDT) >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> Thank you, Gene. You have saved me lots of time hunting around for how to >>> >> fix >> >>> this. I just have to change my numbers to match what the viewer reads. >>> Lisa >>> >>> >>> Gene Young wrote: >>> >>> >>>> SonrisaLisa wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I worked very hard to figure out how to change the styles so that my >>>>> first 5 >>>>> pages (cover, table of contents etc.) of my book are not numbered. Now >>>>> when >>>>> I export it in PDF the table of contents does not match the way the >>>>> >> pages >> >>>>> are numbered in the PDF viewer. It calls page 1- page 6. >>>>> >>>>> Can I change the way the PDF export is done or is there some way to >>>>> change >>>>> its starting page numbering? >>>>> Thank you. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> The page numbers you see in a PDF viewer are the literal pages. >>>> The pages you have numbered as you want are still numbered the way you >>>> numbered them. The PDF viewer has no way of knowing how you numbered >>>> your pages so it can only count the number of pages in the document and >>>> number them sequentially, starting at one. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Gene Y. >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] Spreadsheet update automation >>> From: >>> "James E. Lang" <j...@lang.hm> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 06:12:46 -0700 >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> To: >>> users@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> I take it that no one here knows how to automate spreadsheet updates >>> and no one knows a better forum to ask. >>> >>> If you need me to, I'll send you a personal copy of my original post. >>> >>> --On Thursday, September 03, 2009 06:58:40 PM -0700 I wrote at length >>> on this subject >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: >>> Re: [users] Spreadsheet update automation >>> From: >>> Johnny Rosenberg <gurus.knu...@gmail.com> >>> Date: >>> Tue, 8 Sep 2009 18:41:07 +0200 >>> To: >>> OOo Användarforum <users@openoffice.org> >>> >>> To: >>> OOo Användarforum <users@openoffice.org> >>> >>> >>> Maybe you could try the developer's mail list? I think it is >>> d...@openoffice.org or something like that. >>> >>> J.R. >>> >>> 2009/9/8 James E. Lang <j...@lang.hm>: >>> >>> >>>> I take it that no one here knows how to automate spreadsheet updates and >>>> >> no >> >>>> one knows a better forum to ask. >>>> >>>> If you need me to, I'll send you a personal copy of my original post. >>>> >>>> --On Thursday, September 03, 2009 06:58:40 PM -0700 I wrote at length on >>>> this subject >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jim >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> [Solved] expanding one record into many in calc >>>> From: >>>> Jonathan Kaye <jdkay...@gmail.com> >>>> Date: >>>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:24:11 +0200 >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> Harold Fuchs wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Not using a Calc macro. If it were me I'd export the sheet as a CSV >>>>> >> file, >> >>>>> write a Perl script to generate a new [correctly formatted] CSV file >>>>> >> and >> >>>>> import that into a new sheet. I doubt a suitable Perl script would be >>>>> >> more >> >>>>> than about 10 lines of *un*obfuscated code. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Hi Harold, >>>> I tried it out using Unicon on the csv file. I used ISO 8859-15 encoding >>>> which took care of the kinkier characters. It's a bit more than 10 lines >>>> >> but >> >>>> when you take out the i/o stuff and the pretty formatting for ease of >>>> reading it comes to about that. I had to use "=" as a field delimiter >>>> >> since >> >>>> commas are crucial to splitting the records. The unary "\" operator is a >>>> test for non-nullness. Here's the code: >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> procedure main() >>>> datadir := "/home/jdkaye/MYPROGS/Data/" >>>> outdir := "/home/jdkaye/MYPROGS/Output/" >>>> intext := open(datadir || "8_sept_sample3.csv") | stop("can't open >>>> >> data >> >>>> file") >>>> outtext := open(outdir || "8_sept_sample3_fixed.csv", "w") | >>>> >> stop("can't >> >>>> open output file") >>>> while entry := read(intext) do { >>>> entry ? if ((gloss := tab(upto('='))) & rem := tab(0)) then >>>> >> { >> >>>> if gloss == "" then >>>> next >>>> while \find(",", gloss) do { >>>> gloss ? if ((gl := tab(upto(','))) & move(1) >>>> >> & >> >>>> nrem := tab(0)) then { >>>> write(outtext, gl, rem) >>>> gloss := nrem >>>> } >>>> } >>>> } >>>> write(outtext, gloss, rem) >>>> } >>>> end >>>> >>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>>> Not too bad, eh? Thanks for the tip. >>>> Jonathan >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> UI Goals (Re: UI work) >>>> From: >>>> Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>>> Date: >>>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:29:29 +0300 >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> Nice dodge, Henri. If you have only the unlucky misfortune to appear >>>> accidently as deIcaza types intent on floundering the UI, then that is >>>> unfortunate. >>>> >>>> Let's check if there is any commmon ground: >>>> >>>> Quick quiz: >>>> >>>> Q: What is the goal of OOo? >>>> >>>> a) a deIcaza-style M$ love-in, dutifully copying every >>>> aspect of MSO >>>> >>>> b) providing a good productivity suite >>>> >>>> >>>> c) other - elaborat >>>> >>>> -Lars >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> Re: [users] UI Goals (Re: UI work) >>>> From: >>>> M Henri Day <mhenri...@gmail.com> >>>> Date: >>>> Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:50:05 +0200 >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> 2009/9/8 Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Nice dodge, Henri. If you have only the unlucky misfortune to appear >>>>> accidently as deIcaza types intent on floundering the UI, then that is >>>>> unfortunate. >>>>> >>>>> Let's check if there is any commmon ground: >>>>> >>>>> Quick quiz: >>>>> >>>>> Q: What is the goal of OOo? >>>>> >>>>> a) a deIcaza-style M$ love-in, dutifully copying every >>>>> aspect of MSO >>>>> >>>>> b) providing a good productivity suite >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> c) other - elaborat >>>>> >>>>> -Lars >>>>> >>>>> >>>> But Lars, I've answered your query in the posting to which the former >>>> >> was a >> >>>> reply - why then waste time by asking ? «MS love-in» is hardly my >>>> >> style, as >> >>>> I'm sure the retirees here in Stockholm to whom I am constantly >>>> >> suggesting >> >>>> alternatives would be willing to testify. My only interest is in >>>> contributing what little I can to making OOo a quicker, more productive, >>>> >> and >> >>>> more user-friendly office suite ; for example, I'd be happy to >>>> >> contribute to >> >>>> getting the Swedish version of OOo 3.1.1 up and running, in the event >>>> someone like myself who lacks a programming background can be here be of >>>> aid.... >>>> >>>> Henri >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> Re: [users] UI Goals (Re: UI work) >>>> From: >>>> Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>>> Date: >>>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:20:19 +0300 >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> M Henri Day wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> ... «MS love-in» is hardly my style, as >>>>> I'm sure the retirees here in Stockholm to whom I am constantly >>>>> >> suggesting >> >>>>> alternatives would be willing to testify... >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Well they can testify on paper. 100 SEK notes will do just fine as >>>> stationary, their nice and light colored and give good contrast when >>>> used with a pencil. When you have a shoebox full, we can talk further >>>> on the topic. >>>> >>>> Until then you're in perfect position to gather input about how to >>>> streamline the existing interface. >>>> >>>> Which components do they use most and for which tasks? >>>> >>>> Which function? >>>> >>>> What works best or is most appreciated? >>>> >>>> What is confusing? >>>> >>>> Which behaviors or menus most match expectations? >>>> >>>> Which behaviors or menus most deviate from expectations? >>>> >>>> You'll get some weird stuff, but some of it will be useful. It's been a >>>> few years since I've had a chance to do anything like that. I have >>>> found that some people call all word processors "Word" even if they used >>>> AppleWorks, OOo and WordPerfect but not actually MS Word. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> -Lars >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> Re: [users] UI Goals (Re: UI work) >>>> From: >>>> John Boyle <jbo...@harbornet.com> >>>> Date: >>>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 12:23:16 -0700 >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> Lars Nooden wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Nice dodge, Henri. If you have only the unlucky misfortune to appear >>>>> accidently as deIcaza types intent on floundering the UI, then that is >>>>> unfortunate. >>>>> >>>>> Let's check if there is any commmon ground: >>>>> >>>>> Quick quiz: >>>>> >>>>> Q: What is the goal of OOo? >>>>> >>>>> a) a deIcaza-style M$ love-in, dutifully copying every >>>>> aspect of MSO >>>>> >>>>> b) providing a good productivity suite >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> c) other - elaborat >>>>> >>>>> -Lars >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> To ALL: I echo Lars concerns, and wish that the developers would >>>> concentrate on eliminating ALL the Bugs, errors and other problems with >>>> what is NOW in existence, AND NEVER COPY ANYTHING FROM MSFT, AS THAT >>>> WILL DESTROY OOo completely!!! I now have OOo ver.3.1 and do not plan on >>>> EVER upgrading, as, to make it plain, unless I get full mastery of what >>>> I have now! What I CANNOT understand is WHY this constant and continual >>>> upgrade, upgrade, when all that is needed is simple changes to improve >>>> what is NOW a BASICALLY sound program! The Real Reason that MSFT >>>> continues to have the majority of the market is very simple, THEY GOT >>>> THERE FIRST AND MADE THEIR PRODUCT WITH THE IDEA OF LOCKING PEOPLE IN TO >>>> THEIR LINE, REGARDLESS! I have tried WordStar, which I thought was >>>> pretty good, but they had let it fade away by not making corrections in >>>> what they had, nor would they adapt it to fit the other major lock-in >>>> that MSFT had, WINDOWS! So, I went to WordPerfect, but then they decided >>>> to try to molly-coddle and befriend MSFT instead of paying attention to >>>> perfecting what they had! Marketing is the ONLY thing that MSFT does >>>> well, that and thievery of other people's ideas!Oh, that's right, not >>>> thievery, muscle them into submission is more like it! >>>> There was a company or group working on another clone or modification of >>>> Windows, but so far they are not a viable alternative to WINDOWS! The >>>> company that really let everyone down was IBM, with their abandining of >>>> Both OS/2 and VIA VOICE FOR LINUX! In fact, IBM cannot seem to learn how >>>> to market and to hang on to their market, no matter what! >>>> The ONLY real alternative to WINDOWS is Linux, but I can tell you they >>>> will never overcome MSFT with all the different "distro's" cutting each >>>> other's throats and then cutting their own, by constant upgrade, upgrade >>>> and then more upgrade! >>>> Bottom line, there are people who are still using DOS and Windows 3.1 >>>> and do NOT bother with the Internet! Change is fine when it really is >>>> necessary, but change for change sake is a total WASTE !!!! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> Re: [users] UI Goals (Re: UI work) >>>> From: >>>> Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>>> Date: >>>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:46:59 +0300 >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> John Boyle wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> ... What I CANNOT understand is WHY this constant and continual >>>>> upgrade, upgrade, when all that is needed is simple changes to improve >>>>> what is NOW a BASICALLY sound program! >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> So, I went to WordPerfect, but ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>> WordPerfect also lost to bundling. You could buy WP for $199 and >>>> Quattro for an additional $199 or MS Word plus Excel for the same price. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> .... Marketing is the ONLY thing that MSFT does well, >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Bzzt. Thanks for playing. Marketing and lobbying are outsourced. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> ... that and thievery of other people's ideas!Oh, that's right, not >>>>> thievery, muscle them into submission is more like it! >>>>> >>>>> >>>> That's been documented again and again. The courts, the police and even >>>> the military have failed to effect action. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> There was a company or group working on another clone or modification >>>>> >> of >> >>>>> Windows, but so far they are not a viable alternative to WINDOWS! >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Windows was a copy of GEM, Desqview and Macintosh. NeXT was several >>>> decades ahead. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> ... abandining of Both OS/2 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> MS apparently owns part of OS / 2, having co-developed it, so unless >>>> their part of the code is removed and re-written , OS/2 is dependent on >>>> its main competitor. MS was also contracted to make applications for OS >>>> / 2 and pulled out to work on NT, but apparently notified IBM only just >>>> before ship date... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> The ONLY real alternative to WINDOWS is Linux ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Or OS X or Solaris or FreeBSD, etc. The OEMs, if left alone could >>>> choose what they want. If anyone wants to counter about how hard the >>>> non-linux or non-OS X alternatives are, they are cordially invited to >>>> STFU. OEMs set up a disk image and then clone it. Installation is >>>> never an issue for the end user. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> will never overcome MSFT with all the different "distro's" cutting each >>>>> other's throats and then cutting their own, by constant upgrade, >>>>> >> upgrade >> >>>>> and then more upgrade! >>>>> >>>>> >>>> The only distro throat cutting is by Novell, of its own throat. >>>> >>>> Any distro can be made to look like any other. Pre-installation on >>>> off-the-shelf models is what's lacking -- still. >>>> >>>> John, you've had a long rant. Now what specifically in the current OOo >>>> UI or application needs fixing according to you? >>>> >>>> -Lars >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> Re: [users] UI Goals (Re: UI work) >>>> From: >>>> Per <perj...@gmail.com> >>>> Date: >>>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:56:59 +0200 >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> " Marketing is the ONLY thing that MSFT does well,...." >>>> >>>> If OO.o IS SO OUTSTANDING, why doesn´t everyone using it??... I >>>> mean... what better marketing-trix is an totally free, Office-app!! >>>> >>>> Is it not good enough?? >>>> Is it lack of marketing OO.o ??? >>>> Don´t people know about OO.o? >>>> Can´t they handle it? >>>> >>>> I don´t know, but I hope that more computer users will find OO.o. >>>> >>>> How can we get people to use OO.o?? By spreading the speach of the >>>> excellent office-suite and a give when needed helping hand... >>>> >>>> Here in Sweden there was an period that people could "rent" a >>>> computer from their job, there was a payoff of 36 months and then you >>>> could pay a little sum to get the computer. In these machines there >>>> was WIN XP and MS Office and sometimes even MS Works was installed >>>> (as a bonus?? ) >>>> >>>> It´s hard to talk people into an other track and to get them to use >>>> an other Officesuite... why should they change ?? They already got MS >>>> Office... !! A familiar Office suite they are used to... >>>> So OO.o must be a KILLER APP, making the users of MS Office willing >>>> to change... But I think that there must be a some sort like-ness to >>>> MSO, ´cause it will make a quick change of office suites no fuzz and >>>> "grey hair". People NOT USED to OO.o must easily find what they are >>>> used to in there MS Office suite. >>>> >>>> Maybe I´m wrong.... maybe I´m right, but anyway... having a 3 World >>>> War against or not against ribbons, will probably not give OO.o more >>>> users.... >>>> >>>> >>>> I´m using both MSO and OO.o... They both have their weaknesses and so >>>> on... >>>> >>>> I also having a dual boot with Ubuntu and Win XP... >>>> I like the free alternatives, cause they not looked in to different >>>> formats etc. and I like to learn something new, like Ubuntu. >>>> >>>> I´m moving more and more from MS products into Ubuntu-world. >>>> >>>> >>>> And finally, a link... http://www.lulu.com/content/4964815 >>>> >>>> Here you can download a PDF file.... >>>> >>>> /Keith Curtis, an 11-year veteran of Microsoft, takes a programmer's >>>> approach in "Software Wars," attempting to systematically build a >>>> case that free software can help pave the way for a 21st-century >>>> renaissance in many fields ranging from artificial intelligence (cars >>>> that drive themselves) to the human journey into space (space >>>> elevators). For Mr. Curtis, free software is all about leveraging our >>>> collective intelligence."/ >>>> >>>> Interesting reading. >>>> >>>> /hope you could read my stumbelin english.. ;-) / >>>> >>>> >>>> // Per >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> John Boyle skrev: >>>> >>>>> Lars Nooden wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Nice dodge, Henri. If you have only the unlucky misfortune to appear >>>>>> accidently as deIcaza types intent on floundering the UI, then that is >>>>>> unfortunate. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let's check if there is any commmon ground: >>>>>> >>>>>> Quick quiz: >>>>>> >>>>>> Q: What is the goal of OOo? >>>>>> >>>>>> a) a deIcaza-style M$ love-in, dutifully copying every >>>>>> aspect of MSO >>>>>> >>>>>> b) providing a good productivity suite >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> c) other - elaborat >>>>>> >>>>>> -Lars >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> To ALL: I echo Lars concerns, and wish that the developers would >>>>> concentrate on eliminating ALL the Bugs, errors and other problems with >>>>> what is NOW in existence, AND NEVER COPY ANYTHING FROM MSFT, AS THAT >>>>> WILL DESTROY OOo completely!!! I now have OOo ver.3.1 and do not >>>>> plan on >>>>> EVER upgrading, as, to make it plain, unless I get full mastery of what >>>>> I have now! What I CANNOT understand is WHY this constant and continual >>>>> upgrade, upgrade, when all that is needed is simple changes to improve >>>>> what is NOW a BASICALLY sound program! The Real Reason that MSFT >>>>> continues to have the majority of the market is very simple, THEY GOT >>>>> THERE FIRST AND MADE THEIR PRODUCT WITH THE IDEA OF LOCKING PEOPLE >>>>> IN TO >>>>> THEIR LINE, REGARDLESS! I have tried WordStar, which I thought was >>>>> pretty good, but they had let it fade away by not making corrections in >>>>> what they had, nor would they adapt it to fit the other major lock-in >>>>> that MSFT had, WINDOWS! So, I went to WordPerfect, but then they >>>>> decided >>>>> to try to molly-coddle and befriend MSFT instead of paying attention to >>>>> perfecting what they had! Marketing is the ONLY thing that MSFT does >>>>> well, that and thievery of other people's ideas!Oh, that's right, not >>>>> thievery, muscle them into submission is more like it! >>>>> There was a company or group working on another clone or >>>>> modification of >>>>> Windows, but so far they are not a viable alternative to WINDOWS! The >>>>> company that really let everyone down was IBM, with their abandining of >>>>> Both OS/2 and VIA VOICE FOR LINUX! In fact, IBM cannot seem to learn >>>>> how >>>>> to market and to hang on to their market, no matter what! >>>>> The ONLY real alternative to WINDOWS is Linux, but I can tell you they >>>>> will never overcome MSFT with all the different "distro's" cutting each >>>>> other's throats and then cutting their own, by constant upgrade, >>>>> upgrade >>>>> and then more upgrade! >>>>> Bottom line, there are people who are still using DOS and Windows 3.1 >>>>> and do NOT bother with the Internet! Change is fine when it really is >>>>> necessary, but change for change sake is a total WASTE !!!! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> Re: [users] UI Goals (Re: UI work) >>>> From: >>>> Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>>> Date: >>>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 23:16:38 +0300 >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> Per wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> /Keith Curtis, an 11-year veteran of Microsoft >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Microsofters appear to be all bullshitters and charlatans (1) and look >>>> thoroughly unqualified to speak on any ICT topic. Find anything they've >>>> done and chances are you'll find it was developed 10-20 years earlier >>>> and in use in business for at least half that. The only thing worth >>>> reading from a Microsofter might be a length apology accompanying >>>> remuneration for damages to $NAME_OF_COUNTRY. >>>> >>>> We don't have to pretend any more that these people either know what >>>> they are doing (techology-wise) or are out to help anyone. >>>> >>>> Addressing your question, Per, why should folks change to OOo? You have >>>> a good point. And on the topic of Project Renaissance, "the ribbon" is >>>> one reason to change to OOo. The current incarnation of OOo requires >>>> negligible training for new users coming from other suites. Whereas the >>>> "the ribbon" is a royal PITA and reduces productivity even after one >>>> acclimates: >>>> >>>> http://openoffice.blogs.com/openoffice/2006/02/microsoft_offic.html >>>> >>>> Remember, individuals acclimate to anything. In contrast, businesses >>>> and institutions collapse when dipping below a minimal productivity. >>>> A decrease in productivity can tip border cases into bankruptcy. >>>> >>>> -Lars >>>> >>>> (1) "They bought DOS, they bought Windows -they stole >>>> Windows, excuse me; they bought PowerPoint, they bought >>>> Word, Excel, they bought WebTV, they bought their >>>> browser technology, they bought Hotmail, they bought a >>>> billion dollars of Comcast: they >>>> bought, they bought, they bought. What have they >>>> innovated? Goose egg. >>>> Now just let’s make this innovative company innovative >>>> for the next five years without buying anything. That >>>> would be the simplest remedy." >>>> -- Scott McNealy, CEO Sun MicroSystems >>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/03/21/interview_with_scott_mcnealy/ >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> Re: [users] Re: Installing Font >>>> From: >>>> Mark Miller <mr.mcmil...@gmail.com> >>>> Date: >>>> Tue, 8 Sep 2009 14:38:56 -0400 >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm developing a simple multiple choice test. Each test item has four >>>> options. I'm just using the tab key to indent each option. >>>> >>>> When I tab in "a" and "b" everything works as it should. >>>> >>>> When I tab in "c", it reverts to flush left when I put in the hard >>>> >> return. >> >>>> When I tab in "D", it reverts to flush left when I put in the hard >>>> >> return >> >>>> All items are identical a letter (a,b,c, and d), the text on a single >>>> >> line, >> >>>> and a hard return at the end of the text. >>>> >>>> Why would I keep getting set back to flush left on the third and forth >>>> lines? >>>> >>>> tnx >>>> >>>> mcm >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> UI Work - Calc - Engineering notation >>>> From: >>>> Lars Nooden <larsnoo...@openoffice.org> >>>> Date: >>>> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:57:39 +0300 >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> To: >>>> users@openoffice.org >>>> >>>> >>>> The Engineering notation bug ( #5930 ) has been an obstacle to use of >>>> OOo in the scientific communities. For over seven years, it has been a >>>> factor in keeping OOo out of many fields. >>>> >>>> Add more votes and wait another seven? What should be done? >>>> http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5930 >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> -Lars >>>> >>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org >> >> >> > > > To Harold Fuchs: Which thread did he hijack? I thought he clearly titled it exactly what he needed help on? :-\
-- Old Sarge-John Boyle IN GOD WE TRUST! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org
