[discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Please note that I have only worked with Calc, Writer, and Database. I've never even opened Draw, Impress, or Math. Following are in order of most to least significant. Pros . Free . Reads and writes MS Office file formats . Short learning curve for those coming from MS Office Cons . Limited number of predefined WP templates . Database component not ready for prime time. Numerous ODBC issues with other RDBMS's . Calc does not support Corel Quatrro Pro formats - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: auto filter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jonathon Coombes wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 13:01 -0500, Chuck wrote: >> Karlis Erglis wrote: > It would be goot to improve AutoFilter in OO >> CALC. Including such criteria like 'contains' or 'do not >> contains'.Becose of this i still must use MS Excel. :( > >> >> I would add to that "blanks" and "non-blanks". I use these filters 10x >> as often as any others and I suspect it's the same for many other users. >> Currently I have to do a standard filter which is not as fast. > > All these can be done with the regular expressions feature, and then > some. Have a look in the help under Calc for the regular expressions > usage in filters and that should get you on track to seeing how > powerful this feature is in Calc. > > Regards > Jonathon I'm familiar with regex's but how do you specify one in an auto filter? The drop down doesn't let you enter a regex. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32) iEYEARECAAYFAkPOXF0ACgkQzIf+rZpn0oRDSwCdHFSNI8UcU9k77Xwwrv8VR94H 3KQAn3BUu5ceARKDXFE63aZyEwxs746x =LCbA -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Chuck wrote: Following are in order of most to least significant. Pros . Free . Reads and writes MS Office file formats . Short learning curve for those coming from MS Office That's very sad. It makes it sound like a free MS Office rip-off. No wonder people see OOo just like that. How about this: * Cross platform. Run it on Windows or Linux. * Uses OpenDocument natively, so your data is secure. * Higher reliability. You're less likely to lose a document. * Features that work. Consider styles, master documents and templates. * Includes a vector graphics application (MS Office does not). * Superior integration. Open a WP file from your spread sheet. Draw an image on Draw and paste it on Writer. The last two things you said are not "features". They are counter arguments for people who might be afraid of using OOo. Selling them as features makes OOo look bad (because both are things that MS Office "obviously" does better). If you want to make it a feature, say this: * Opens your old MS Office files *better* than MS Office. Cheers, Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Daniel Carrera wrote: > Chuck wrote: >> Following are in order of most to least significant. >> Pros >> >> . Free >> . Reads and writes MS Office file formats >> . Short learning curve for those coming from MS Office > > That's very sad. It makes it sound like a free MS Office rip-off. No > wonder people see OOo just like that. How about this: > > * Cross platform. Run it on Windows or Linux. > * Uses OpenDocument natively, so your data is secure. > * Higher reliability. You're less likely to lose a document. > * Features that work. Consider styles, master documents and templates. > * Includes a vector graphics application (MS Office does not). > * Superior integration. Open a WP file from your spread sheet. Draw an > image on Draw and paste it on Writer. The OP specifically asked to skip that stuff. If you leave that all out, it is a free alternative to MS Office. I'm betting he's trying to justify OOo to a bunch of suits that are afraid of using anything but MS Office. Those "pros" should alleviate those fears. Chuck -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32) iEYEARECAAYFAkPObYoACgkQzIf+rZpn0oQkiQCfZ0FU4YyG4kiaCo39Va7vCXtq QZYAoI8c/dJDqItAty4FvLzBYNC7i9wb =YqMc -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: SO 5.2 Images Pixels
Daniel Kasak wrote: Randomthots wrote: I guess the main point here would be that it's a bit of a stretch to say that Evolution is actually available for the Win32 platform. It's a lot closer and that's certainly a welcome development, but it would be a mistake to point posters looking for an alternative to Outlook in that direction just yet. I don't think so. If they're keen enough to use OpenOffice, then I don't see trying out evolution as being a major problem. Download files. Unzip them. Add path to environment. Run and test. 1. Probably >95% of the current user base of OOo (Win32) will not have understood "Add path to environment." 2. *Trying out* an alpha or pre-alpha release is a whole different animal than *using* a reasonably mature program like OOo. Until Evolution for Windows is stable and mature enough to warrant at least a beta designation (WITH installer) it's unreasonable to think of it as something that people can actually *use* day-to-day. 3. For that matter the designation OOo 2.0 is a bit misleading since it's the same thing as SO 8. A version 8 release vs. pre-alpha?? If people don't test things out, how will the bugs get noticed? Fine for you and me, perhaps, but if it crashes and trashes data -- something that is more than likely at this stage -- then playing with it to find bugs is about *all* you can do with it. Also, if it's a stretch to say that evolution is available for Win32, then it's *certainly* a stretch to say that SO 5.2 is better than OOo 2.0 :-P ... but yes, I'm straying off-topic ... or on-topic, or something ... No argument there, although I've never used SO 5.2. From what little I can glean from descriptions here, it sounds like a lot of other software from the Win3.1 era when people were experimenting with different user interfaces. The best ideas made their way into WinXP, Gnome, KDE, etc. The worst are better off forgotten. -- Rod - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On 1/18/06, Chuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Daniel Carrera wrote: > > Chuck wrote: > >> Following are in order of most to least significant. > >> Pros > >> > >> . Free > >> . Reads and writes MS Office file formats > >> . Short learning curve for those coming from MS Office > > > > That's very sad. It makes it sound like a free MS Office rip-off. No > > wonder people see OOo just like that. How about this: I wouldn't say those pros make it sound like a cheap MS rip-off, those are the 3 most important reasons most people use OOo. Take away any one of those, and you'll lose a large part of our user-base. > > > > * Cross platform. Run it on Windows or Linux. Thanks for not putting Mac on your list. Unless you count NeoOffice, I wouldn't tell people OOo runs on Mac. > > * Uses OpenDocument natively, so your data is secure. Very few people care about this (as has been discussed at great length) and is hardly a selling point for OOo. > > * Higher reliability. You're less likely to lose a document. Explain what you mean by that - not just for me, but for the OP and other readers. > > * Features that work. Consider styles, master documents and templates. Templates? Um, if you're comparing OOo to MSO (as I believe this thread is meant to do) templates would be a pro for MSO and a con for OOo - there are thousands, if not tens of thousands of good quality, useful templates out there for MSO, and many of them are hosted on Microsoft.com and a good number come on the CD with MSO. How many templates are on OpenOffice.org's website? 25? 50? 100? 5? > > * Includes a vector graphics application (MS Office does not). Visio does that, but it doesn't come with MSO proper. > > * Superior integration. Open a WP file from your spread sheet. Draw an > > image on Draw and paste it on Writer. You can copy and paste from one MSO app to the next. You can open Word Docs as objects in Excel, or Excel spreadsheets in PowerPoint. I'd say OOo and MSO tie there. > The OP specifically asked to skip that stuff. If you leave that all out, > it is a free alternative to MS Office. And it is a free alternative to MS Office. Unfortunately, MSO has such a high market share that people think of MS Office whenever they hear "office suite" or "office program". They think Word when they mean word processor, they think Excel when they mean spreadsheet, they think PowerPoint when they mean presentation, etc.. It has been so much of the market for so long, it's going to be hard to be compared to anything else. Every other office suite or productivity package in the world is an alternative to MSO, including OOo. Even if the suite has been around longer than MSO (ie WordPerfect) or does things better than MSO (ie iWork) - they are still held up to the MSO "benchmark" for comparison. For better or worse. Railing against the machine isn't going to change people's mindset. Chipping away at the userbase of MSO until it's a forgotten dinosaur will. > > I'm betting he's trying to justify OOo to a bunch of suits that are > afraid of using anything but MS Office. Those "pros" should alleviate > those fears. +1 - good list, Chuck. Thanks. This is my list: Free MS-Compatible Included one-button PDFs from any file Familiar interface to any word processor user Easy task switching Flash Export of presentations Can be used along side of existing software No registration or activitation required (no legal issues, can be put on any number of machines) Included Vector graphics program Resistant to macro-based viruses -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ Because everyone loves free software! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Chad Smith wrote: I wouldn't say those pros make it sound like a cheap MS rip-off, those are the 3 most important reasons most people use OOo. Take away any one of those, and you'll lose a large part of our user-base. They are important, but if that's your list, it really does make it sound like a cheap MS rip-off. * Uses OpenDocument natively, so your data is secure. Very few people care about this (as has been discussed at great length) and is hardly a selling point for OOo. It depends on who you are. Some large customers care a lot. If you don't have any document older than a week old and none of your documents is critical, then I guess this isn't an issue for you. * Higher reliability. You're less likely to lose a document. Explain what you mean by that - not just for me, but for the OP and other readers. An zip compressed XML file (like ODF) is significantly less prone to failure than a binary dump (like .doc). First, XML files are well structured with defined schemas. One upshot of that is that you can lose a fair bit of structural data and still rebuild the entire document without loss. For example, take this document: Joe Smith 123-456-7890 ... ... Now, let's introduce a file corruption: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Joe Smith 123-456-7890 ... ... This is a fairly severe data corruption. A lot of bytes have been lost. Yet, you can use the XML schema to reconstruct all the lost data. If an equivalent corruption had occurred on a binary dump, the entire document would be lost because you would have lost the top-level pointer () that leads you to the rest of the document. Compressing the XML into a ZIP file does negate some of the advantage, but not very much. ZIP compression is designed to be resilient. A corrupt ZIP file can usually be reconstructed automatically with little or no loss of data. And when you apply the XML schema to whatever you get back, you can usually correct whatever the ZIP algorithm couldn't. * Features that work. Consider styles, master documents and templates. Templates? Um, if you're comparing OOo to MSO (as I believe this thread is meant to do) templates would be a pro for MSO and a con for OOo - there are thousands, There are very few OOo templates, and that's a con for OOo, no doubt. But here I was talking about reliability. For example, no one uses MS Office master documents because the damm things just don't work. Someone (I forget who) one said "a master document can only be in two states: corrupt, and about to be corrupt". OOo master documents are significantly more reliable. OOoAuthors uses master documents on every book we produce and they work. * Includes a vector graphics application (MS Office does not). Visio does that, but it doesn't come with MSO proper. Correct, it's not part of MSO. We're comparing with MSO. You can copy and paste from one MSO app to the next. You can open Word Docs as objects in Excel, or Excel spreadsheets in PowerPoint. I'd say OOo and MSO tie there. Not really. OOo is a single app with a common format. You might think that .odt, .ods, etc are different formats, but they really are just one. The extension is really for your benefit, nothing more. This same property holds for OOo internally. Included one-button PDFs from any file Easy task switching Flash Export of presentations Can be used along side of existing software No registration or activitation required (no legal issues, can be put on any number of machines) Included Vector graphics program Resistant to macro-based viruses Those are good additions. I removed things that, though important, are not what I'd call "features" in the sense of "OOo has this and MSO does not". I don't know what you mean by easy task switching. Cheers, Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Short list with Pro's & Cons
Cor Nouws wrote: Python cán be used. (1) Not as a macro language (2) Last time I checked the API was incomplete. The API is complex, but powerfull. Code-completion would make it a lot easier. It may be powerful, but that's little use if most people can't manage the energy to learn it. Ruby is powerful, and it's very easy to learn. Cheers, Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
From: Chad Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:25:38 -0500 > To install X11 on a system that is already running Tiger, you have to > *reinstall Tiger* to do it, potentially losing data and/or > preferences. This is non-true statement. As you use non-true statements as your arguments (either on purpose or because of your limited knowledge), please use [EMAIL PROTECTED] or social@openoffice.org next time, please. > Do you use a Mac, Pavel? Yes. My second computer on my desk is PowerPC based Macintosh! I even regularly produce the OpenOffice.org and it runs on my Macintosh! In fact it is in the form of universal binary now, but it doesn't matter! And as it runs on my Mac, it is a living evidence that you lie. but I know you do not want to lie. Your goal are different. I know them. But you are not representing your goals in a good way - see below. > Do you know what I'm talking about? Yes. You lie about the inability to install X11 without reinstalling the whole system. X11 is (currently) requirement of OpenOffice.org. Take it as fact! If you do not agree with it, do not behave like an * but try to help to get rid of this requirement. E.g. installing Xcode is a requirement if you want to develop on Mac OS X. Do you use the argument "You can't develop on Mac OS X"? No, because this is crystal-clear nonsense. By behaving like an * you only make the motivation of the people who actually can change this smaller! Do you understand it? And of course, people see you as an *. P.S. I have substituted the word I used to describe your behavior with * because I'm not native English language speaker and thus it could be incorrect usage of that term even if it is correct in this case in my language/country. But you can imagine what I wanted to use! -- Pavel Janík 2.4.15 eats files. DON'T USE IT. -- "H. Peter Anvin" in LKML - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Short list with Pro's & Cons
Hi Jef, Jeff Causey wrote: Thanks for working on this project. I've been following along as whatever is produced will help in my efforts as well. Couple notes after having gone through the previous (very detailed) spreadsheet and Thanks for doing that job. So it's not that worse if it stay's a little longer waiting at my list. [...] The above are just a few I've thought of that I have not yet seen elsewhere. This is jmo, but I'm not sure I would agree the style concept is better in OO. This is perhaps true for page styles, but otherwise I think they are the same. Page styles is tha main difference. Character styles another one. The difference with OO is I think it is much more overt in its effort to get a user to use styles instead of directly formatting text. Correct for me. Again, jmo, but pasting something from a spreadsheet into a text document works more seamlessly in OO than in MSO. I'll have to work on how to articulate that. OK, would be interesting if you can find that out. Back in the day's when I was professionally supporting MsOffice. it was mostly '97 and a little 2000 I had to cope with ;-) Using object (Excel In Word) was a recepi for plain disaster. Tried a little recently in MsO 2003. And that looked OK now. Kind regards, Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
From: Chad Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:43:37 -0500 Chad, > > > * Cross platform. Run it on Windows or Linux. > > Thanks for not putting Mac on your list. Unless you count NeoOffice, > I wouldn't tell people OOo runs on Mac. does Neo run on Mac OS X without Java? Is Mac OS X without Java Mac OS X? What about helping instead of such disgusting sentences in all of your e-mails? -- Pavel Janík RPM is crap. -- Hubert Mantel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Chuck wrote: The OP specifically asked to skip that stuff. If you leave that all out, it is a free alternative to MS Office. I'm betting he's trying to justify OOo to a bunch of suits that are afraid of using anything but MS Office. Those "pros" should alleviate those fears. Well understood, Chuck. I do not hide my enthousiasm when communication about OOo (which is my business, profession). Could not even do that, if I wanted. However, I try to be honust as well. (That's by far the main reason that I'm hapy to have left the Ms-ship) And for seats, headlines and balanced information is important. Greetings. Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Hi Daniel, Daniel Carrera wrote: [...] * Higher reliability. You're less likely to lose a document. Good one. [...] * Includes a vector graphics application (MS Office does not). As well. * Superior integration. Open a WP file from your spread sheet. Draw an image on Draw and paste it on Writer. And because of (close to) conseqent UI. [...] * Opens your old MS Office files *better* than MS Office. Thanks! Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Jeff Causey wrote: All that is true and sways the technical folks and power users, but I rather suspect for your typical business person (who is the target of Cor's project), you probably lost them after "An zip compressed XML file..." I don't expect a typical business person to understand the technical details. But it is still true that OpenDocument files are much more reliable and that's something most business people care about. If "higher reliability" can be articulated in terms of a sentence/bullet point, you might have something useful to add to the list. Sigh... the *first* email I wrote had a single, short bullet point. I only added a technical explanation when someone asked me for one. Hmm, I've used MSO's master documents successfully for several years. So making a statement like that has the potential to destroy credibility if presented to someone who uses MSO's master documents. The question in my mind is, how are OO's master documents more reliable? Is there something about the app that makes them work better/easier to work with? MSO master documents get corrupted very easily. They break easily. OOo's don't as much.f I'll reiterate my point about styles in OO as well - MSO has the same capability. The one "selling point" about styles I think OO can make is page styles. Page styles matter. Does MSO have a Navigator and Stylist? Does it use styles natively? (styles are so central to OOo you cannot avoid using them - even when you think you're not using styles, OOo is making styles dynamically for you) OK, but this still does not change the point that you can copy and paste between the apps in MSO and OO. e.g. There is a "Window" menu that lists all your OOo windows regardless of whether they are a WP, spread sheet, etc. I'd ask as well what "easy task switching" refers to? Ask Chad. Please don't quote Chad's list as if it were mine. That's rude. Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Short list with Pro's & Cons
Hi Daniel, Daniel Kasak wrote: The main difference for us now is that OOo doesn't support VB macros, and probably never will. Valid for the most. There are works goìng on to make the use of VBA in OOo far more easily. I'm no fan of VB, but this still has to be taken into consideration when you have lots of legacy VB macros. Big con in thos situation. Unless you´re company is up for a change (improvement) anyway. Than it would possibly not that much of an extra disadvantage. Also, the basic editor / debugger leaves a lot to be desired. There's no code-completion support, for example, which makes learning the language and objects quite an uphill battle. In fact, you'd have to be pretty keen to stick with it long enough to learn. I've done some small OOBasic scripts, and I don't look forward to the next one I have to do ... I know from my own experience. Here also, there are improvements coming sooner or (probably a little) later. The big plus is that OOo is cross-platform. This means that moving to OOo makes the move to Linux much easier - assuming that this is what you want to do - it's a worthy goal IMHO :) Thanks for your comments and suggestions. It's not my personal or business goal to move to Linux. The goal of my question is to produce a nice brochure, to inform others. For the marketing activities in The Netherlands. And I promise to take care for an translation. Greetings, Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Hi Chad, Chad Smith wrote: Templates? Um, if you're comparing OOo to MSO (as I believe this thread is meant to do) templates would be a pro for MSO and a con for OOo - there are thousands, if not tens of thousands of good quality, useful templates out there for MSO, and many of them are hosted on Microsoft.com and a good number come on the CD with MSO. How many templates are on OpenOffice.org's website? 25? 50? 100? 5? There are some more available for OOo than you write, however far less than for MsO. Is a disadvantage indeed, if you like pre-boiled templates. [...] This is my list: Free MS-Compatible Included one-button PDFs from any file Familiar interface to any word processor user Easy task switching Flash Export of presentations Can be used along side of existing software No registration or activitation required (no legal issues, can be put on any number of machines) Included Vector graphics program Resistant to macro-based viruses Thanks for your contribution, Greetings, Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On 1/18/06, Daniel Carrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That's very sad. It makes it sound like a free MS Office rip-off. > WRT the stuff I said about all office software being considered an alternative to MSO, one of the RSS feeds I get in my Gmail had this story in it about Word Perfect X3 coming out. http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=70727&cat_id=580 And this was the first line: Corel Corporation has announced the availability of the new Corel > WordPerfect Office X3 family of desktop productivity software - the newest > version of the alternative to Microsoft Office. > -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ Because everyone loves free software!
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Hi Lars, Lars D. Noodén wrote: * cross platform * supports OpenDocument natively * supports long documents better than the competition * better support for styles than competition * translated to over 80 languages In general I've found it to have better support for older versions of MS formats. (The MS spport is rather poor in that regard). It's big and slow (-), but MS Office is bigger and slower (--) and is not cross platform. Indeed a short list, as I like. And withh new items on it! Thanks & best wishes, Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Short list with Pro's & Cons
Hi Daniel, Daniel Carrera wrote: [...] read. I was about to say that things would be better if OOo used a known language like Ruby or Python, but on a second thought, that wouldn't Python cán be used. help so much. The biggest problem is a complex API. It'd be better if someone wrote a library to simplify common tasks. Ian Laurenson has a wiki with such functions. Those would be a good start. The API is complex, but powerfull. Code-completion would make it a lot easier. Cheers, Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Short list with Pro's & Cons
Cor Nouws wrote: Robin Laing wrote: I don't use MSO so I cannot offer feature comparisons but I will say that OOo will open MSO files that MSO won't open for some strange reason. Even files that were just closed on the same desktop. I have saved someones butt on more than one occasion. Also from someone that I work with, the graphics support in Writer is so much better and controllable than in MSO. Styles works better than in MSO. It doesn't take over your whole document and you can undo allot better than in MSO. But the ability of working with Of course there are issues with header and footer links breaking in OOo. This is supposed to be fixed by 2.0.2. Hope this is a start. Indeed, Robin, Thanks. The MsO document-recovery you mention, is an interesting OOo-feature. Greetings, Cor Thank you. I was thinking of one problem against OOo is opening and saving large documents. It can be so much slower than MSO. We are talking hundreds of times slower. I don't find it that much of a problem but others may. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Hi Chuck, Chuck wrote: Please note that I have only worked with Calc, Writer, and Database. I've never even opened Draw, Impress, or Math. (Should try Draw. Makes fun ánd sence!) Following are in order of most to least significant. Pros . Free . Reads and writes MS Office file formats . Short learning curve for those coming from MS Office Cons . Limited number of predefined WP templates . Database component not ready for prime time. Numerous ODBC issues with other RDBMS's I think that's a real issue for my list/brochure, where I want to focus on head-lines - whatever that may be. (For those who missed it: my orig posting is here: http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=55484 ) . Calc does not support Corel Quatrro Pro formats Thanks & greetings, Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
An zip compressed XML file (like ODF) is significantly less prone to failure than a binary dump (like .doc). First, XML files are well structured with defined schemas. One upshot of that is that you can lose a fair bit of structural data and still rebuild the entire document without loss. For example, take this document: Joe Smith 123-456-7890 ... ... Now, let's introduce a file corruption: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Joe Smith 123-456-7890 ... ... This is a fairly severe data corruption. A lot of bytes have been lost. Yet, you can use the XML schema to reconstruct all the lost data. If an equivalent corruption had occurred on a binary dump, the entire document would be lost because you would have lost the top-level pointer () that leads you to the rest of the document. Compressing the XML into a ZIP file does negate some of the advantage, but not very much. ZIP compression is designed to be resilient. A corrupt ZIP file can usually be reconstructed automatically with little or no loss of data. And when you apply the XML schema to whatever you get back, you can usually correct whatever the ZIP algorithm couldn't. All that is true and sways the technical folks and power users, but I rather suspect for your typical business person (who is the target of Cor's project), you probably lost them after "An zip compressed XML file..." If "higher reliability" can be articulated in terms of a sentence/bullet point, you might have something useful to add to the list. Otherwise, I think it is just going to be overwhelming information. Also keep in mind, this will probably only resonate with someone who has had an MSO file become corrupt/unuseable. Uses OpenDocument natively, so your data is secure. Similar to the point above, is there a way to express this so that it hits home with the business user? I would say use of the word "secure" may be problematic. Do you mean meta-data won't get leaked? Do you mean the file will be useable years down the road (an argument that Mass. relied heavily upon, but I don't sense it resonating with others)? Or something else? no one uses MS Office master documents because the damm things just don't work. Someone (I forget who) one said "a master document can only be in two states: corrupt, and about to be corrupt". OOo master documents are significantly more reliable. Hmm, I've used MSO's master documents successfully for several years. So making a statement like that has the potential to destroy credibility if presented to someone who uses MSO's master documents. The question in my mind is, how are OO's master documents more reliable? Is there something about the app that makes them work better/easier to work with? I'll reiterate my point about styles in OO as well - MSO has the same capability. The one "selling point" about styles I think OO can make is page styles. Not really. OOo is a single app with a common format. You might think that .odt, .ods, etc are different formats, but they really are just one. The extension is really for your benefit, nothing more. This same property holds for OOo internally. OK, but this still does not change the point that you can copy and paste between the apps in MSO and OO. For the end user, the perception will likely be "no difference". As an end-user, I do think there is a difference, but I have not yet figured out how to articulate the difference. Included one-button PDFs from any file Easy task switching Flash Export of presentations Can be used along side of existing software No registration or activitation required (no legal issues, can be put on any number of machines) Included Vector graphics program Resistant to macro-based viruses I'd ask as well what "easy task switching" refers to? Likewise, "can be used along side of existing software"? Unfortunately, that bullet did prompt me to wonder just how many applications out there have integration with MSO. For anyone using such an application, that alone could be a showstopper in wanting to switch to OO. Also, does MSO require registration/activation? I know Windows requires activation and you obviously have to have a serial number for MSO, but I'm not aware that you are required to register/activate it with MS. Jeff Causey
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Hi Jeff, Jeff Causey wrote: [...] Thanks for th idea's I snipped away above. Were some very usefull. I'd ask as well what "easy task switching" refers to? Likewise, "can be used along side of existing software"? Unfortunately, that bullet did prompt me to wonder just how many applications out there have integration with MSO. For anyone using such an application, that alone could be a showstopper in wanting to switch to OO. Definitely true. However, in may situations it is not that comlicated to make a short work around ;-) Also, does MSO require registration/activation? I know Windows requires activation and you obviously have to have a serial number for MSO, but I'm not aware that you are required to register/activate it with MS. No problem for the legal MsO users, is it? (BTW, I heard someone talking about the 'open licencing' model of MsO: € 200,- per user per year :-) Greetings, Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On 1/18/06, Pavel Janík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >From: Chad Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:43:37 -0500 > > Chad, > >> > > * Cross platform. Run it on Windows or Linux. >> >> Thanks for not putting Mac on your list. Unless you count NeoOffice, >> I wouldn't tell people OOo runs on Mac. > > does Neo run on Mac OS X without Java? Is Mac OS X without Java Mac OS X? Mac OS X doesn't come in a "without Java" format. If you buy a new Mac, it comes with Java. If you install OS X, it comes with Java. if you run Software Update on Mac, it gets the latest version of Mac-ified Java. So there is no Mac OS X without Java. I'm sure if you tried really hard to find Java and delete it, Mac OS X would still run, but I don't know of any reason anyone would do that, other than to prove they could in response to an email like this. X11, on the other hand, does not come preinstalled, nor is it a part of the default install of OS X. It is included on the disc, but you have to purposefully (a) know it's there (b) know how to find it and (c) ask for it specifically - before you get it. And you can't just download it or install it by itself in Mac OS X 10.4 (Tiger). If you try to download it from the Apple website, it will download, but when you try to install it, the system tells you that you "already have newer software installed" and doesn't give you any choice but to stop. To install X11 on a system that is already running Tiger, you have to *reinstall Tiger* to do it, potentially losing data and/or preferences. If you were to end up with a Mac OS X system that doesn't have Java - you can easily get it through Software Update or from Apple.com. Do you use a Mac, Pavel? Do you know what I'm talking about? If not, then it is no longer you don't understand why I said what I said. If you've ever tried to install X11 on a Mac that already has Tiger, then you shouldn't have to ask. -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ Because everyone loves free software! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Short list with Pro's & Cons
Robin Laing wrote: I don't use MSO so I cannot offer feature comparisons but I will say that OOo will open MSO files that MSO won't open for some strange reason. Even files that were just closed on the same desktop. I have saved someones butt on more than one occasion. Also from someone that I work with, the graphics support in Writer is so much better and controllable than in MSO. Styles works better than in MSO. It doesn't take over your whole document and you can undo allot better than in MSO. But the ability of working with Of course there are issues with header and footer links breaking in OOo. This is supposed to be fixed by 2.0.2. Hope this is a start. Indeed, Robin, Thanks. The MsO document-recovery you mention, is an interesting OOo-feature. Greetings, Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Short list with Pro's & Cons
Robin Laing wrote: I was thinking of one problem against OOo is opening and saving large documents. It can be so much slower than MSO. We are talking hundreds of times slower. I don't find it that much of a problem but others may. Correct. Thanks for now, to all. I'm leaving a while to clean up my kitchen. Have a good time, enjoy each other. And I'm interested to read some more contributions, sharp reply's later on, to my first question (1). Cor 1) http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=55484 -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On 1/18/06, Pavel Janík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >From: Chad Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:25:38 -0500 > >> To install X11 on a system that is already running Tiger, you have > to >> *reinstall Tiger* to do it, potentially losing data and/or >> preferences. > > This is non-true statement. As you use non-true statements as your > arguments (either on purpose or because of your limited knowledge), please > use [EMAIL PROTECTED] or social@openoffice.org next time, please. Please tell me how to install X11 on a Mac that is already running Mac OS X 10.4 without running the OS X install disc which makes you reinstall Tiger to get X11. I've asked this question before, and the only answer I get is "it's on the Tiger DVD". > Do you use a Mac, Pavel? > > Yes. My second computer on my desk is PowerPC based Macintosh! I even > regularly produce the OpenOffice.org and it runs on my Macintosh! In fact > it is in the form of universal binary now, but it doesn't matter! > > And as it runs on my Mac, it is a living evidence that you lie. but I know > you do not want to lie. Your goal are different. I know them. But you are > not representing your goals in a good way - see below. I never said it was impossible to install X11 - I just said to do it on a Mac that already has Tiger (OS X 10.4.x) you have to reinstall Tiger. On 10.3 or 10.2, installing X11 is not nearly as difficult. Installing it *with* Tiger (as in you are upgrading from an older Operating System) isn't hard, you just have to know it's there and ask for it. But if you are already running Tiger, the only way I've been told and been able to find out on my own through experiementing to install X11 is to reinstall the OS, (which I have done on my laptop, so i can run GIMP). > Do you know what I'm talking about? > > Yes. You lie about the inability to install X11 without reinstalling the > whole system. I said reinstalling Tiger - you don't have to wipe your hard drive to do it, but it does go through the process of reinstalling Tiger. So if you interupt it in mid-process, you can lose data. It's not like the normal drag-and-drop of any other Mac software. In fact, on 10.3, I believe (not sure - feel free to correct me), X11 *is* drag and drop. But for Tiger, it's not, (unless they've updated the file on apple.com or it is available from a different place). X11 is (currently) requirement of OpenOffice.org. Take it as fact! If you > do not agree with it, do not behave like an * but try to help to get > rid of this requirement. It's not a requirement for NeoOffice. I'd like it not to be for OpenOffice.org. But I don't see the point in me getting involved in learning a programming language, devoting tons of my spare time, etc. to doing something that NeoOffice has already done. Why OpenOffice.org can't do what NeoOffice has done, I don't know. I do know why they won't accept NeoOffice as OOo-proper (licensing issues, NeoOffice is GPL - OpenOffice.org is LGPL). But since Java and Carbon come on every Mac and every copy of Mac OS X that Apple produces, then I don't see why OOo proper can't use them instead of X11. I can "take it as fact" that OOo proper "needs" X11. But I can also "take it as fact" that NeoOffice is user-friendly, doesn't require anything that isn't pre-installed on my Mac, and looks/feels/acts like a Mac native program. So you can "take it as fact" that this * is going to use and promote NeoOffice over OOo for Mac users as long as each project keep doing what they're doing. By behaving like an * you only make the motivation of the people who > actually can change this smaller! Do you understand it? And of course, > people see you as an *. > I do understand your point. But I've given up on trying to convince the people who make the X11 port change their ways. I've banged my head against that brick wall for too long. I'm just going to use NeoOffice on my Mac and be happy with it. On my Windows box, it's OOo. On my Linux box, it's OOo. On my Mac, it's NeoOffice. -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ Because everyone loves free software!
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On 1/18/06, Daniel Carrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'd ask as well what "easy task switching" refers to? > > Ask Chad. Please don't quote Chad's list as if it were mine. Yeah, you could get Daniel kicked off the list if you keep that up. :-) Easy task switching refers to the ability to open Calc from within Writer, or to open Draw from within Impress. The drop-down menu in the top left corner of the toolbars of each component of OOo lets the user open whatever program he needs at the time. I don't think Word can open Excel or PowerPoint - at least not nearly as easily. It goes back to them all really being different modes of the same program. But it's really convenient. Much more convenient than the old "[MS] Office Task Bar" or whatever that thing was called. -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ Because everyone loves free software!
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Chad Smith wrote: Easy task switching refers to the ability to open Calc from within Writer, or to open Draw from within Impress. The drop-down menu in the top left corner of the toolbars of each component of OOo lets the user open whatever program he needs at the time. I don't think Word can open Excel or PowerPoint - at least not nearly as easily. It goes back to them all really being different modes of the same program. But it's really convenient. Much more convenient than the old "[MS] Office Task Bar" or whatever that thing was called. Ah. Yes. I think this is a good feature. Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Chuck, my short list is * cross platform * supports OpenDocument natively * supports long documents better than the competition * better support for styles than competition * translated to over 80 languages In general I've found it to have better support for older versions of MS formats. (The MS spport is rather poor in that regard). It's big and slow (-), but MS Office is bigger and slower (--) and is not cross platform. -Lars Lars Nooden ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Software patents endanger the legal certainty of software. Keep them out of the EU by writing your MEP, keep the market open. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Short list with Pro's & Cons
I've noticed that some of the larger spreadsheets I have can take upwards of two minutes to save. If this went on in the background it would be more tolerable. -Lars Lars Nooden ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Software patents endanger the legal certainty of software. Keep them out of the EU by writing your MEP, keep the market open. On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Robin Laing wrote: [snip] I was thinking of one problem against OOo is opening and saving large documents. It can be so much slower than MSO. We are talking hundreds of times slower. I don't find it that much of a problem but others may. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Daniel, Jeff Causey wrote: All that is true and sways the technical folks and power users, but I rather suspect for your typical business person (who is the target of Cor's project), you probably lost them after "An zip compressed XML file..." I don't expect a typical business person to understand the technical details. But it is still true that OpenDocument files are much more reliable and that's something most business people care about. If "higher reliability" can be articulated in terms of a sentence/bullet point, you might have something useful to add to the list. Sigh... the *first* email I wrote had a single, short bullet point. I only added a technical explanation when someone asked me for one. Yes, your first email indicated "Higher reliability. You're less likely to lose a document." My issue is you can _say_ more reliable all day long, but you need to be able to back it up. Your reply was to go into a detailed explanation of the structure of the file formats and the benefits of XML. The problem I am trying to anticipate is the business person who responds, "Doesn't MSO use XML files now? What about their new Office XML formats?" As I said, everything you noted is accurate, I just don't see it resonating. I did find this though: Key Benefits and Functionality . *Compact file format.* Documents are automatically compressed---up to 75 percent smaller in some cases. . *Improved damaged file recovery.* Modular data storage enables files to be opened even if a component within the file is damaged---a chart or table, for example. . *Safer documents.* Embedded code---for example, OLE objects or Microsoft Visual Basic for Applications code---is stored in a separate section within the file, so it can be easily identified for special processing. IT Administrators can block the documents that contain unwanted macros or controls, making documents safer for users when they are opened. . *Easier integration.* Developers have direct access to specific contents within the file, like charts, comments, and document metadata. . *Transparency and improved information security.* Documents can be shared confidentially because personally identifiable information and business sensitive information---user names, comments, tracked changes, file paths---can be easily identified and removed. Unfortunately, as you may have guessed, this comes from Microsoft and can be found here: http://www.microsoft.com/office/preview/developers/fileoverview.mspx So even if Cor is able to clean up what has been discussed as to the benefits of using an XML based file schema versus the proprietary .doc or .xls or .ppt formats, eventually it is still going to be compared to the above list from MS and I suspect the person reading them will see no difference because the benefits of an XML schema are the same. MSO master documents get corrupted very easily. They break easily. OOo's don't as much. Do you have any data to back up your opinion that MSO master documents get corrupted or break easily? I did find the statement you referenced about "a master document can only be in two states..." here (http://word.mvps.org/FAQs/General/WhyMasterDocsCorrupt.htm). And yes, I understand that I am probably in the minority in questioning the common knowledge of the flakiness of MS'es master documents. It just sounds like a "rah, rah - we're better" type statement that could get one into trouble if presented to the wrong audience. Page styles matter. Does MSO have a Navigator and Stylist? Does it use styles natively? (styles are so central to OOo you cannot avoid using them - even when you think you're not using styles, OOo is making styles dynamically for you) IIRC, MSO does not have the equivalent of the Navigator. But then, I don't use it in OO either. As for the Stylist, I think the equivalent would be the task pane showing styles in MS Word. Yes, MSO uses styles natively - just few people switch away from the default. As I explained elsewhere in this thread, I do think OO does a better job at being overt in trying to make you understand you are using styles and to make better use of them. Likewise, I think OO's page styles is something definitely better than MSO. e.g. There is a "Window" menu that lists all your OOo windows regardless of whether they are a WP, spread sheet, etc. I'm sorry Daniel, but you've lost me. Usually in my work I'm pasting tables or charts from the spreadsheet to a document. I don't recall having trouble with either program with keeping track of which document I was in/going to/coming from, etc. Perhaps you are talking about something else though? Ask Chad. Please don't quote Chad's list as if it were mine. That's rude. My apologies Daniel - an oversight on my part amidst all the copying/pasting I was doing. Cor (and everyone else), you might want to check out this article
[discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Daniel Carrera wrote: > An zip compressed XML file (like ODF) is significantly less prone to > failure than a binary dump (like .doc). In all seriousness, when was the last time you experienced corruption in a compressed document? In 20+ years in IT I've never seen it happen once. The closest I've come to it was a version of gzip a few years ago on Solaris that refused to unzip files > some size (2g I think). Had something to do with using signed versus unsigned numbers in the header definition. There was no real corruption and you could copy the file to any other OS to unzip it. Or you could patch the Solaris version. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Jeff Causey wrote: The problem I am trying to anticipate is the business person who responds, "Doesn't MSO use XML files now? What about their new Office XML formats?" 1) "Doesn't MSO use XML files now?" No, not yet. But next version will. 2) What about their new Office XML formats. They have the same resistance to corruption that I described for ODF files. That's not surprising since the Office XML format is obviously Unfortunately, as you may have guessed, this comes from Microsoft and can be found here: No reason we can't edit that list a little to make it fit OOo. We can match and improve all of those points. MSO master documents get corrupted very easily. They break easily. OOo's don't as much. Do you have any data to back up your opinion that MSO master documents get corrupted or break easily? Expert opinion from a technical editor of 30 years. IIRC, MSO does not have the equivalent of the Navigator. But then, I don't use it in OO either. It doesn't I'm sure. As for the Stylist, I think the equivalent would be the task pane showing styles in MS Word. That doesn't show you character, frame, page and list styles. From my understanding of what a "task pane" is, I'm not sure it has all the other features that the Stylist has. e.g. There is a "Window" menu that lists all your OOo windows regardless of whether they are a WP, spread sheet, etc. I'm sorry Daniel, but you've lost me. Look at your OOo window. Look at the menu bar at the top. There is a menu called "Window". Click on it and see what's in it. Cheers, Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Chuck wrote: In all seriousness, when was the last time you experienced corruption in a compressed document? About 3 times in the last 2 years. One of those times was when I rescued a year's work for an Italian author. He was writing a book. I've seen it happen more than 3 times with MS Office, and in those cases the file was just lost. Whether this is an issue depends on the user. If you have complex documents you have a higher risk. If your documents must be around for a long time (e.g. contracts, or say you're a lawyer, archivist or government body) or your files are very critical, this issue matters. This is part of why Boeing was active in developing the OpenDocument format. They have a lot of complex documents that must retain full precision for a long time (the specs for a 747 would not fit on seven 747s). Cheers, Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On 1/18/06, Daniel Carrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Jeff Causey wrote: > > The problem I am trying to anticipate is the business > > person who responds, "Doesn't MSO use XML files now? What about their > > new Office XML formats?" > > 1) "Doesn't MSO use XML files now?" > > No, not yet. But next version will. Microsoft Office 2003 has an XML format, (and has for 3 years). It's a different format than the one they are planning to use in the next version of MSO, but it is XML. 2) What about their new Office XML formats. > > They have the same resistance to corruption that I described for ODF > files. That's not surprising since the Office XML format is obviously Is obviously what? I don't see the rest of that sentence. Did it get cut off somehow? If you were going to say "obviously a copycat of OpenOffice.org" I'd find that ironic when you say in the same email... No reason we can't edit that list a little to make it fit OOo. We can > match and improve all of those points. > I think learning from your competition is an excellent way to grow. I mean, look at the success MS has had copying Apple. -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ Because everyone loves free software!
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Chad Smith wrote: Microsoft Office 2003 has an XML format, (and has for 3 years). It's a different format than the one they are planning to use in the next version of MSO, but it is XML. It's not the default though. And that format is dead. It won't be supported in future versions. It wasn't really more than an experiment. Is obviously what? I don't see the rest of that sentence. Did it get cut off somehow? Oops. I began writing something, then started deletting, and forgot to finish composing that sentence. The MS Office format is largely derivative of OpenDocument. I probably shouldn't say "obviously" because that's only obvious to someone familiar with the format. If you were going to say "obviously a copycat of OpenOffice.org" I'd find that ironic when you say in the same email... No reason we can't edit that list a little to make it fit OOo. We can It's not always wrong to be a copycat. The fact that MS Office's format is a copycat of OpenDocument is not wrong. Using compressed XML files is a good design decision and you shouldn't do something else just to be different (the NIH syndrome). The MS Office format would be even better if it copied more from OpenDocument. It should be a JAR archive (like ODF) and it should reuse existing standards (like ODF). In fact... I wish MS Office would copy *everything* from ODF :) I think learning from your competition is an excellent way to grow. I mean, look at the success MS has had copying Apple. /daniel can't believe he agreed with Chad on something Cheers, Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Jeff Causey wrote: I think that could be persuasive if they are willing to put their name to that and they have sufficient name recognition. Jean Hollis weber. Yes, in tech writer circles her has good recognition. Her most recent book got the highest awards in the Australia Tech Writers competition (distinction and best of show). Bruce's email should convince you. It doesn't I'm sure. According to the article I referenced by Bruce Byfield, the Navigator equivalent in Writer is the Outline View. He seemed to think Word's implementation was superior. My understanding is that they are different things. I'll let Bruce comment though. OK, I see what you are saying now. I'd probably classify that as a benefit like "easier navigation between documents" That benefit is a by-product of integration. Cheers, Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Postgres
I see that Base offers a connection to MySql. It would be really nice if a connection to Postgres was available. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 14:25 -0500, Chad Smith wrote: > On 1/18/06, Pavel Janík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >From: Chad Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:43:37 -0500 SNIP! > X11, on the other hand, does not come preinstalled, nor is it a part > of the default install of OS X. It is included on the disc, but you > have to purposefully (a) know it's there (b) know how to find it and > (c) ask for it specifically - before you get it. And you can't just > download it or install it by itself in Mac OS X 10.4 (Tiger). If you > try to download it from the Apple website, it will download, but when > you try to install it, the system tells you that you "already have > newer software installed" and doesn't give you any choice but to stop. > To install X11 on a system that is already running Tiger, you have to > *reinstall Tiger* to do it, potentially losing data and/or > preferences. No problem for me. I have done it simply and easily since 10.1 up to 10.4.4 now. > If you were to end up with a Mac OS X system that doesn't have Java - > you can easily get it through Software Update or from Apple.com. As you can for X11. > Do you use a Mac, Pavel? Do you know what I'm talking about? If not, > then it is no longer you don't understand why I said what I said. If > you've ever tried to install X11 on a Mac that already has Tiger, then > you shouldn't have to ask. Hahahahahaha!! Sorry, could not help myself there. Obviously Chad, you do not know who Pavel is or what he does for OpenOffice.org. Regards Jonathon -- OOo Tips: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au/tips.rss OOo Knowledgebase: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au Training4Linux: http://www.training4linux.com Cybersite Consulting: http://www.cybersite.com.au - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Chuck wrote: > In all seriousness, when was the last time you experienced corruption in a > compressed document? About once a week for compressed files. Usually because of transmission glitches. As far as documents go, anytime I create a document with MSo, that contains 10 000 words, I can be assured that it will be corrupt, the next time I try to open it. xn jonathon -- Ethical conduct is a vice. Corrupt conduct is a virtue. Motto of Nacarima.
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 20:57 +0100, Cor Nouws wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > Daniel Carrera wrote: > > [...] > > * Higher reliability. You're less likely to lose a document. > Good one. > > [...] > > * Includes a vector graphics application (MS Office does not). > As well. > > > * Superior integration. Open a WP file from your spread sheet. Draw an > > image on Draw and paste it on Writer. > And because of (close to) conseqent UI. > > [...] > > * Opens your old MS Office files *better* than MS Office. > Thanks! Hi Cor, I would also add to that list * Uses advanced/up-to-date technologies such as XForms and web services architecture. Regards Jonathon -- OOo Tips: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au/tips.rss OOo Knowledgebase: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au Training4Linux: http://www.training4linux.com Cybersite Consulting: http://www.cybersite.com.au - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 19:59 +, Daniel Carrera wrote: > Jeff Causey wrote: > > All that is true and sways the technical folks and power users, but I > > rather suspect for your typical business person (who is the target of > > Cor's project), you probably lost them after "An zip compressed XML > > file..." > > I don't expect a typical business person to understand the technical > details. But it is still true that OpenDocument files are much more > reliable and that's something most business people care about. One point they do understand with non-ODF/proprietary formats is that of lock-out. Explain to them what happens if they store all their files in Office97 format in 10 years. They catch on really quickly, particularly if they have been in business more than 15-20 years. > > Hmm, I've used MSO's master documents successfully for several years. > > So making a statement like that has the potential to destroy credibility > > if presented to someone who uses MSO's master documents. The question > > in my mind is, how are OO's master documents more reliable? Is there > > something about the app that makes them work better/easier to work with? > > MSO master documents get corrupted very easily. They break easily. OOo's > don't as much. Yes, I would think this relates to the integration based on the common ODF type format. > > I'll reiterate my point about styles in OO as well - MSO has the same > > capability. The one "selling point" about styles I think OO can make is > > page styles. > > Page styles matter. Does MSO have a Navigator and Stylist? Does it use > styles natively? (styles are so central to OOo you cannot avoid using > them - even when you think you're not using styles, OOo is making styles > dynamically for you) Agreed. Being able to individually define headers and footers and use them as objects compared to just "special formats" is a big advantage. > > OK, but this still does not change the point that you can copy and paste > > between the apps in MSO and OO. > > e.g. There is a "Window" menu that lists all your OOo windows > regardless of whether they are a WP, spread sheet, etc. Interesting point. Never thought of that as a feature before :) Regards Jonathon -- OOo Tips: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au/tips.rss OOo Knowledgebase: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au Training4Linux: http://www.training4linux.com Cybersite Consulting: http://www.cybersite.com.au - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On 1/18/06, Jonathon Coombes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 14:25 -0500, Chad Smith wrote: > > On 1/18/06, Pavel Janík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >From: Chad Smith < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:43:37 -0500 > SNIP! > > X11, on the other hand, does not come preinstalled, nor is it a part > > of the default install of OS X. It is included on the disc, but you > > have to purposefully (a) know it's there (b) know how to find it and > > (c) ask for it specifically - before you get it. And you can't just > > download it or install it by itself in Mac OS X 10.4 (Tiger). If you > > try to download it from the Apple website, it will download, but when > > you try to install it, the system tells you that you "already have > > newer software installed" and doesn't give you any choice but to stop. > > To install X11 on a system that is already running Tiger, you have to > > *reinstall Tiger* to do it, potentially losing data and/or > > preferences. > > No problem for me. I have done it simply and easily since 10.1 up to > 10.4.4 now. Let me try, once again, to explain. If TODAY you were to get a new Mac from Apple, with no special requests to put X11 on it, it will not run OpenOffice.org proper out of the box. It will, however, run NeoOffice. If you got the new Mac, which would have Macintosh OS X 10.4.4 on it, and visit the apple.com website, and then download the X11 they have hosted there - it will not install on Tiger. It says you have a newer version already installed. If you do, OpenOffice.org 2.0 does not recognize it. I tested this again today on the eMac I got just a few short months ago and the OpenOffice.org I downloaded today and the X11 I downloaded today. It will work on my laptop that had X11 installed when it was running 10.2, and then I upgraded to Tiger. But if you start with Tiger already installed, you cannot in any way I've been able to find, install X11 without reinstalling Tiger as well. If you have X11 "grandfathered in" from a previous version of OS X, then sure. If you have 10.2 or 10.3 - it's not that hard, easy, some would say. But starting on a Mac sold in the last year, or upgraded to Tiger without X11 being installed, you have to do it the way I've described. At least according to all the googling and asking and testing I've done. -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ Because everyone loves free software!
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 19:26 -0500, Chad Smith wrote: > On 1/18/06, Jonathon Coombes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 14:25 -0500, Chad Smith wrote: > > > On 1/18/06, Pavel Janík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >From: Chad Smith < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:43:37 -0500 > > SNIP! > > > X11, on the other hand, does not come preinstalled, nor is it a part > > > of the default install of OS X. It is included on the disc, but you > > > have to purposefully (a) know it's there (b) know how to find it and > > > (c) ask for it specifically - before you get it. And you can't just > > > download it or install it by itself in Mac OS X 10.4 (Tiger). If you > > > try to download it from the Apple website, it will download, but when > > > you try to install it, the system tells you that you "already have > > > newer software installed" and doesn't give you any choice but to stop. > > > To install X11 on a system that is already running Tiger, you have to > > > *reinstall Tiger* to do it, potentially losing data and/or > > > preferences. > > > > No problem for me. I have done it simply and easily since 10.1 up to > > 10.4.4 now. > > > Let me try, once again, to explain. OK. Let me explain again for you. > If TODAY you were to get a new Mac from Apple, with no special requests to > put X11 on it, it will not run OpenOffice.org proper out of the box. It > will, however, run NeoOffice. If you got the new Mac, which would have > Macintosh OS X 10.4.4 on it, and visit the apple.com website, and then > download the X11 they have hosted there - it will not install on Tiger. It > says you have a newer version already installed. If you do, OpenOffice.org > 2.0 does not recognize it. I tested this again today on the eMac I got just > a few short months ago and the OpenOffice.org I downloaded today and the X11 > I downloaded today. By TODAY, I assume you mean since Tiger was made available on the new Apple machines. Well, mine is less that 2 months old and came with Tiger pre-installed. I installed OOo with X11 onto it without any issue, or without having to re-install Tiger. What is the problem? OK. So you are saying if 10.4.4 is already on it, then X11 will not install. This I have not been able to verify. I take it this is what you mean, right? I don't want to test it just yet, as I have to do presentations on it in a few days in New Zealand :) > It will work on my laptop that had X11 installed when it was running 10.2, > and then I upgraded to Tiger. But if you start with Tiger already > installed, you cannot in any way I've been able to find, install X11 without > reinstalling Tiger as well. Hang on, do you mean Tiger, or do you mean 10.4.4 version of Tiger? Because I have had no problem with 10.4.3 so far. > If you have X11 "grandfathered in" from a previous version of OS X, then > sure. If you have 10.2 or 10.3 - it's not that hard, easy, some would say. > But starting on a Mac sold in the last year, or upgraded to Tiger without > X11 being installed, you have to do it the way I've described. At least > according to all the googling and asking and testing I've done. No, mine was a new install off the Tiger DVD that came with the new machine. Regards Jonathon -- OOo Tips: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au/tips.rss OOo Knowledgebase: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au Training4Linux: http://www.training4linux.com Cybersite Consulting: http://www.cybersite.com.au - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 23:09 +, Daniel Carrera wrote: > Jeff Causey wrote: > > I think that could be persuasive if they are willing to put their name > > to that and they have sufficient name recognition. > > Jean Hollis weber. Yes, in tech writer circles her has good recognition. > Her most recent book got the highest awards in the Australia Tech > Writers competition (distinction and best of show). > > Bruce's email should convince you. > > >> It doesn't I'm sure. > > > > According to the article I referenced by Bruce Byfield, the Navigator > > equivalent in Writer is the Outline View. He seemed to think Word's > > implementation was superior. > > My understanding is that they are different things. I'll let Bruce > comment though. I definitely think they are different features here. Yes, it is possible to do a type of Outline View using the Navigator in Writer (and some would think it is outclassed by MSO), but it does much more. The navigator allows the user to navigate through a document,spreadsheet or presentation and do certain tasks on certain objects as well. Regards Jonathon -- OOo Tips: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au/tips.rss OOo Knowledgebase: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au Training4Linux: http://www.training4linux.com Cybersite Consulting: http://www.cybersite.com.au - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On 1/18/06, Chad Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > If TODAY you were to get a new Mac from Apple, with no special requests to > put X11 on it, it will not run OpenOffice.org proper out of the box. It > will, however, run NeoOffice. If you got the new Mac, which would have > Macintosh OS X 10.4.4 on it, and visit the apple.com website, and then > download the X11 they have hosted there - it will not install on Tiger. It > says you have a newer version already installed. If you do, > OpenOffice.org 2.0 does not recognize it. I tested this again today on > the eMac I got just a few short months ago and the OpenOffice.org I > downloaded today and the X11 I downloaded today.\ > In case you were wondering, here's the page I got X11 from. http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/apple/x11formacosx.html Notice the note: *Note* 10.4 customers can install X11 by using the Tiger DVD installer disk. Which everytime I try to use it, it takes me to the "Install Mac OS X 10.4" setup, and I can't get out of it. I've been unable to locate the X11 installer package on the DVD by itself. The very fact that the end user has to install *ANYTHING* other than OOo when NeoOffice doesn't require anything that's not already there proves my point. This whole conversation proves my point. If it's so good to use X11, why not include the blankety-blank thing in the OOo for Mac installer and make it simple for everyone? -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ Because everyone loves free software!
Re: [discuss] Re: auto filter
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 10:18 -0500, Chuck wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Jonathon Coombes wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 13:01 -0500, Chuck wrote: > >> Karlis Erglis wrote: > It would be goot to improve AutoFilter in OO > >> CALC. Including such criteria like 'contains' or 'do not > >> contains'.Becose of this i still must use MS Excel. :( > > >> > >> I would add to that "blanks" and "non-blanks". I use these filters 10x > >> as often as any others and I suspect it's the same for many other users. > >> Currently I have to do a standard filter which is not as fast. > > > > All these can be done with the regular expressions feature, and then > > some. Have a look in the help under Calc for the regular expressions > > usage in filters and that should get you on track to seeing how > > powerful this feature is in Calc. > > > > Regards > > Jonathon > > I'm familiar with regex's but how do you specify one in an auto filter? > The drop down doesn't let you enter a regex. No, that is true, but you can choose the standard filter feature and do it through that. Regards Jonathon -- OOo Tips: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au/tips.rss OOo Knowledgebase: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au Training4Linux: http://www.training4linux.com Cybersite Consulting: http://www.cybersite.com.au - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Hi Lars, Lars D. Noodén wrote: * cross platform * supports OpenDocument natively * supports long documents better than the competition * better support for styles than competition * translated to over 80 languages In general I've found it to have better support for older versions of MS formats. (The MS spport is rather poor in that regard). It's big and slow (-), but MS Office is bigger and slower (--) and is not cross platform. Indeed a short list, as I like. And withh new items on it! Thanks & best wishes, Cor - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] New Option by closing a unsaved Document
Hello, I'm from Germany and hope you'll excuse my bad english. When you close OpenOffice the user has three options (for unsaved documents): - Save - Don't save - Cancel (I have the German version so I don't know the english meanings, I hope you know what I mean) Another usefull option could be: - See later (or so) In this case the document will be saved in a temp-folder of OpenOffice (e.g. folder where the files were saved to recover) and it will be automatically loaded with the next launch of OpenOffice (Writer/Calc/Draw). I hope you like it and include it in your work. Your sincerly, ZodiacXP from Germany In addition: With four buttons the width could be to big. My soulution is to make the close-button [X] work like the "Cancel"-Button and hide the "Cancel" button. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On 1/18/06, Jonathon Coombes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: By TODAY, I assume you mean since Tiger was made available on the new > Apple machines. Well, mine is less that 2 months old and came with Tiger > pre-installed. I installed OOo with X11 onto it without any issue, or > without having to re-install Tiger. What is the problem? My machine is about the same age, and even before I updated to 10.4.4 I was not able to install X11 from the Apple Website, and when I attempted to install X11 off the DVD, it started to reinstall Tiger. Tell me what to do, and I'll do it. > Hang on, do you mean Tiger, or do you mean 10.4.4 version of Tiger? > Because I have had no problem with 10.4.3 so far. I mean Tiger. 10.4.whatever I can't install X11 from the website at all, and I can't find it on the DVD, except as an option on the "reinstall Tiger" menu. No, mine was a new install off the Tiger DVD that came with the > new machine. > How about you tell me how to do that, please? If it's so easy. -- - Chad Smith http://www.gimpshop.net/ Because everyone loves free software!
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On Thu, 2006-19-01 at 10:57 +1100, Jonathon Coombes wrote: > > > > I'll reiterate my point about styles in OO as well - MSO has the same > > > capability. The one "selling point" about styles I think OO can make is > > > page styles. > > > > Page styles matter. Does MSO have a Navigator and Stylist? Does it use > > styles natively? (styles are so central to OOo you cannot avoid using > > them - even when you think you're not using styles, OOo is making styles > > dynamically for you) > > Agreed. Being able to individually define headers and footers and use > them as objects compared to just "special formats" is a big advantage. I've always thought it tacky to quote yourself, but I can't take the time right now to restate the argument. My article at: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7447 explains why OOo implements styles and templates more reliably than MS Word, even when the available features are otherwise broadly similar. -- Bruce Byfield 604-421.7177 Burnaby, BC, Canada http://members.axion.net/~bbyfield - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Daniel, Jean Hollis weber. Yes, in tech writer circles her has good recognition. Her most recent book got the highest awards in the Australia Tech Writers competition (distinction and best of show). Bruce's email should convince you. Thanks. I actually don't need convincing as I know that my successful experience with MSO master documents is the exception rather than the rule. My point is to help put some "meat" to the argument that MSO's master documents are poorly implemented and OO's are much better (and actually can be used by the majority of users). I forgot to mention it in my last e-mail, but your comments about Boeing and their need for a stable document format could be used for marketing purposes effectively. Your expression "a lot of complex documents that must retain full precision for a long time" is something I think the lay reader would understand as far as the benefits of an XML based schema for files. Jeff Causey
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On Wed, 2006-18-01 at 21:52 +, Daniel Carrera wrote: > >> MSO master documents get corrupted very easily. They break easily. > >> OOo's don't as much. > > > > Do you have any data to back up your opinion that MSO master documents > > get corrupted or break easily? > > Expert opinion from a technical editor of 30 years. If anybody doubts the problems with MSO master documents: - Go to the Techwriters' list archives at www.techwr-l.com and search for "master documents." Technical writers are exactly the sorts of users who use master documents if they can, but, aside from one or two exceptions, the overwhelming consensus on the list (which consists of over 5000 people, most of them professionals) is that master documents should be avoided on MS Word. Instead, techwriters nurse along massive documents with every trick that they can. These documents are prone to crash, yet even that risk is safer than using master documents. - if that's not enough, go to: http://word.mvps.org/FAQs/General/WhyMasterDocsCorrupt.htm This site is dedicated to helping users get the most out of MSO. Most of the contents, including this page, are written by Microsoft MVPs (Most Valuable Professionals), people designated by Microsoft as experts with the backgrounds to help others. In other words, it is a pro-Microsoft site, maintained and written by people who have volunteered to help Microsoft and its users. Yet MSO master documents are so notoriously untrustworthy that even this site urges people to avoid them. Basically, the only way to keep MSO master documents from corrupting is to use them so carefully and so sparingly that you cancel out all advantages. Finally, a personal perspective: Having worked on dozens of documents varying from 100-1000 pages, I can personally vouch for the continued unreliability of MSO master documents for over a decade. I have used OOo master documents for four years, and rarely had a problem. In early versions, I had a couple of crashes, but, unlike the case in MS Word, I never lost files as a result. In short, anyone who persists in denying the instability of MSO master documents is going against the cumulative experience of thousands of users for over fifteen years. The problems are too well-documented to argue against unless you suffer from a streak of perversity. -- Bruce Byfield 604-421.7177 Burnaby, BC, Canada http://members.axion.net/~bbyfield - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 20:01 -0500, Chad Smith wrote: > On 1/18/06, Jonathon Coombes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > By TODAY, I assume you mean since Tiger was made available on the new > > Apple machines. Well, mine is less that 2 months old and came with Tiger > > pre-installed. I installed OOo with X11 onto it without any issue, or > > without having to re-install Tiger. What is the problem? > > > My machine is about the same age, and even before I updated to 10.4.4 I was > not able to install X11 from the Apple Website, and when I attempted to > install X11 off the DVD, it started to reinstall Tiger. Tell me what to do, > and I'll do it. I don't remember having that issue? I think it was just a matter of installing the developers tools, or a part of that from memory. I do not have it with me at the moment to verify that. However, I will let you know as I can. > > Hang on, do you mean Tiger, or do you mean 10.4.4 version of Tiger? > > Because I have had no problem with 10.4.3 so far. > > I mean Tiger. 10.4.whatever > > I can't install X11 from the website at all, and I can't find it on the DVD, > except as an option on the "reinstall Tiger" menu. H Seems odd considering I had no problem. I though initially it may be a corrupt DVD, but it seems more like an install option you are missing, but I don't remember having to choose anything special. Regards Jonathon -- OOo Tips: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au/tips.rss OOo Knowledgebase: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au Training4Linux: http://www.training4linux.com Cybersite Consulting: http://www.cybersite.com.au - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Daniel, Do you have any data to back up your opinion that MSO master documents get corrupted or break easily? Expert opinion from a technical editor of 30 years. I think that could be persuasive if they are willing to put their name to that and they have sufficient name recognition. IIRC, MSO does not have the equivalent of the Navigator. But then, I don't use it in OO either. It doesn't I'm sure. According to the article I referenced by Bruce Byfield, the Navigator equivalent in Writer is the Outline View. He seemed to think Word's implementation was superior. As I indicated, I haven't really used Navigator, so I spent a few minutes just tinkering around to get a feel for it. My initial impression is that it is much more powerful barring what Byfield described as the limitations for "dedicated outliners" (which I am not). If Navigator were to be included in a list of pros for OO, I'd suggest it be listed somehow to describe what it can do that Word's Outline View can't do vs. just listing "Navigator" as the pro. As for the Stylist, I think the equivalent would be the task pane showing styles in MS Word. That doesn't show you character, frame, page and list styles. From my understanding of what a "task pane" is, I'm not sure it has all the other features that the Stylist has. Everyone has identified the ability to have "page" styles as a benefit of Writer. Perhaps character, frame and list should be added? I think the hierarchical view is a strength of OO as well. On the negative side, OO does not display the different styles in the window ala Word. I'd suggest the item be listed as "Better support for styles" or "Easier use of styles" (or something similar) with some of these other sub-items then listed. I'm sorry Daniel, but you've lost me. Look at your OOo window. Look at the menu bar at the top. There is a menu called "Window". Click on it and see what's in it. OK, I see what you are saying now. I'd probably classify that as a benefit like "easier navigation between documents" (similar to someone's comment elsewhere in the thread about the single button that let's you create a new document of any type no matter which app you happen to be in). Perhaps both of those items could be used to support a benefit like "a true suite instead of a collection of applications put together". Jeff Causey
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Bruce Byfield wrote: Finally, a personal perspective: Having worked on dozens of documents varying from 100-1000 pages, I can personally vouch for the continued unreliability of MSO master documents for over a decade. I have used OOo master documents for four years, and rarely had a problem. In early versions, I had a couple of crashes, but, unlike the case in MS Word, I never lost files as a result. That's related to another OOo pro: crash recovery - if needed - nearly always is succesful. Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] calc numbers issue urgent
Dear Friends, I have a slight emergency, as I am due in court friday, and the issue is as follows; in calc, oo version 2.0.0-1 if I enter a number with a decimal point to add up dollars and cents, the cell reads '###". If I use a dollar sign in front, the number appears, but the sum function does not work. I I use a comma instead of the decimal point, the number appears, but again I cannot add the columns up. What is wrong? I apologise for the hasty need, but, in effect, the old version was no problem with this issue. I presume the programme will allow me to add numbers with decimal points, or dollar signs, irrespective of my locale which is en_gb UTF8, as I use english spelling. This should not be that complicated, as I used to be able to use calc to do just about anything. Thanks and best wishes, martin best, M - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] calc numbers issue urgent
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 22:48 -0500, my wrote: > Dear Friends, > > I have a slight emergency, as I am due in court friday, and the issue is > as follows; > > in calc, oo version 2.0.0-1 if I enter a number with a decimal point to > add up dollars and cents, the cell reads '###". This usually just means that the cell is not wide enough to display the value inside. Try making the column a bit wider and see if this fixes the problem. > If I use a dollar sign in front, the number appears, but the sum function > does not work. Sounds like it is defaulting to text format then. > I I use a comma instead of the decimal point, the number appears, but > again I cannot add the columns up. Ditto here for text. > What is wrong? Try and select the area you are having trouble with and then do a Format -> Default Format or something similar. Then do a Format -> Cells (or Column if appropriate) and define the format you require (presumably currency of some form). Then try your numbers again without the dollar sign. Regards Jonathon -- OOo Tips: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au/tips.rss OOo Knowledgebase: http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au Training4Linux: http://www.training4linux.com Cybersite Consulting: http://www.cybersite.com.au - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: calc numbers issue urgent
Dear Jonathan, Thank you very much for your kind and prompt reply. Simply following your advice and selecting all, then default format allowed me to use the decimal point and add the columns. Your help is most appreciated, as it never occurred to me that it could be something so mundane as the formatting. (I thought I could use a larger bolder font to save eye strain - my bad.) Sincerely, Martin On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:56:42 +1100, Jonathon Coombes wrote: > On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 22:48 -0500, my wrote: >> Dear Friends, >> >> I have a slight emergency, as I am due in court friday, and the issue is >> as follows; >> >> in calc, oo version 2.0.0-1 if I enter a number with a decimal point to >> add up dollars and cents, the cell reads '###". > > This usually just means that the cell is not wide enough to > display the value inside. Try making the column a bit wider > and see if this fixes the problem. > >> If I use a dollar sign in front, the number appears, but the sum function >> does not work. > > Sounds like it is defaulting to text format then. > >> I I use a comma instead of the decimal point, the number appears, but >> again I cannot add the columns up. > > Ditto here for text. > >> What is wrong? > > Try and select the area you are having trouble with and then do a > Format -> Default Format or something similar. Then do a Format -> > Cells (or Column if appropriate) and define the format you require > (presumably currency of some form). Then try your numbers again > without the dollar sign. > > Regards > Jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Postgres
It does, have a look at http://dba.openoffice.org On 1/18/06, Robert Finlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I see that Base offers a connection to MySql. It would be really nice if > a connection to Postgres was available. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Alexandro Colorado
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
On 18 Jan 2006 at 19:31, Chad Smith wrote: > In case you were wondering, here's the page I got X11 from. > > http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/apple/x11formacosx.html > > Notice the note: > > *Note* 10.4 customers can install X11 by using the Tiger DVD installer > disk. > > Which everytime I try to use it, it takes me to the "Install Mac OS X 10.4" > setup, and I can't get out of it. I've been unable to locate the X11 > installer package on the DVD by itself. > > The very fact that the end user has to install *ANYTHING* other than OOo > when NeoOffice doesn't require anything that's not already there proves my > point. This whole conversation proves my point. If it's so good to use > X11, why not include the blankety-blank thing in the OOo for Mac installer > and make it simple for everyone? > I am not a Mac owner but I will be soon. Since I want the latest version of OOo that means using X11. I found this on the Apple site. It may solve your problem. http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=301229 More custom reinstallation options with Mac OS X 10.4 Want to reinstall a part of Mac OS X 10.4 after it's already installed? It's easy! 1. Insert your Mac OS X 10.4 Install disc. 2. Double-click the "Optional Installs.mpkg." 3. After the installer opens, you can choose from the following custom install options: 4. You can expand each section (except Additional Fonts) by clicking the disclosure triangle to the left of the section name, if you want even more specific custom install options. Once you've selected the items, simply click OK, then click Install. Here's a complete list of all the custom installation options available with Optional Installs.mpkg: * Applications o Address Book 4.0 o iCal 2.0 o iChat 3.0 o iTunes 4.7.1 o Mail 2.0 o Oxford Dictionaries o Safari 2.0 o X11 --clip-- There are screenshots on the web page showing the options. It looks simple to me although I have not done it yet. -- Larry I. Gusaas, Moose Jaw, Sask. http://larry-gusaas.com --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 0603-3, 01/18/2006 Tested on: 1/18/2006 10:52:26 PM avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] New email address added to your PayPal account
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 04:18:29 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a hoax, don't anyone be fooled. Could someone unsub this email address. BTW does this redirect anyone to the hidden web page? Intenet explorer users perhaps. -- Michael Those that can, do; those that can't, teach. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Daniel Carrera wrote: This is part of why Boeing was active in developing the OpenDocument format. They have a lot of complex documents that must retain full precision for a long time (the specs for a 747 would not fit on seven 747s). Good point for my list! Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Jonathon Coombes wrote: On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 23:09 +, Daniel Carrera wrote: Jeff Causey wrote: According to the article I referenced by Bruce Byfield, the Navigator equivalent in Writer is the Outline View. He seemed to think Word's implementation was superior. My understanding is that they are different things. I'll let Bruce comment though. I definitely think they are different features here. Yes, it is possible to do a type of Outline View using the Navigator in Writer (and some would think it is outclassed by MSO), but it does much more. The navigator allows the user to navigate through a document,spreadsheet or presentation and do certain tasks on certain objects as well. I'm not with Bruce on the point of the Navigator. Look what you can do using different docs, linking, copying, the possibilities in Calc etc etc. Navigator is a very important part in trainings I give. Regards, Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Short list with Pro's & Cons
Hi Jonathon, Jonathon Coombes wrote: I would also add to that list * Uses advanced/up-to-date technologies such as XForms and web services architecture. I know XForms do not excist in MsO. And that XForms have much to do with web services architecture. Do you or does anyone else know how I have to weigth this point in comparing with MsO? Thanks, Cor -- - - - - - - - - - - -Cor Nouws- - www.nouenoff.nl - - - - - OOo - - - - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
