Sun, 03 Oct 2010 16:46:19 -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > "retard" <r...@tard.com.invalid> wrote in message > news:i89npm$ts...@digitalmars.com... >> Sun, 03 Oct 2010 03:28:09 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: >> >>> The slides for my Sep. 15 talk at NWCPP: >>> >>> http://nwcpp.org/images/stories/nwcpp-2010-09.pdf >> >> On a side note, I noticed that Walter is still using OpenOffice 2.4 >> from March 2008. 9 new releases have been announced after that :-) I >> doubt it has any effect on these slides, but the latest versions might >> offer better user experience. > > Heh, I'm still using OpenOffice 1.1 just because it doesn't have those > terribly ugly menubar/toolbar gradients (an old screenshot I used to > demonstrate it to the boneheaded OOO developers who tried to tell me > that it was just my system and not OpenOffice: > http://www.semitwist.com/download/OpenOfficeVisualCompare.jpg They ended > up ignoring it.) I know that's a really trivial reason, but I haven't > had any problems with 1.1, so I've had no real reason to upgrade either.
This is what OpenOffice 3.2.1 looks like [on Linux] (sorry for having a bit larger resolution): http://www.freeimagehosting.net/image.php?72b470923c.png Last time I heard, the next OpenOffice/LibreOffice might switch to the ribbon style, though. The more recent versions have lots of new features. For example compatibility with the unholy office xml formats is much better.
