Re: [discuss] your private showstopper
On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 00:32, Chad Smith wrote: > >Welcome to marketing. :-) > > > Seriously. > > It was like his company had paid many multiple thousands of dollars for > the company-wide upgrade, and what do their employees say "Wow! That's > pretty!" > > I like pretty colors and I love good UI. But if that's it, I ain't > paying $250 a head for the upgrade (or however much large companies pay > for it). Its not unusual for people to choose things for trivial reasons particularly if it means there is no real change involved. Most people don't like change thet means they have to think so cosmetics are good for them, fundamental change bad. My usual reply to people who say "the staff want MSO they can't get on with OOo" is to say fine, if they want it they pay for it. Then there is often a change in attitude. -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMS Ltd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Open-Source Future For Java Enterprise System?
Hi Christian, Actually, I think that this is where Sun might be a bit misunderstood. Let's see if you guys agree with me. Sun has produced a number of different products which you might call "environmental" products, that is, products which are intended to seed the environment to change the market to give Sun's shareholders the benefit of greater uptake of Sun's products in a more Sun-friendly market, as opposed to the current Microsoft friendly market. So OOo is the alternative to MSO, and Java is the alternative to .Net. Just as an aside, while SO/OOo can be seen as something done by Sun to provide an alternative to MSO (or even to provide anything, when thinking about the Solaris platform), historically Java came before .NET and didn't have much equivalent at the time, so if anything .NET came as an alternative to Java. If I understand correctly (and I don't have any more information than any other), Java's main initial point was to provide a platform-independent development solution (porting issues were a real pain at the time, not that they've gone that much better). This doesn't invalidate your points, I just thought I'd mention it. Cyrille - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: No-break
Rod Engelsman wrote: John W. Kennedy wrote: Rod Engelsman wrote: John W. Kennedy wrote: Why, o why, o why, o why, o WHY can we not have a simple "do not break" character attribute? [snip] Has an issue been filed? I would vote for it. It couldn't show up until v 2.1 at the earliest, but the idea definitely has merit. +1 -- Peter Kupfer OOo user since 'OO4 http://peschtra.tripod.com/open_office/ooo_front.htm - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] your private showstopper
Chad Smith wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it's not what you are saying - it's how you are saying that. it would have been enough to say that you personally have no need for position remembering. trying to fight against a feature in every thread seems... slightly exaggerated. it's also the same with all flames that you have been involved concerning msoffice. it is necessary to look at competition to see areas where one might improve - but it's again _how_ you do that. most participants on this list have done something for the good of oo.org and it probably is somewhat in their subconsciousness as a child :) so any criticism must be worded to avoid insults as possible. "remember last editing position" is a really neat feature and i just love it. so do some other people. if you see no need for it - why are you just dying to see it removed (it's very different from implementation from the scratch) completely ? I'm not dying to see it removed. In the thread, if you'll look, I simply said that *I* have no use for it. I also said I doubt it will be "fixed" because it wasn't a mistake or a bug to remove it. I doubt very highly that they programmers somehow "slipped up" and removed all the code relating to that particular "feature". It was a choice. Someone, somewhere, and some point made a *choice* to remove that feature. I doubt that person/group/company is going to pull a 180 on that choice because of 3 or 4 people complaining about it. Now, about the URL bar - it's still possible, (from what has been said in this list - I don't care to check on it, because I don't want to ever put it back) to put it back. But it was ugly, a "real estate" hog, and really served no purpose to most people. I'm glad it's gone. It helped to "clean up the UI" which is why I talked about that here. Peter asked me a question, and I answered it. It was no vendeta against the URL bar that lead me to just start spouting off at it. I was responding to a direct question with a direct answer. As far as my apparent joy in seeing features removed, it is because I, too, wish to see OOo succeed. Ian has often (very often, oh my starry skies, how very often!) complained, harped on, bemoaned the lack of "elegant" code design in general, and usually with regards to operating systems and/or office suites. Removing little-used, confusing, pointless, ugly "features" is one way to clean up the code. It's called bloat, Rich. And removing it is a Good Thing (tm). Cleaning up the code is one thing, cleaning up the user interface is another. I care much more about cleaning up the user interface than the code, because my computer can handle a couple extra kilobytes of code here and there. 100 GB is plenty of room for programs. I've even got a 250 GB HD I haven't plugged in yet. The point is, I want the UI to be good, and if that means adding code, fine - if it means taking code away - fine. Removing checkboxes, menu options, and icons that are unused is a Good Thing (tm). It's just like the whole "Export" and "Export to PDF" thing. What's up with that? They both do the same thing, and *ONLY* the same thing. I'm not on a computer with OOo right now, and I haven't checked, has that been cleared up in 2.0? If not, I'm filing a IZ, or voting for one. If cleaning up the user interface means its harder for *me personally* to do the things I like to do with OOo, or maybe even impossible - so be it. As long as it does the most good for the most people. You may not like the way I say things - and I'm sorry if you don't. I do over emphasize my points sometimes, but that's usually to drive home a point. In this case the point is, too many options is a very, very Bad Thing (tm). It's bloat. It's poor design. It's very MS-like. Look at Firefox. The menu choices and the dialog boxes are a lot *LESS* than Mozilla. And it is a ton more popular, and can do many times even *more* things than Mozilla Navigator! It is just an effective use of User Interface Design. They *removed features* they *removed options* and it *RESTARTED THE BROWSER WARS*! Neither Netscape nor IE had come out with a new browser in years... Now both are working on next gen browsers. All because Mozilla decided to revamp their UI. To be honest, they didn't remove features, the hid them. For those that don't know, type *about:config* in the url bar in FF and you will see a barrage of options. As suggested, this is possibly what OOo should do. Have "Advanced" options in a separate menu. Removing features, removing options, removing choices - when done well, they are a very Good Thing (tm). +1 But, who decides? I suggest googling the mailing list for the phrase "too many choices". I've posted a link to a study where Psychologists found that giving people too many choices is a bad thing. It leads to confusion, bewilderment, and people give up. I feel this way at dinner sometimes. Many a night I just
Re: [discuss] your private showstopper
Chad Smith wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chad Smith wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is an icon (iconic) that you can click on to switch (switching) between (between) the different interfaces of OOo (modes). In other words, the little deally that lets me go from Writer to Calc to Impress to Writer to Draw to Calc to Draw to Impress to Math to HTML editor to Writer ... all without typing or opening a menu. it's the wavy thing on your toolbar. I don't know if you are being serious or what with this (and the next comment) I don't see any wavy line, and you indignant little words in parenthesis above are not necessary. Yes, I was being serious. There is a little icon of whatever mode you are using (Writer, Calc, Draw, Impress, etc.) on the toolbar of OOo. This icon can be clicked, and then a drop-down menu of other icons for the other modes shows up, and you can click on them to open that mode. About the "indignant little words" - I was trying to explain what I mean. The wavy thing is the icon. Sorry for the defensiveness. That was there in 1.1.4 wasn't it? I guess I was confused, because I don't see anything different. You mean the little dropdown arrow next to the new file button? the new paste-special shortcut Yeah, I forgot to mention that one. That thing changed the way I live. I've added that to every word processing program I use. That's the coolest little trick ever! Why do you need to do this? Does it make you feel better to belittle others? I used to think you were like a nice person who tried to bring perspective and intelligence to the forums. Now I see I was wrong. You have dropped by a level in my book (not that you probably care). What? I really do like that one. It really has been added to all of my office suites. I love the paste special keyboard shortcut. I wasn't belittling you. Sorry. I hate e-mail. You are still my favorite MS plant. :) -- Peter Kupfer OOo user since 'OO4 http://peschtra.tripod.com/open_office/ooo_front.htm - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Java fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS community
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 08:21:30 AM +0200, io ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > It's the "some small parts of the code" attitude, with all its > implications, that makes me uneasy. This is the complete answer I > gave Bruce on this specific point when he asked for my opinion: Just to make it clearer: I disagree with the technical arguments and the statement that Java dependent things are minor. But I am NOT convinced that there is some SUN conspiracy, and AM convinced that the all the hard working OO.o volunteers are in good faith, and struggling to make the best possible product. I only think that they (the volunteers) are so enthusiast to have become incoeherent on this particular issue. Ciao, Marco -- Marco Fiorettimfioretti, at the server mclink.it Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/ I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go into the other room and read a book. - Groucho Marx - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Java fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS community
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 23:58:49 PM -0600, Rod Engelsman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > Only fly in the ointment is that some small parts of the code are > dependent on a proprietary, though freely distributed, software that > this same company owns. Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough in the past, and maybe my own view is not expressed completely in Bruce's article. As far as *I* am concerned the thing that bothers me the most is *not* exactly Java license or the fact by itself that OO.o depends on it. Don't lecture me on that. It's the "some small parts of the code" attitude, with all its implications, that makes me uneasy. This is the complete answer I gave Bruce on this specific point when he asked for my opinion: ## 1) OO.o doesn't depend on Java, at least for essential functionality This is the "apprehension" bit. It is technically true like the fact that Debian could use other kernels than Linux, and just as unfeasible today for almost everybody. Yeah, I can make OO.o not use any Java at all, but how realistic this is? Come on. Above all, you also have: every OO.o developer and FLOSS advocate on the planet boasting that Munich administration is switching to OO.o, that OO.o is already a mature platform for public administrations and corporate offices etc accessibility as a mandatory requirement by law in many countries for any software to even be _listed_ as a candidate for use in public offices. accessibility in OO.o today absolutely requiring (so I'm told) Java ooo developers and advocates (see the discuss archives) saying with a straight face "accessibility is not essential, and is necessary only to a small number of users, so OO.o doesn't depend on Java" (Threads "OO.o relying on Java, was: Interesting interview on KOffice" and " everybody and his cousin saying explicitly that they won't use OO.o in the office until it has some "Access-like" DB function. And telling them to install Oracle or MySql is ridiculous: it's not portable across machines and it's NOT necessary for a small customer database OO.o 2.0 shipping with HSQLB for whatever reason I swallow all this, and try to change the subject when it comes out, because I want OpenDocument (not necessarily OO.o) become a truly universal standard, but this really worries me. And it's not because I hate Java or its license, or any SUN conspiration (which I don't believe to be the case) to force Java on the whole world, mind you. It is because if some corporate manager or lawmaker read all the above in a straight row, he'd think "these people *are* hiding something, or are incompetents who produced OO.o by pure accident. Can I trust them?" # In other words: even if I were the strongest supporter around of Java and its license (which I am not), I'd still have problems to sell the "OO.o is a mature product and we can trust its team" mantra to my IT manager at the office. Ciao, Marco -- Marco Fiorettimfioretti, at the server mclink.it Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/ [WYSIWYG] Word processing may be an obsolete idea of the 1980s...no longer a necessity in the age of the Web and email Michael Stutz, The Linux Cookbook - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: Java fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS community
You know, this sort of thing crops up again and again... A mother buys an ice cream sundae. It has chocolate sauce and whipped cream on it. Yummy! Hands it to her little boy, who looks at it and screams, "What's the matter b, no cherry!!?" Here we have a corporation that acquires a major piece of intellectual property -- an office productivity suite, changes the liscencing to GPL and hands it over to the open-source community. If that's all they ever did, it would be the single greatest gift to FOSS ever, right up there with the Netscape gift of Mozilla. But that's not all. This corporation then devotes dozens of programmers to the task of updating and improving this property over a period of years. Hosts the website that distributes it to outside developers and users. Actively promotes it, even though it directly competes with a proprietary version of the same software that they sell. Only fly in the ointment is that some small parts of the code are dependent on a proprietary, though freely distributed, software that this same company owns. Let's get real, just how pure does a company have to be to be seen as one of the good guys? There's a real limit to how much they can get away with in furtherance of this experimental strategy. As someone else pointed out, if the parts of OOo that depend on Java bother you that much, then re-write the freakin' things in C++. Start a fork if you *really* feel the need. I wish people could reserve their criticism for companies that are actually *opposed* to open-source software instead of banging on the good guys for not being pure enough. My 2 cents, nuff said. Rod - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: No-break
John W. Kennedy wrote: Rod Engelsman wrote: John W. Kennedy wrote: Why, o why, o why, o why, o WHY can we not have a simple "do not break" character attribute? I'm working right now on transcribing an 18th-century document full of "Mr. Sh" and the like (actually, that's two em dashes), and I can find absolutely no way to prevent "Sh" being broken if it happens to hit the end of a line. All I can do is manually pad out the line with extra spaces until the whole thing falls off onto the next line -- but if I should need to alter the margins, or make a correction to the text, I have to do the whole thing over again. You can insert a non-breaking dash using Shift+Ctrl+(minus sign). Does that do what you want? That's a hyphen, not a dash. Yeah, I know. It's an en-dash, not an em-dash. I thought maybe it might work for you. Too bad it doesn't. :( Anyway, this is only the most recent annoyance. Time and time again I've hit some problem using OOo that could have been quickly and conveniently solved if I had been able just to say, "Don't break here," (as I could on DeScribe), but which instead had to be solved by performing some kludge. Mark the word in question "no language". Turn off hyphenation. Fiddle with the margins. Rewrite the copy. etc., etc., etc Has an issue been filed? I would vote for it. It couldn't show up until v 2.1 at the earliest, but the idea definitely has merit. Rod - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: No-break
Rod Engelsman wrote: John W. Kennedy wrote: Why, o why, o why, o why, o WHY can we not have a simple "do not break" character attribute? I'm working right now on transcribing an 18th-century document full of "Mr. Sh" and the like (actually, that's two em dashes), and I can find absolutely no way to prevent "Sh" being broken if it happens to hit the end of a line. All I can do is manually pad out the line with extra spaces until the whole thing falls off onto the next line -- but if I should need to alter the margins, or make a correction to the text, I have to do the whole thing over again. You can insert a non-breaking dash using Shift+Ctrl+(minus sign). Does that do what you want? That's a hyphen, not a dash. Anyway, this is only the most recent annoyance. Time and time again I've hit some problem using OOo that could have been quickly and conveniently solved if I had been able just to say, "Don't break here," (as I could on DeScribe), but which instead had to be solved by performing some kludge. Mark the word in question "no language". Turn off hyphenation. Fiddle with the margins. Rewrite the copy. etc., etc., etc -- John W. Kennedy "You can, if you wish, class all science-fiction together; but it is about as perceptive as classing the works of Ballantyne, Conrad and W. W. Jacobs together as the 'sea-story' and then criticizing _that_." -- C. S. Lewis. "An Experiment in Criticism" - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Java fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS community
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 18:33:21 PM -0500, Chad Smith ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > This whole conversation is beyond me. Java is free, as in beer, it > can be used by anyone on any computer on any platform in the > world Why anyone would exclude it for some stupid political > reason is beyond my understanding. You need to distinguish between "any private, non-commercial user", "any distributor" and "any corporation or government office". Those three user classes differ enourmously in skills, money and *concrete* legal obligations (vs personal, subjective "stupid political reasons"). At home, you, me and any other computer geek can patch and install by hand whatever is needed if we want. Non technical users, as well as organizations with common IT policies on what can be installed by who and when simply cannot. Which of those "anyone" are you referring to? > I don't need a lecture on the difference between software that is > free and free software. If you don't, you should also remember that, quite often, people are "forbidden by law", not simply "unwilling" to rewrite a JRE or whatever it is. Furthermore, each developer may have his own "stupid political reasons", but system integrators are not developers. A distributor trying to integrate and package Gpl and non Gpl programs may find itself sued by the developers of *any* of the packages, not just the proprietary ones. So, regardless of this particular issue (how free is Java, and is OO.o really useful without it) it's not that simple. Ciao, Marco F. -- Marco Fiorettimfioretti, at the server mclink.it Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/ There is more to life than increasing its speed. -- Mahatma Gandhi - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Java fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS community
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 17:10:59 PM -0800, Bruce Byfield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Chad Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Does anyone have numbers on this? Is OOo the most often included > >office suite on Linux or is it not? > > Well, about the only distribution I've heard of that doesn't include > it is Slackware. Maybe presented this way it's a bit misleading. The right format of the question(s) should be: 1) How many free (freedom and/or beer) Linux distributions include a *fully* *functional*, that is fully using Java, OO.o? Where "include" means that they can and are shipping binary packages of both OO.o and everything it depends on? Without need for the inexperienced user to hunt down 3rd party unofficial/not really tested stuff and install it himself? Is such a *fully* *functional* OO.o the most often *included* office suite on Linux? 2) (side question) of the distros which do *not* ship fully functional OO.o, how many do it for very practical reasons? (those like "do it and somebody *will* sue your ass 30 seconds later") > At any rate, there's another issue that nobody seems to have picked up > on. When Base was being built, one of the requirements was that it be > open source. How was that requirement dropped? The decision to drop it > doesn't seem to have been taken by the Community Council. Yes, I too would really like to see a complete answer to this. Marco PS: Bruce, may I ask you to check your mail client setup? It breaks threading. Thanks. -- Marco Fiorettimfioretti, at the server mclink.it Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/ "The SUN TROPIC beauty farm reopens today: featuring exotic swimming pools, and, under the palm trees, **UVA lamps**" (unluckily for humankind, a REAL ad that I read in a real magazine) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Java fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS community
On Wednesday 30 March 2005 15:33, Chad Smith wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >The concerns are not overstated, quite the contrary. Today the > > silliest python app will have less difficulty being included in > > a Linux distribution than any given major java app. > > Does anyone have numbers on this? Is OOo the most often included > office suite on Linux or is it not? If it is, I doubt we should > even care what the free software fanatics say about our use of > Java... > > This whole conversation is beyond me. Java is free, as in beer, > it can be used by anyone on any computer on any platform in the > world Why anyone would exclude it for some stupid political > reason is beyond my understanding. Free as in beer/free as in > freedom Who cares? Does it work? Yes, oh yeah, it works. > Is it free? Well it doesn't cost anything. Can I put it on > Linux, Windows, Mac, Solaris? Yep-yep. Is there any spyware or > adware or viruses? Nope. Okay... I'm sold. > > I don't need a lecture on the difference between software that is > free and free software. I know the difference between > OpenOffice.org and 602 PC Suite. I know the difference between > open source and > trialware/shareware/adware/crippleware/nagware/and even freeware. > But if Java works, (and it does), and it works well, (and it > does), and it is as crossplatform as OOo (and it certainly seems > that way to me), and there's no way to do this in a more-free > format without a complete rewrite of stuff that the "open source > community"has heretofore been, shall we say, unwilling to rewrite > for us - I say, screw 'em. > > OOo is done 95% or more by *SUN EMPLOYEES*. If SUN wants to use > Sun's Java - then they can, and should. If these little Free > Software Freaks want it Java-free (pun intended) then "SHOW ME > THE CODE". If they want to bitch and moan - let them. They can > always try to get there work done on AbiWord. There is not always a clear line between "open source" folks and "free software" folks, at least among the folks that I met in Spain, Scotland, Germany, and Brazil. Not all of the "open source" folks agree with Eric Raymond, Linus Torvalds, Bruce Perens, or Larry Augustin, and not all of the "free software" folks agree with Richard Stallman or the FSF. Members of the FSF often grip about Richard, and Richard is quite particular and will quickly disagree with anyone, and yet when the dust of history settles, the names that will always be repeated in discussions of FLOSS will be folks from both sides of the fence. Damn, there I go being diplomatic again. Force of habit. > > Sumbit IZ reports, discuss changes, but, when it comes down to > it, if you want it done, do it. Either do it, or find someone to > do it for you. I'm not concerned in the least about us losing > some FSF programmers - because we don't have any! When was the > last time someone of this political ilk submitted code to > OpenOffice.org? Last week? last month? last year? EVER?!? > > Why should we give a d*** about placating people who will never > like us and never help us anyway? It's a waste of time, effort, > and political capital. Let's just keep doing what we're doing > and let the code fall where it may. > > *This message brought to you by the International Alliance of > Coffee Bean Growers - JAVA RULZ!* > > -Chad Smith - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Open-Source Future For Java Enterprise System?
On Wednesday 30 March 2005 06:22, Ian Lynch wrote: > On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 15:16, Daniel Carrera wrote: > > Nicu Buculei wrote: > > > this is a description of what JES is: > > > http://www.sun.com/software/javaenterprisesystem/compare.xml > > > > > > it does not look at all related to JRE. > > > > > > use Java Desktop System as an example, it is already Open > > > Source, but is related to Java only for branding reasons. > > > > Sun seems to use the word "Java" on every other product. > > Probably because the Java name is more well-known that Sun ;-) Actually, I think that this is where Sun might be a bit misunderstood. Let's see if you guys agree with me. Sun has produced a number of different products which you might call "environmental" products, that is, products which are intended to seed the environment to change the market to give Sun's shareholders the benefit of greater uptake of Sun's products in a more Sun-friendly market, as opposed to the current Microsoft friendly market. So OOo is the alternative to MSO, and Java is the alternative to .Net. If I am correct in this analysis, I do admire Sun for its gumption. It is making a long-term investment in alternatives to the current monoculture, and that actually takes lots of guts in the face of Wall Street's myopic quarter to quarter short term vision. Some people have said, hey, why is Scott McNealy criticizing Linux when Sun has its own Linux solutions like JDS. I am guessing that Sun's execs are hunkered down for the long term view, and they have to be careful about sending out messages which emphasize the long term over the short term picture. I am guessing that the Sun execs are concerned that the conventionaly wisdom on the Street is that long term vision is good only so long as it can produce in the near term. The Street can be quite vicious in its treatment of stocks in the near term, which can actually derail the long term vision. Again, markets measure belief about future performance, and the damn thing about the Street is that its short-term vision can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. So again, at the risk of losing my credibility by appearing to favorable to Sun on a Sun-sponsored list, IMHO people need to look at what Sun's long term plans are. Again, that is just my guess based on what I read in public, and it's not based on anything that anyone working for Sun has told me. I could be totally off. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:01:26 -0500, Daniel Carrera wrote: > I will vote for it too. I will also 'cofirm' the issue, so that it goes > to the developers directly. And I'll track it. But having me tracking it > doesn't really mean much. It just means you have a friend trying to > help. I prefer the wording proposed by Matt Needles in August 2004. I've filed an issue by borrowing the wording I put into 4414 last August. I don't do Windows, so I haven't seen the dialog myself. Issue 46347: Clearer Explaination Needed in the File Associations Dialog = The most frequent complaint seen on the users' lists is "Help! Your program has taken over my computer!" Either the description needs to be made more clear, or making OOo the default for MSO file types should be defered until runtime. Suggested wording from Matt Needles in August 2004: "OpenOffice.org can open MS Word, Excel and PowerPoint documents. Another program is currently assigned this task on your system. Do you want OpenOffice.org to be the default program to open these files when you open them from Windows Explorer? If you choose NO, you may still open these files from within OpenOffice.org." = I encourage anyone who is interested to add comments and vote early and often. -- Mac :}) ** I usually forward private questions to the appropriate mail list. ** Ask Smarter: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html Give a hobbit a fish and he eats fish for a day. Give a hobbit a ring and he eats fish for an age. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: No-break
John W. Kennedy wrote: Why, o why, o why, o why, o WHY can we not have a simple "do not break" character attribute? I'm working right now on transcribing an 18th-century document full of "Mr. Sh" and the like (actually, that's two em dashes), and I can find absolutely no way to prevent "Sh" being broken if it happens to hit the end of a line. All I can do is manually pad out the line with extra spaces until the whole thing falls off onto the next line -- but if I should need to alter the margins, or make a correction to the text, I have to do the whole thing over again. You can insert a non-breaking dash using Shift+Ctrl+(minus sign). Does that do what you want? Rod - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No-break
--- "John W. Kennedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why, o why, o why, o why, o WHY can we not have a simple "do not break" > character attribute? > > I'm working right now on transcribing an 18th-century document full of > "Mr. Sh" and the like (actually, that's two em dashes), and I can > find absolutely no way to prevent "Sh" being broken if it happens to > hit the end of a line. All I can do is manually pad out the line with > extra spaces until the whole thing falls off onto the next line -- but > if I should need to alter the margins, or make a correction to the text, > I have to do the whole thing over again. > > -- > John W. Kennedy > "I want everybody to be smart. As smart as they can be. A world of > ignorant people is too dangerous to live in." >-- Garson Kanin. "Born Yesterday" > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Have you tried using underscores instead until the document is finished, and then going back and using search and replace to change the double underscore to a double dash? It's more work, and a temporary solution, but that's all I as an end user have to offer you for right now. I'll have my army of slaves get to work on fixing this bug right away! "Get to work slaves! (hehehe)." In the mean time, it would be a good idea to run off to the issue section of openoffice.org and file an issue, that way it can be filed and accessed more easily by the developers and others. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html Rigel __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] No-break
Why, o why, o why, o why, o WHY can we not have a simple "do not break" character attribute? I'm working right now on transcribing an 18th-century document full of "Mr. Sh" and the like (actually, that's two em dashes), and I can find absolutely no way to prevent "Sh" being broken if it happens to hit the end of a line. All I can do is manually pad out the line with extra spaces until the whole thing falls off onto the next line -- but if I should need to alter the margins, or make a correction to the text, I have to do the whole thing over again. -- John W. Kennedy "I want everybody to be smart. As smart as they can be. A world of ignorant people is too dangerous to live in." -- Garson Kanin. "Born Yesterday" - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: Java fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS community
Chad Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Does anyone have numbers on this? Is OOo the most often included >office suite on Linux or is it not? Well, about the only distribution I've heard of that doesn't include it is Slackware. However, inclusion isn't the issue, since most distros also include AbiWord and Koffice. I seem to remember several studies that suggest that something like 75% of GNU/Linux users use OOo as their office suite of choice. >This whole conversation is beyond me. Please don't take this the wrong way, but whether you or anyone else agrees with the position doesn't matter. What does matter is that there are people who hold the position. And, moreover, these are people who, if their objections are answered, will promote OOo and maybe get involved in it. You don't need to agree with the position to see that it's bad public relations and bad strategy to upset potential allies. >OOo is done 95% or more by *SUN EMPLOYEES*. If SUN wants to use Sun's >Java - then they can, and should. But Sun doesn't own OOo. It doesn't control it, either -- the Community Council is supposed to. Besides, if Sun wants to use Java, there's always StarOffice. One of the points of the dual licensing is to separate the free and non-free versions At any rate, there's another issue that nobody seems to have picked up on. When Base was being built, one of the requirements was that it be open source. How was that requirement dropped? The decision to drop it doesn't seem to have been taken by the Community Council. It seems to have been made by developers without consultations. If that is true, then the OOo structure seems dysfunctional. >If these little Free Software Freaks want it Java-free You've been attacked many times on OOo lists for your personal beliefs. I'm surprised that you're not more tolerant. In many cases, free software is as important to its supporters as your religious beliefs are to you. That may be hard to understand. You may say that religion is far more important than free software. Yet, so far as I can see, it's true. And if it is, you don't have to accept the belief to show some respect for it. >I'm not concerned in the least about us losing some FSF >programmers - because we don't have any! I wouldn't begin to know. But it doesn't really matter, because people contribute in more ways than programming. In particular, many free software people are distributors of OpenOffice.org, working to make it compatible with their distributions. OOo's programming might be unaffected by their non-participation, but its distribution definitely would be. -- Bruce Byfield 604-421-7177 http://members.axion.net/~bbyfield - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Envelope printing
Works great! Thanks very much. John - Original Message - From: "CPHennessy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: ; "John Layne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 11:51 AM Subject: Re: [discuss] Envelope printing On Thursday 24 March 2005 13:58, + John Layne wrote: [ MODERATED ] I am currently experimenting with 2.0 beta and notice the lack of an icon for envelope printing. I print lots of individual envelopes with the word processor and it would be very handy to have an icon for the purpose. You can add this with "Tools" -> "Customize" -> Tools, select the toolbar you want to modify then "Add" -> "Insert" -> "Envelope" -> Add. Please reply to discuss@openoffice.org only -- CPH : openoffice.org contributor Maybe your question has been answered already? http://user-faq.openoffice.org/#FAQ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: [users] StarOffice
Ah, well that's cool too. I guess that means that if I get SO then there is no learning curve? I might try that out... On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:28:39 +0100, CPHennessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 30 March 2005 16:12, hackmiester wrote: > > Is OO.o derived from StarOffice? > No, it's the other way around. SO is based on OOo. (Effectively it is OOo + > clipart + fonts + adabas + commercial support from Sun). > > > They're both free but is SO open? > No, it is a commercial product but is sometimes given away. > Note that this is allowed by the SISSL license. > > Please redirect all follows on this to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > CPH : openoffice.org contributor > > Maybe your question has been answered already? > http://user-faq.openoffice.org/#FAQ > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- -hackmiester - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Java fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS community
Chad Smith wrote: > This whole conversation is beyond me. Java is free, as in beer, it can > be used by anyone on any computer on any platform in the world... Disclaimer: Anything I say could be totally wrong. :-) Not quite. It's not even free in /that/ sense of the word. In particular, Linux distros are not allowed to include it in the distribution unless the sign a deal with Sun. And /that/ deal is not free as in beer. So, all the community distros (who have no budget) are forced to ship a crippled version of OOo. > Free as in beer/free as in freedom Who cares? As I illustrated above, there can be significant practical problems with free as in beer products. That's why free as in freedom really is superior. Free as in freedom implies the ability to redistribute. That's something that free as in beer doesn't give you. > and it is as crossplatform as OOo (and it certainly seems that way to me), It isn't actually. It's been ported to GNU/Linux, Windows and Mac. But it hasn't been ported to other systems that OOo runs on. > OOo is done 95% or more by *SUN EMPLOYEES*. 80%-90% Not that the exact number matters. There are 80-100 Sun employees and 10-20 "community" volunteers. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Java fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS community
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The concerns are not overstated, quite the contrary. Today the silliest python app will have less difficulty being included in a Linux distribution than any given major java app. Does anyone have numbers on this? Is OOo the most often included office suite on Linux or is it not? If it is, I doubt we should even care what the free software fanatics say about our use of Java... This whole conversation is beyond me. Java is free, as in beer, it can be used by anyone on any computer on any platform in the world Why anyone would exclude it for some stupid political reason is beyond my understanding. Free as in beer/free as in freedom Who cares? Does it work? Yes, oh yeah, it works. Is it free? Well it doesn't cost anything. Can I put it on Linux, Windows, Mac, Solaris? Yep-yep. Is there any spyware or adware or viruses? Nope. Okay... I'm sold. I don't need a lecture on the difference between software that is free and free software. I know the difference between OpenOffice.org and 602 PC Suite. I know the difference between open source and trialware/shareware/adware/crippleware/nagware/and even freeware. But if Java works, (and it does), and it works well, (and it does), and it is as crossplatform as OOo (and it certainly seems that way to me), and there's no way to do this in a more-free format without a complete rewrite of stuff that the "open source community"has heretofore been, shall we say, unwilling to rewrite for us - I say, screw 'em. OOo is done 95% or more by *SUN EMPLOYEES*. If SUN wants to use Sun's Java - then they can, and should. If these little Free Software Freaks want it Java-free (pun intended) then "SHOW ME THE CODE". If they want to bitch and moan - let them. They can always try to get there work done on AbiWord. Sumbit IZ reports, discuss changes, but, when it comes down to it, if you want it done, do it. Either do it, or find someone to do it for you. I'm not concerned in the least about us losing some FSF programmers - because we don't have any! When was the last time someone of this political ilk submitted code to OpenOffice.org? Last week? last month? last year? EVER?!? Why should we give a d*** about placating people who will never like us and never help us anyway? It's a waste of time, effort, and political capital. Let's just keep doing what we're doing and let the code fall where it may. *This message brought to you by the International Alliance of Coffee Bean Growers - JAVA RULZ!* -Chad Smith
Re: [discuss] your private showstopper
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chad Smith wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... the new paste-special shortcut Yeah, I forgot to mention that one. That thing changed the way I live. I've added that to every word processing program I use. That's the coolest little trick ever! and now imagine that this is removed in next subversion with no ability to configure. Well, I'd have a few options then. 1)Resign to the fact that most people don't like/don't use it, and move on without it. 2)Keep the quite functional copy of the version I've been using and be happy with it. [The choice between these two would be does the new version's improvements outweigh my desire to use my pet option.] 3)Use both, since it's free, I can easily install both versions, using OOo-old when I want my pet option, and OOo-new when I need the new features. 4)Write or have written a patch/macro/hack that will put my pet option back into the new version. 5)Screw it and buy/download another program that does what I want. For this particular option, I'd go with either 2, 3, or 5. Most likely 3. But since nearly every office suite / word processor I have (and I have over 20) allows me to make my own keyboard shortcuts, I don't have to worry about it. -Chad Smith
Re: [discuss] your private showstopper
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it's not what you are saying - it's how you are saying that. it would have been enough to say that you personally have no need for position remembering. trying to fight against a feature in every thread seems... slightly exaggerated. it's also the same with all flames that you have been involved concerning msoffice. it is necessary to look at competition to see areas where one might improve - but it's again _how_ you do that. most participants on this list have done something for the good of oo.org and it probably is somewhat in their subconsciousness as a child :) so any criticism must be worded to avoid insults as possible. "remember last editing position" is a really neat feature and i just love it. so do some other people. if you see no need for it - why are you just dying to see it removed (it's very different from implementation from the scratch) completely ? I'm not dying to see it removed. In the thread, if you'll look, I simply said that *I* have no use for it. I also said I doubt it will be "fixed" because it wasn't a mistake or a bug to remove it. I doubt very highly that they programmers somehow "slipped up" and removed all the code relating to that particular "feature". It was a choice. Someone, somewhere, and some point made a *choice* to remove that feature. I doubt that person/group/company is going to pull a 180 on that choice because of 3 or 4 people complaining about it. Now, about the URL bar - it's still possible, (from what has been said in this list - I don't care to check on it, because I don't want to ever put it back) to put it back. But it was ugly, a "real estate" hog, and really served no purpose to most people. I'm glad it's gone. It helped to "clean up the UI" which is why I talked about that here. Peter asked me a question, and I answered it. It was no vendeta against the URL bar that lead me to just start spouting off at it. I was responding to a direct question with a direct answer. As far as my apparent joy in seeing features removed, it is because I, too, wish to see OOo succeed. Ian has often (very often, oh my starry skies, how very often!) complained, harped on, bemoaned the lack of "elegant" code design in general, and usually with regards to operating systems and/or office suites. Removing little-used, confusing, pointless, ugly "features" is one way to clean up the code. It's called bloat, Rich. And removing it is a Good Thing (tm). Cleaning up the code is one thing, cleaning up the user interface is another. I care much more about cleaning up the user interface than the code, because my computer can handle a couple extra kilobytes of code here and there. 100 GB is plenty of room for programs. I've even got a 250 GB HD I haven't plugged in yet. The point is, I want the UI to be good, and if that means adding code, fine - if it means taking code away - fine. Removing checkboxes, menu options, and icons that are unused is a Good Thing (tm). It's just like the whole "Export" and "Export to PDF" thing. What's up with that? They both do the same thing, and *ONLY* the same thing. I'm not on a computer with OOo right now, and I haven't checked, has that been cleared up in 2.0? If not, I'm filing a IZ, or voting for one. If cleaning up the user interface means its harder for *me personally* to do the things I like to do with OOo, or maybe even impossible - so be it. As long as it does the most good for the most people. You may not like the way I say things - and I'm sorry if you don't. I do over emphasize my points sometimes, but that's usually to drive home a point. In this case the point is, too many options is a very, very Bad Thing (tm). It's bloat. It's poor design. It's very MS-like. Look at Firefox. The menu choices and the dialog boxes are a lot *LESS* than Mozilla. And it is a ton more popular, and can do many times even *more* things than Mozilla Navigator! It is just an effective use of User Interface Design. They *removed features* they *removed options* and it *RESTARTED THE BROWSER WARS*! Neither Netscape nor IE had come out with a new browser in years... Now both are working on next gen browsers. All because Mozilla decided to revamp their UI. Removing features, removing options, removing choices - when done well, they are a very Good Thing (tm). I suggest googling the mailing list for the phrase "too many choices". I've posted a link to a study where Psychologists found that giving people too many choices is a bad thing. It leads to confusion, bewilderment, and people give up. The answer isn't burying options - it's removing them. We could give people an option to change the color of each half of each letter of their text - with 24 bit options for each color But that would be too much of a choice. Even graphics programs that allow such fine-tuned controls default to a pallete of much fewer choices (like maybe 24 colors
Re: [discuss] your private showstopper
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 23:20 -0500, Chad Smith wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: "The colors are so KEWL! It's very cool looking!" Part of me died inside. Welcome to marketing. :-) Seriously. It was like his company had paid many multiple thousands of dollars for the company-wide upgrade, and what do their employees say "Wow! That's pretty!" I like pretty colors and I love good UI. But if that's it, I ain't paying $250 a head for the upgrade (or however much large companies pay for it). If OOo 2.0 comes out, and I download and install it. Then a few weeks/months later OOo 2.5 comes out, and the only upgrade is the colors - I may or may not bother getting it, and it is *FREE*. I can't imagine that's the only benefit - but if that's all the employees see/use then effective that's all you've paid for. Now, to be fair, my roommate mostly deals with Adobe Acrobat, and not Microsoft Office - so people who use Office more often might be more impressed with other features. But still, I'd like a little more ROI than "wow, prudy colors!" -Chad Smith
Re: [discuss] your private showstopper
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chad Smith wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the iconic switching between modes (I love that one). What does this mean? There is an icon (iconic) that you can click on to switch (switching) between (between) the different interfaces of OOo (modes). In other words, the little deally that lets me go from Writer to Calc to Impress to Writer to Draw to Calc to Draw to Impress to Math to HTML editor to Writer ... all without typing or opening a menu. it's the wavy thing on your toolbar. I don't know if you are being serious or what with this (and the next comment) I don't see any wavy line, and you indignant little words in parenthesis above are not necessary. Yes, I was being serious. There is a little icon of whatever mode you are using (Writer, Calc, Draw, Impress, etc.) on the toolbar of OOo. This icon can be clicked, and then a drop-down menu of other icons for the other modes shows up, and you can click on them to open that mode. About the "indignant little words" - I was trying to explain what I mean. The wavy thing is the icon. the new paste-special shortcut Yeah, I forgot to mention that one. That thing changed the way I live. I've added that to every word processing program I use. That's the coolest little trick ever! Why do you need to do this? Does it make you feel better to belittle others? I used to think you were like a nice person who tried to bring perspective and intelligence to the forums. Now I see I was wrong. You have dropped by a level in my book (not that you probably care). What? I really do like that one. It really has been added to all of my office suites. I love the paste special keyboard shortcut. I wasn't belittling you. i have to copy and paste a ton of stuff from the internet all the time, and the paste-special (specifically "paste without formatting") is a life saver. It wasn't until one of the eariler 680 versions of OOo that I knew it was possible to have a keyboard shortcut for it. Since learning that I've added it to all the word processors I use - (including NeoOffice/J, MSO 2001 for Mac, MSO 2003 for Windows, and of course, OOo 1.1.4). -Chad Smith
Re: [discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
Tony Pursell wrote: > I've tested this out on my wife. She's been a computer user for many > years and has also done some IT support work in the past. But she > doesn't have the mistrust of computer systems that 30+ years of > software development (plus a degree in Psychology) has given me. > > So when the dialog cam up, I asked her what she would do. Without > hesitation, she said she would check all the boxes. Why, I asked her. > Because I would want to open these files in Open Office, she said. > Then I explained what the consequence of this would be, and she said > that she wouldn't want *that* to happen. Excellent work Tony. Nothing like a usability test to settle a usability argument. > So what do I do to get this changed without it disappearing into a black > holr? I wish I could promise to you that this will get fixed right away, but I can't. You definitely need to file an issue. Filing an issue is, sadly, no guarantee that it won't get lost. But NOT filing an issue is guarantee that it WILL get lost. Why? Because OOo is so freakin big and there are so many issues. So yours will be competting with many many others, for the limited developer time. But this is also why filing an issue is important. At least it'll be in the database. So it's easier to recover, and harder to lose. Also, if you get more votes, it is easier to find. > I have at least one vote from Cor Nouws for the sort of wording I > suggested. I will vote for it too. I will also 'cofirm' the issue, so that it goes to the developers directly. And I'll track it. But having me tracking it doesn't really mean much. It just means you have a friend trying to help. > And is this a 2.1 or a 2.0.1 fix? It's borderline. Probably 2.1 :-( Developers are not supposed to change the UI in a significant way during the micro releases. The micro releases are meant to be mostly bugfixes. The reason why they might make an exception with yours is because the change is simple, compared to most UI changes. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
I've tested this out on my wife. She's been a computer user for many years and has also done some IT support work in the past. But she doesn't have the mistrust of computer systems that 30+ years of software development (plus a degree in Psychology) has given me. So when the dialog cam up, I asked her what she would do. Without hesitation, she said she would check all the boxes. Why, I asked her. Because I would want to open these files in Open Office, she said. Then I explained what the consequence of this would be, and she said that she wouldn't want *that* to happen. Only then did I tell her the problems we were having. One telling thing was that when I pointed out the line in the heading then says... Select the file types that are to be opened with OpenOffice.org 1.9.79 ... she said 'Oh, I didn't notice that'. Strange. Neither did I when first saw this form. I had to look again to take it in. It should have been on the main form with the other line. So what do I do to get this changed without it disappearing into a black holr? I have at least one vote from Cor Nouws for the sort of wording I suggested. And is this a 2.1 or a 2.0.1 fix? Tony Pursell - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] updates
Hello Adrian, > Does the version offered as 2.0 beta constantly change or is it always 1.9.79 > > -- that is, how do I get the later versions and should I? The snapshots change every other week or so. The latest one is 1.9.87. One of the snapshots was called OOo 2.0 beta. After a few more bugs are fixed, another snapshot will be called OOo 2.o beta2. And so on. You can get the latest snapshot here: http://download.openoffice.org/680/index.html Should youget the latest snapshot? I don't know. It depends on what you want. > And will the download go into an RC sequence at some point as with OOo.1 ? I guess so. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] updates
Does the version offered as 2.0 beta constantly change or is it always 1.9.79 -- that is, how do I get the later versions and should I? And will the download go into an RC sequence at some point as with OOo.1 ? Thanks Adrian
Re: [discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
Rod Engelsman wrote: > That is *really* disingenuous, Daniel. This problem has been discussed > for *over three years*. UI freeze, my ass! That was before the UI freeze > for 1.1 for God's sake!! 1) Rod, please calm down. 2) Please read what I've said again. People complained about the dialog. The dialog changed in an attempt to address the issue. If the change was not satisfactory, you need to say so before the UI freeze. I have seen this dialog change. I had an issue with the old dialog. Then it changed in a way that I felt addressed the problem. Obviously so did the developers. After all, that's why they changed it. This is the context in which this issue is being brought up now. If the change is not satisfactory, you need to inform the developers in time. Otherwise they will inevitably think that they dealt with the issue. I did. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 22:35, Rod Engelsman wrote: > Daniel Carrera wrote: > > Tony Pursell wrote: > > > > > >>I thought more was going to be done to avoid it and I am amazed that > >>we still have a setup dialog that virtually invites people to do what they > >>don't really want to do > > > > > > But why didn't you say this before the UI freeze? > > > > I saw the OOo snapshot before the UI freeze and I thought the problem had > > been > > fixed. The time to test the UI and request changes is before the freeze. > > Jut a few > > weeks before the final release. > > > > Cheers, > > That is *really* disingenuous, Daniel. I think he is just being realistic about the way th edevelopers will see it. The change is a good suggestion but it will probably have to wait until 2.1 assuming other people think it is a good suggestion too. > This problem has been discussed > for *over three years*. UI freeze, my ass! That was before the UI freeze > for 1.1 for God's sake!! > > Ignore a problem for three years and then claim you can't do anything > about it because of a UI freeze is just lame. I don't think Daniel has any power to do anything. Don't shoot the messenger! Is this filed under an issue? If so which one and has it many votes? If not file the issue. -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMS Ltd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
Tony Pursell wrote: But on a more constructive note, my suggestion for the wording would be: OOo 1.9.79 can be made the default application for opening the following file types. This means that if you click on one of these files, OOo will open it, not the Microsoft progam that opens it now. ... then after the list, add this explanation ... If you are just trying out Open Office, you probably don't want this to happen, so leave the boxes unchecked. If you want to try opening these files in Open Office, you can do that by using 'File Open' and selecting the file there. This is good, Tony, IMHO. Cor - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
Daniel Carrera wrote: Tony Pursell wrote: I thought more was going to be done to avoid it and I am amazed that we still have a setup dialog that virtually invites people to do what they don't really want to do But why didn't you say this before the UI freeze? I saw the OOo snapshot before the UI freeze and I thought the problem had been fixed. The time to test the UI and request changes is before the freeze. Jut a few weeks before the final release. Cheers, That is *really* disingenuous, Daniel. This problem has been discussed for *over three years*. UI freeze, my ass! That was before the UI freeze for 1.1 for God's sake!! Ignore a problem for three years and then claim you can't do anything about it because of a UI freeze is just lame. Rod - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
On 30 Mar 2005 at 15:19, Daniel Carrera wrote: > Tony Pursell wrote: > > > I thought more was going to be done to avoid it and I am amazed that > > we still have a setup dialog that virtually invites people to do > > what they don't really want to do > > But why didn't you say this before the UI freeze? > Two reasons: a) I was a real OO.o newbie back then and didn't know how things worked. I'm still a OO.o rookie, but getting more confident at expressing my opinions. b) I, like everyone else, has another life. For me, this includes being made redundant, looking for a job, getting married, etc > I saw the OOo snapshot before the UI freeze and I thought the problem > had been fixed. The time to test the UI and request changes is before > the freeze. Jut a few weeks before the final release. I havn't a clue when the OO.o snapshot was available for viewing at this level of detail. The first thing I knew was when the beta was announced. But on a more constructive note, my suggestion for the wording would be: OOo 1.9.79 can be made the default application for opening the following file types. This means that if you click on one of these files, OOo will open it, not the Microsoft progam that opens it now. ... then after the list, add this explanation ... If you are just trying out Open Office, you probably don't want this to happen, so leave the boxes unchecked. If you want to try opening these files in Open Office, you can do that by using 'File Open' and selecting the file there. ... I'm sure other people will have equally valid suggestions Tony Pursell - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
Enrique wrote: > Do you see as feasible at this stage to add something like this to that > wording: > > "If you check these boxes OpenOffice 2.0 will replace Microsoft > applications when opening those files. You will not be able to launch > Microsoft applications by doubleclicking in that files. Leave unchecked > if you want to preserve the association with Microsoft applications" That should probably be edited. It seems to say that OOo will replace MSO. Why don't you and Jason talk about this and come up with a phrasing you're happy with. And let's take it from there. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
James Walker wrote: > If you read the issue it is basically the same thing listed in there, > and nothing was done. 1) I thought the UI had already changed. 2) Why is it surprising that developers don't act on this issue, if the subject line is completely unrelated to the problem you are referring to. > most programs ask if you want to have the program be the default application. > Fair enough. I agree that's better wording. I think the current one is fine, but we can always improve. Please file an issue. Please don't blame developers for not fixing a problem that they can't reasonably be expected to be aware of. Please don't blame developers for not changing the UI, months after the UI freeze, and weeks before the final release. > Winamp ... Irrelevant. Please don't sidetrack the discussion with non-issues. You don't need to convince anyone that someone might not want to open MSO files with OOo. > I am starting to see that there is no reason to continue this. It has > been an issue for a long time, Which developers probably thought had been addressed. If you felt this was important, you should have spoken before the UI freeze. I saw the snapshots before the UI freeze and it looked fine to me. > and is a simple text change, not a code change. Can you provide a patch? > And nothing has been done, and nothing will be. I've seen this dialog change more than once. So your premise is false. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
Daniel Carrera wrote: Now, if you can bring down this UI change to just changing a string, that has a better chance of success. If you can do that, please file an issue. OK, Daniel, I was trying to save people like you, regular posters in these newsgroups, quite a lot or work if OOo 2.0 is really a success and lot of windows newbies give OOo a try. Do you see as feasible at this stage to add something like this to that wording: "If you check these boxes OpenOffice 2.0 will replace Microsoft applications when opening those files. You will not be able to launch Microsoft applications by doubleclicking in that files. Leave unchecked if you want to preserve the association with Microsoft applications" There are three senteces there, if too long perhaps the middle could be dropped. I am not killing for this. It is OOo "support line" who is suffering the effects of this dialog. If you see this as more disturbing that helpful, I will not insist. Exchanging a couple of posts here is not a waste for OOo development, I hope :-) - Enrique - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re[2]: OO Impress 1.9.m87 issues
Hey, I can confirm that my two issues are now dealt with and that I got informed. Ones is apparently already fixed in the upcomming version. Regards & Thank you, Stephan -- Stephan Gromer, MD. PhD. Work: Biochemie-Zentrum Heidelberg / Im Neuenheimer Feld 504 / D-69120 Heidelberg / Tel.: +49 (6221) 544291 / Fax.: +49 (6221) 545586 Home: Sternallee 89 / D-68723 Schwetzingen / Tel.: +49 (6202) 855038 Mobil: +49 (172) 7694555 / URL: http://www.gromer-online.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
Daniel Carrera wrote: James Walker wrote: This is saying that OOo can open files of type No, it does not say "OOo can open these file types". What kind of a question would that be? It says that those file types will be opened *automatically* in OOo. But it does not say that for now on when you click on a .doc file or .xsl file that OOo is going to open it up. That's what I read it to say. "These file types will open automatically in OOo". If I am just now learning to use OOo. I want to be able to use MSO to continue to use MSO files. So you wouldn't click on an option that says that those files will open in OOo automatically. Look, this part of your argument was totally besides the point. You don't have to demonstrate that some people may want to use MSO to open those files. The issue at hand (now) is whether the text is clear. Let's stick to that. this is issue 4414, has been around since like 2002 but very few votes. Uhmm... Issue 4414 says "Allow for MSOffice file associations post-install". It sounds like a nice idea, but it is completely unrelated to the text string used in the initial association dialog. Cheers, If you read the issue it is basically the same thing listed in there, and nothing was done. that is why I had a hard time finding it again. I did not want to duplicate an issue. most programs ask if you want to have the program be the default application. that is a much better wording, most people understand that. this just says it can open them automatically, Winamp can automatically open mp3s that does not mean I want it to. but it is nice to know that it can. I am starting to see that there is no reason to continue this. It has been an issue for a long time, and is a simple text change, not a code change. if it was a typo, then someone would be able to change it quickly, that is about all that this amounts to and it is something that has been discussed on several occasions. And nothing has been done, and nothing will be. James - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
Tony Pursell wrote: > I thought more was going to be done to avoid it and I am amazed that > we still have a setup dialog that virtually invites people to do what they > don't really want to do But why didn't you say this before the UI freeze? I saw the OOo snapshot before the UI freeze and I thought the problem had been fixed. The time to test the UI and request changes is before the freeze. Jut a few weeks before the final release. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
Rod Engelsman wrote: > >Uhhmm... yes it does. It looks very clear to me. It says that OOo will > >automatically open those file types. > > It's not. At least not to new users. What's not clear from the wording > is whether or not you will be able to open MSO files *at all* if you do > not check the boxes. I have trouble seeing that interpretation. But fine, I'll accept it. > >Because changing this is not like flicking a light switch. > > Actually, this one almost is that easy. This is in the install script, > not the program itself. And it wouldn't require anyone to write *one* > *line* of new code, merely to disable a few lines with comment marks. Huh? I can't imagine it being that easy. Have you seen the installer? Can you show me which part you could just comment out to remove this dialog? My understanding was that the OOo installer was difficult to maintain aind inflexible, and it took a major rewrite to make it adapt to what we have today. I guess it's possible that *now*, after the rewrite, removing a dialog is trivial. But I don't want to assume that's the case. Can you confirm whether this is true or not? > >Asking "why take that > >chance?" is incredibly unfair. It inherently assumes we have nothing to > >lose. In truth, we have a lot to lose. We have time, effort and code > >stability to lose. > > Explain exactly how this change would affect "code stability". I don't have to. Changing code always has the risk of introducing bugs. Often in ways that you did not forsee beforehand. That's why even a simple change like the QS had to go through a lot of QA and had to be tested against several localizations. Even if I cannot see how adding a stupid link to the QS could do any harm, the fact is, it might, so you need to test. > And it would save an incredible amount of time ... [snip] You're going back to arguing that we don't want volunteers to think OOo took over their files. You don't need to argue this. This has been established. The focus of this argument is whether this particular UI change can be done at this particular time. I say that it's too close to the final release, and that the UI freeze happened a long time ago. > I think you're really overstating the extent of the effort required to > bring about this change. With the QS I really understated the extent of effort required. The fact is, I don't know. This change, to me, seems bigger than the QS. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
James Walker wrote: > This is saying that OOo can open files of type No, it does not say "OOo can open these file types". What kind of a question would that be? It says that those file types will be opened *automatically* in OOo. > But it does not say that for now on when you click on a > .doc file or .xsl file that OOo is going to open it up. That's what I read it to say. "These file types will open automatically in OOo". > If I am just now learning to use OOo. I want to be able to use MSO to > continue > to use MSO files. So you wouldn't click on an option that says that those files will open in OOo automatically. Look, this part of your argument was totally besides the point. You don't have to demonstrate that some people may want to use MSO to open those files. The issue at hand (now) is whether the text is clear. Let's stick to that. > this is issue 4414, has been around since like 2002 but very few votes. Uhmm... Issue 4414 says "Allow for MSOffice file associations post-install". It sounds like a nice idea, but it is completely unrelated to the text string used in the initial association dialog. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
On 30 Mar 2005 at 14:11, James Walker wrote: > Daniel Carrera wrote: > > >James Walker wrote: > > > > > > > >>Leave the dialog there, but make the text more understandable. > >> > >>This was discussed before and an Issue was filed, I do believe. but > >>I cannot find it now. > >> > >> > > > >If you feel this is important, please do find that issue. Or file a > >new one. > > > >However, the UI freeze for OOo 2.0 *is* past. You are suggesting a UI > >change. Don't get your hopes up. > > > >Cheers, > > > > > Line #1: Select the file types that are to be opened with > OpenOffice.org 1.9.79 > > Line #2: OOo 1.9.79 will automatically open the following file types > > Word > Excel > PowerPoint > > > This is what the dialog says now,Now no where in this does it say > that it is taking over from MSO if you click on these types of files. > That is the issue that everyone is having with this. I know what it > means and you do. But for some people they do not understand that it > is taking over from MSO. > I remember the last discussion on this. It was on the users list and followed on from a very irate post. This problem must lose us a lot of goodwill. Any marketing man will tell you that one angry customer can negate the effect of dozens of satisfied customers, just because angry/upset customers badmouth a product at every opportunity. I thought more was going to be done to avoid it and I am amazed that we still have a setup dialog that virtually invites people to do what they don't really want to do when they are just trying out the product for the first time. I think the dialog should be more discouraging. After all, those who are installing because they want OO.o to open MS Office files will not be put off. As it seems that nothing can be done about this now, I wonder if there is some clever person who can knock up a small routine that will manipulate these file associations that can be included in the install package. Or tweak the setup.exe so that the 'Repair' option calls this form and allows the user to alter their choices. From my experience in help desk work, the one thing that can retrieve the situation when you have angry customer is being able to offer a very easy fix. My 2p Tony Pursell - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
Daniel Carrera wrote: Uhhmm... yes it does. It looks very clear to me. It says that OOo will automatically open those file types. It's not. At least not to new users. What's not clear from the wording is whether or not you will be able to open MSO files *at all* if you do not check the boxes. Because changing this is not like flicking a light switch. Actually, this one almost is that easy. This is in the install script, not the program itself. And it wouldn't require anyone to write *one* *line* of new code, merely to disable a few lines with comment marks. Asking "why take that chance?" is incredibly unfair. It inherently assumes we have nothing to lose. In truth, we have a lot to lose. We have time, effort and code stability to lose. Explain exactly how this change would affect "code stability". And it would save an incredible amount of time for the volunteers who have to repeatedly answer the same complaint that "Open Office took over my MSO files!!". For that reason, UI changes should, in general, be postponed until the next release. Now, if you can bring down this UI change to just changing a string, that has a better chance of success. If you can do that, please file an issue. Cheers, I think you're really overstating the extent of the effort required to bring about this change. Rod - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
Enrique wrote: > I posted here, not in IZ, to avoid developer "distraction". You said you were proposing something. I responded to the proposal. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
Rod Engelsman wrote: > This has been an issue for a *l* time, Daniel. My understanding is that the UI has already changed, and now, weeks before the final release, there is a suggestion for another change. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
Daniel Carrera wrote: James Walker wrote: Line #1: Select the file types that are to be opened with OpenOffice.org 1.9.79 Line #2: OOo 1.9.79 will automatically open the following file types This is what the dialog says now,Now no where in this does it say that it is taking over from MSO if you click on these types of files. Uhhmm... yes it does. It looks very clear to me. It says that OOo will automatically open those file types. I have a couple of dozen tools that will take a bolt out, but just because I used a pair of plyers once to see if it could do what I want to do does not mean that for every bolt that I touch I want to use the plyers. This is saying that OOo can open files of type But it does not say that for now on when you click on a .doc file or .xsl file that OOo is going to open it up. If I am just now learning to use OOo. I want to be able to use MSO to continue to use MSO files. I know that with almost all programs the way things work now is, if it can open it, it wants to open it all the time. I do not feel this is the best approach. There are some things that OOo cannot do with the MSO files the MSO can do. not because it is incapable of doing it, but because it does it in a different way, so the conversion does not work. That is the issue that everyone is having with this. Everyone? Even the people in that African tribe with the clicking sound? Wow! --- I'm just teasing. Joke, humour. ;-) I know what it means and you do. But for some people they do not understand that it is taking over from MSO. I think the language is clear. It says taht OOo will automatically open those types of files. It's not using akward vocabulary or anything. It's not using jargon. The language is not ambiguous. On the other hand, "taking over" would be *very* ambigous. Now if it said something to the effect that do you want OOo to be the default program for files of type ... then that might be a little better. That would work too. I am not trying to start an arguement and I understand that UI changes have been frozen. But I think we are going to have issues with this and people uninstalling just to get the association of MSO files back to MSO. why take that chance. Because changing this is not like flicking a light switch. Asking "why take that chance?" is incredibly unfair. It inherently assumes we have nothing to lose. In truth, we have a lot to lose. We have time, effort and code stability to lose. For that reason, UI changes should, in general, be postponed until the next release. Now, if you can bring down this UI change to just changing a string, that has a better chance of success. If you can do that, please file an issue. Cheers, this is issue 4414, has been around since like 2002 but very few votes. At least I know what it means and so if it is not an issue for other people then I guess we will leave it alone.
[discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
Daniel Carrera wrote: Enrique wrote: Before releasing OOo 2.0 I would propose something radical: Just before a release is not the time to propose something radical. This has been an issue for a *l* time, Daniel. Even if you convince everyone, inc the developers, that droping this dialog and functionality is a good idea. The issue is that we are in the *beta* release right now. The UI freeze was months ago. The specs were months before that. Right now developers are just trying to make things stable so we can release the product in a few weeks. Compare this with the quickstarter. The QA was a much simpler UI change, and there was massive support for it. But we had to wait a lot because developers were not sure that they'd manage to do it without breaking anything. There is a lot of QA involved in UI changes. This is not the time to suggest such a UI change for 2.0. I'm sorry. Cheers, Then make it 2.01 for christ's sake. How many times do we want to answer the same stupid question Rod - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: No more file association to MSO when installing
OK, Daniel. I posted here, not in IZ, to avoid developer "distraction". Cheers - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
James Walker wrote: > Line #1: Select the file types that are to be opened with OpenOffice.org > 1.9.79 > > Line #2: OOo 1.9.79 will automatically open the following file types > > This is what the dialog says now,Now no where in this does it say > that it is taking over from MSO if you click on these types of files. Uhhmm... yes it does. It looks very clear to me. It says that OOo will automatically open those file types. > That is the issue that everyone is having with this. Everyone? Even the people in that African tribe with the clicking sound? Wow! --- I'm just teasing. Joke, humour. ;-) > I know what it means and you do. But for some people they do not understand > that it is taking over from MSO. I think the language is clear. It says taht OOo will automatically open those types of files. It's not using akward vocabulary or anything. It's not using jargon. The language is not ambiguous. On the other hand, "taking over" would be *very* ambigous. > Now if it said something to the effect that do you want OOo to be the > default program for files of type ... then that might be a little better. That would work too. > I am not trying to start an arguement and I understand that UI changes > have been frozen. But I think we are going to have issues with this and > people uninstalling just to get the association of MSO files back to > MSO. why take that chance. Because changing this is not like flicking a light switch. Asking "why take that chance?" is incredibly unfair. It inherently assumes we have nothing to lose. In truth, we have a lot to lose. We have time, effort and code stability to lose. For that reason, UI changes should, in general, be postponed until the next release. Now, if you can bring down this UI change to just changing a string, that has a better chance of success. If you can do that, please file an issue. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
Daniel Carrera wrote: James Walker wrote: Leave the dialog there, but make the text more understandable. This was discussed before and an Issue was filed, I do believe. but I cannot find it now. If you feel this is important, please do find that issue. Or file a new one. However, the UI freeze for OOo 2.0 *is* past. You are suggesting a UI change. Don't get your hopes up. Cheers, Line #1: Select the file types that are to be opened with OpenOffice.org 1.9.79 Line #2: OOo 1.9.79 will automatically open the following file types Word Excel PowerPoint This is what the dialog says now,Now no where in this does it say that it is taking over from MSO if you click on these types of files. That is the issue that everyone is having with this. I know what it means and you do. But for some people they do not understand that it is taking over from MSO. Now if it said something to the effect that do you want OOo to be the default program for files of type ... then that might be a little better. I am not trying to start an arguement and I understand that UI changes have been frozen. But I think we are going to have issues with this and people uninstalling just to get the association of MSO files back to MSO. why take that chance. James Walker - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
James Walker wrote: > Leave the dialog there, but make the text more understandable. > > This was discussed before and an Issue was filed, I do believe. but I > cannot find it now. If you feel this is important, please do find that issue. Or file a new one. However, the UI freeze for OOo 2.0 *is* past. You are suggesting a UI change. Don't get your hopes up. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
Daniel Carrera wrote: Enrique wrote: Before releasing OOo 2.0 I would propose something radical: Just before a release is not the time to propose something radical. Even if you convince everyone, inc the developers, that droping this dialog and functionality is a good idea. The issue is that we are in the *beta* release right now. The UI freeze was months ago. The specs were months before that. Right now developers are just trying to make things stable so we can release the product in a few weeks. Compare this with the quickstarter. The QA was a much simpler UI change, and there was massive support for it. But we had to wait a lot because developers were not sure that they'd manage to do it without breaking anything. There is a lot of QA involved in UI changes. This is not the time to suggest such a UI change for 2.0. I'm sorry. Cheers, Then why not just change the text to something that does a better job of warning a user that it is taking over as the default application for opening these files. It really is not as clear as it could be. I know that if I was new and was evaluating whether OOo was something that could replace MSO then I would not want it to take over and then make me figure out how to get it to stop. At that point I would just uninstall and stick with MSO. Leave the dialog there, but make the text more understandable. This was discussed before and an Issue was filed, I do believe. but I cannot find it now. James Walker - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Imbedded jpeg problem in m687 odt file
Hi, all. I downloaded m687 hoping to find the task tray enhancement Jacqueline announced, but(sigh!) apparently not for public consumption yet. Anyway, m687 did manage to break the imbedding of jpegs in the frames in a document I constructed in m684! I went from pretty (maybe) pictures to path names, "file:///c:/directory/photo.jpg" after what I assume is a broken photo icon ... not sure, though, haven't seen it before. The file is just fine in m684. I filed an issue on this, as I cannot fix it from OO.o m687, and even stranger, if I re-embed the photo link, the link preview shows the photo just fine, but only shows the path in the frame. This is windows XP, so the "/" in the path rather than the "\" I expect in XP is also odd to me. I filed an issue, because if this is real, I think it would be a "good thing" to be addressed before 2.0 goes final. Issue #46035. I called it a defect. Anybody else see this? -Greg P.S. If I ever figure out all that issue filing stuff, I'm going to write a HOWTO for the non-developer/programmers here! ;-) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
Enrique wrote: > Before releasing OOo 2.0 I would propose something radical: Just before a release is not the time to propose something radical. Even if you convince everyone, inc the developers, that droping this dialog and functionality is a good idea. The issue is that we are in the *beta* release right now. The UI freeze was months ago. The specs were months before that. Right now developers are just trying to make things stable so we can release the product in a few weeks. Compare this with the quickstarter. The QA was a much simpler UI change, and there was massive support for it. But we had to wait a lot because developers were not sure that they'd manage to do it without breaking anything. There is a lot of QA involved in UI changes. This is not the time to suggest such a UI change for 2.0. I'm sorry. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] No more file association to MSO when installing
Hi, There have been a lot of discussion in these newsgroups about the association of MSO .doc, .xsl etc files with OOo when installing OOo. Before releasing OOo 2.0 I would propose something radical: Just give up that dialoge and making NO association at all at install time between OOo and MSo files. At least, move that option to the "Custom" install route. In the beta the dialogue is still there, and wording is not preventing newbies from this long know confusion. This is a windows-only issue, and one that involves just beginners and windows-only users. By the time a newby actually needs to change file associations to use only OOo, *then* file associations can be explained, and he/she wil be very happy to have learnt a geek-trick. I think that the inconvenience for the experienced user (having to do the association manually, *once*) is negligible compared to the benefit for these newsgroups as "support line" for OOo. Just my 2c - Enrique - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Envelope printing
On Thursday 24 March 2005 13:58, + John Layne wrote: > [ MODERATED ] > I am currently experimenting with 2.0 beta and notice the lack of an icon > for envelope printing. I print lots of individual envelopes with the word > processor and it would be very handy to have an icon for the purpose. You can add this with "Tools" -> "Customize" -> Tools, select the toolbar you want to modify then "Add" -> "Insert" -> "Envelope" -> Add. Please reply to discuss@openoffice.org only -- CPH : openoffice.org contributor Maybe your question has been answered already? http://user-faq.openoffice.org/#FAQ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Footnotes, symbols and line spacing
On Wednesday 23 March 2005 00:11, + Josep Barcons wrote: > [ MODERATED ] *** > Good morning, > > I am using OpenOffice to write my PhD. I share at all your > philosophy, and I am satisfied with the apllications, although in the > last days I have had several problems when opening and trying to > change the format of some chapters (I send you error reports). > These are my ideas for a next version: > > 1) Possibility of arranging the footnotes lenght individually for > every page, a part from the general format. That would be very useful. I'm not sure if this will be possible for OOo 2.0 but I do not think so. > 2) Possibility of modifying the keys combination that insert a symbol > (Microsoft Word has this option) I think that this is currently possible - even though you may have to use a macro. If you are comfortable with macros have a look at http://pitonyak.org. > 3) Concerning line spacing it would be great if it were an option > concerning multiple line spacing. Instead of 1'5 the user should > insert 1'3, 1'4, 1'8, etc. Did you look at "Format" -> "Paragraph" and the tab "Indents & Spacing". -> "Line Spacing". Please reply to discuss@openoffice.org only -- CPH : openoffice.org contributor Maybe your question has been answered already? http://user-faq.openoffice.org/#FAQ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Love at first site
On Tuesday 22 March 2005 22:51, + Ovi Anton wrote: > [ MODERATED ] *** > Hello discuss, > > I am an Acces 97 end user and I looked for an equivalent (on 602 > suite, koffice, Open Office 1.4.., etc.) for a long time ago, when > started to search others OS and I found Linux distributions. > Today, I installed the Open Office 2.0 version and I was surprised to > found many facilities, the most interesting being database suite. >I tried to generate a table with a form and I have the surprise to > found the same way to work like Microsoft Acces and better. > I have some sugestions: > 1 - You gave us sugar - give us the spoon: an instrument to convert > an Acces file into a database Oo file included into toolbar; This sounds like a new feature, but it may be possible to do a "copy and paste" from an access db to another db. But this is not really an office productive suite feature. > 2 - It will be wonderful to gave as the posibility to save or to > link an Oo table to a MySql table; I think that this is already possible in OOo 1.x > 3 - Not least, a tool to convert an Oo into a dinamic Html form wich > can be posted on a site and can update a MySql table (something like > Apache/Php/MySql suite witch is now used for dynamic web sites). (If > you realise this - adios Microsoft Office) You mean XForms? Ok, maybe you do not mean XForms, but I think that this is exactly what XForms does and this is exactly what is currently available in OOo 2.0 beta. > I have many other ideas, but I stop here . If you consider that I am > useful for you, give me a click. For these and any other ideas you have can you please report this in issuezilla ? ( http://openoffice.org -> "Register", then when you receive a confirmation email, "Login" and "File an issue" ) In this way the relevant developers will see your bug report / suggestion and you will also see the progress of this feature / bug report if it is accepted. Please reply to discuss@openoffice.org only -- CPH : openoffice.org contributor Maybe your question has been answered already? http://user-faq.openoffice.org/#FAQ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Corel's Word Perfect Office 12 in Government
On Wednesday 30 March 2005 04:12, Kevin Cullis wrote: > Hi all, > > Where are we on being able to filter WordPerfect docs to OO? Have a look at the latest OOo 2.0 betas. -- CPH : openoffice.org contributor Maybe your question has been answered already? http://user-faq.openoffice.org/#FAQ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: OO Impress 1.9.m87 issues
I have notification turned on. We use bugzilla at work and I was aware of that feature when I created my account and filed the issue. I think it's like you said, there's a lot of testing going on and a lot of "issues" being filed. It takes time to look at them all. Rich wrote: > if anybody will do anything to your issue (comment, change status etc), > you will receive an email, unless you have disabled notifications > > you can see and change your notification settings here : > > http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification > > i believe, beta version attracted a lot more testers, so that not all > issues can be looked at instantly :) > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: OO Impress 1.9.m87 issues
if anybody will do anything to your issue (comment, change status etc), you will receive an email, unless you have disabled notifications you can see and change your notification settings here : http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification i believe, beta version attracted a lot more testers, so that not all issues can be looked at instantly :) Chuck wrote: Stephan Gromer wrote: There is indeed some progress on the performance side, however some effects are still terribly slow and I found anotehr bug too. Significant Performance problems still exists with [...] Have you filed an issue? Now I did, hopefully not causing any confusion. Issue #:46023 and #46024 Will I be contacted if my description is not good enough or will I simply be ignored? Good question? I filed an issue last week (45970) and haven't heard anything about it since. The issue is still listed as unconfirmed. I guess that means they're too busy to look at it. -- Rich - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: OO Impress 1.9.m87 issues
Stephan Gromer wrote: >>>There is indeed some progress on the performance side, however some >>>effects are still terribly slow and I found anotehr bug too. >>>Significant Performance problems still exists with > > [...] > >>Have you filed an issue? > > > Now I did, hopefully not causing any confusion. > Issue #:46023 and #46024 > Will I be contacted if my description is not good enough or will I simply be > ignored? > Good question? I filed an issue last week (45970) and haven't heard anything about it since. The issue is still listed as unconfirmed. I guess that means they're too busy to look at it. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] your private showstopper
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 23:20 -0500, Chad Smith wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > "The colors are so KEWL! It's very cool looking!" > > Part of me died inside. Welcome to marketing. :-) -- Smoot Carl-Mitchell System/Network Architect email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell: +1 602 421 9005 home: +1 480 922 7313 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Open-Source Future For Java Enterprise System?
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 15:16, Daniel Carrera wrote: > Nicu Buculei wrote: > > > this is a description of what JES is: > > http://www.sun.com/software/javaenterprisesystem/compare.xml > > > > it does not look at all related to JRE. > > > > use Java Desktop System as an example, it is already Open Source, but is > > related to Java only for branding reasons. > > Sun seems to use the word "Java" on every other product. Probably because the Java name is more well-known that Sun ;-) -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMS Ltd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Open-Source Future For Java Enterprise System?
Nicu Buculei wrote: > this is a description of what JES is: > http://www.sun.com/software/javaenterprisesystem/compare.xml > > it does not look at all related to JRE. > > use Java Desktop System as an example, it is already Open Source, but is > related to Java only for branding reasons. Sun seems to use the word "Java" on every other product. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Open-Source Future For Java Enterprise System?
Claus Agerskov wrote: In the article "Open-Source Future For Java Enterprise System?" from Information Week stated that Sun will release Java Enterprise System as open source this summer: http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=159907676&tid=5979 Will the JRE also be open source then? this is a description of what JES is: http://www.sun.com/software/javaenterprisesystem/compare.xml it does not look at all related to JRE. use Java Desktop System as an example, it is already Open Source, but is related to Java only for branding reasons. -- nicu my OpenOffice.org pages: http://ooo.nicubunu.ro - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Open-Source Future For Java Enterprise System?
In the article "Open-Source Future For Java Enterprise System?" from Information Week stated that Sun will release Java Enterprise System as open source this summer: http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=159907676&tid=5979 Will the JRE also be open source then? The most enjoyable greetings -- Claus Agerskov"Kan jeg, så kan du også" Helper/HjælperHenrik Dahl i DRs Rabatten om OpenOffice.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ooo.chbs.dk/ http://da.openoffice.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: opening on a templete
Trevor Farlow wrote: 1) The Quickstarter, that little icon in the system tray, appears to be coming back soon in an upcoming release of OOo 2 because you aren't alone in your preference for it. 2) The latest developer snapshot of OOo 2 (version 1.9.87) has made a change since the initial 2.0 Beta release so that now opening another document from the File menu will replace the blank document you talked about. I, too, was glad to see this changed. Thank Heaven! The combination of the defunctionalized Quickstarter and the is-not-saved blank document was making 1.9.79 look like a plain botch. -- John W. Kennedy "...when you're trying to build a house of cards, the last thing you should do is blow hard and wave your hands like a madman." -- Rupert Goodwins - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Engineering mode works in Calc
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 14:02, Niklas Nebel wrote: > Daniel Carrera wrote: > > Btw, thank you for our work Niklas. :-) > > OOoAuthors is making the Calc Guide, and we're all very happy with Calc 2.0 > > Good work! > > Glad you like it. :-) > > Niklas We all like it :-) Well nearly all ;-) You probably just hear more from people who have particular issues. Keep up the good work it really is appreciated. -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMS Ltd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Engineering mode works in Calc
Daniel Carrera wrote: Btw, thank you for our work Niklas. :-) OOoAuthors is making the Calc Guide, and we're all very happy with Calc 2.0 Good work! Glad you like it. :-) Niklas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Engineering mode still doesn't work in Calc
It still doesn't work. I just tested with a small sample of numbers - too small to recognize that it doesn't work for all numbers. Sorry to have misinformed you. The most enjoyable greetings -- Claus Agerskov"Kan jeg, så kan du også" Helper/HjælperHenrik Dahl i DRs Rabatten om OpenOffice.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ooo.chbs.dk/ http://da.openoffice.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Engineering mode works in Calc
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Niklas Nebel wrote: > Claus Agerskov wrote: > > Earlier this month Peter Knudsen ask for engineering notation in Calc. > > > > In issue 5930 the registred OpenOffice.org user nn wrote this: > > > > Actually the total number of integer digits, "#" and "0", is counted. > > "0.00E+00" and "#.00E+00" are equivalent, and "###.0E+00", "##0.0E+00" > > and "000.0E+00" all force the exponent to multiples of 3 (with the last > > one adding leading zeros - after all, leading zeros without modifying > > the exponent are quite useless)."##0.0E+0" is among the default formats > > in XLS file format. > > That's how it's supposed to be, and how it's handled elsewhere. We don't > have support for engineering number formats yet. This remains an open > enhancement issue, and I (nn, that's me) added that comment to clarify > what we need to do. I just tried with some sample numbers and they all came out in the right format so I didn't catch that the format is still not supported. Sorry for my misinformation. The most enjoyable greetings -- Claus Agerskov"Kan jeg, så kan du også" Helper/HjælperHenrik Dahl i DRs Rabatten om OpenOffice.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ooo.chbs.dk/ http://da.openoffice.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Engineering mode works in Calc
Niklas Nebel wrote: > That's how it's supposed to be, and how it's handled elsewhere. We don't > have support for engineering number formats yet. This remains an open > enhancement issue, and I (nn, that's me) added that comment to clarify > what we need to do. Btw, thank you for our work Niklas. :-) OOoAuthors is making the Calc Guide, and we're all very happy with Calc 2.0 Good work! Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Engineering mode works in Calc
Claus Agerskov wrote: Earlier this month Peter Knudsen ask for engineering notation in Calc. In issue 5930 the registred OpenOffice.org user nn wrote this: Actually the total number of integer digits, "#" and "0", is counted. "0.00E+00" and "#.00E+00" are equivalent, and "###.0E+00", "##0.0E+00" and "000.0E+00" all force the exponent to multiples of 3 (with the last one adding leading zeros - after all, leading zeros without modifying the exponent are quite useless)."##0.0E+0" is among the default formats in XLS file format. That's how it's supposed to be, and how it's handled elsewhere. We don't have support for engineering number formats yet. This remains an open enhancement issue, and I (nn, that's me) added that comment to clarify what we need to do. Niklas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Engineering mode works in Calc
Earlier this month Peter Knudsen ask for engineering notation in Calc. In issue 5930 the registred OpenOffice.org user nn wrote this: Actually the total number of integer digits, "#" and "0", is counted. "0.00E+00" and "#.00E+00" are equivalent, and "###.0E+00", "##0.0E+00" and "000.0E+00" all force the exponent to multiples of 3 (with the last one adding leading zeros - after all, leading zeros without modifying the exponent are quite useless)."##0.0E+0" is among the default formats in XLS file format. I have suggested to add this information in the online help. The most enjoyable greetings -- Claus Agerskov"Kan jeg, så kan du også" Helper/HjælperHenrik Dahl i DRs Rabatten om OpenOffice.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ooo.chbs.dk/ http://da.openoffice.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] your private showstopper
Peter Kupfer wrote: Technically, it hasn't been removed from the interface as the check box is still in the options, it just has no functionality. :) That's not true. For spreadsheets, the option works as before, and for text documents, it still restores the other view settings (like zoom). Niklas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Java fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS community
On Mer 30 mars 2005 3:16, Christian Einfeldt a écrit : > I must admit that as a simple end user who really loves OOo, I find > myself worried that knowledgable programmers are concerned. On the > other hand, I also see that one person commented that Apache uses > Java, or can use Java, and so I'm not sure whether the concerns are > overstated. Some projects of the Apache Foundation (not the Apache http server) are using the java language. And this _huge_ pool of FOSS software have been totally ignored by big Linux distributions till very recently because it depended on a non-free JVM component (this represents a lot more java code than OO.o, it's not suspisciously dependent on Sun but provided by a long-time friendly org, and yet it's largely not been packaged to this day). Lately some bits that happen to build/run with gcj are going in, but only in bleeding-edge distributions that use gcc4 (and a big part of the community opposes this because Sun controls the java langage and can change its def in ways that will render gcj useless at any time). The concerns are not overstated, quite the contrary. Today the silliest python app will have less difficulty being included in a Linux distribution than any given major java app. > At any rate, I was also impressed by the strength of the comments to > the effect that open source will tend to route around obstacles. > This tends to bring us once again back to the notion of competition > helping incent people to try harder to do better. > > From a business perspective, it seems that Java is in the process of > being commoditized by Mono and gcj, and so maybe Java is at the end > of the operational cycle. Maybe now is the time for Sun to head > Eric Raymond's call to let Java go. It's not - the time is way past (last year would have been ok). Now that much of the hard work is done in gcj and classpath (because of Sun's licensing) people won't dump it like this. The right time for opening up is not when a tech has been largely replicated - it's when people can still be grateful they won't have to recode it themselves. At this point in time the badwill Sun acrued with java these past years probably outweights the gratitude it could earn for making the reimplementation of the last mile of java libraries redundant. The people that have been trying to get java running on Sun's term (ie the less prejudiced at first) are probably the ones that have been burnt deeper by Sun licensing policy. (Which does not mean that OO.o java parts will work perfectly in gcj and users won't be annoyed in a big way for probably a year at least, just that gcj is mature enough people are ready to wait for its completion instead of jumping ship. We'll probably see a red line being drawn soon between acceptable stuff that only uses the java subset that's been reimplemented and stuff that uses all the bells and whistles of Sun's java) > We are not irreplaceable. No one is. But players that take care to work alongside other members of the FOSS ecosystem instead of doing their own thing ignoring everyone else (because they provide a key service and feel they can do whatever they like) are less likely to be replaced. Remember too people have long memories - it's way easier to ruin a reputation than to build it up. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
