Re: [discuss] Re: OOo Icons
Drew Jensen wrote: Quick warning it's a Sunday email and I ramble a bit... On 09/26/2010 07:46 AM, Christoph Noack wrote: Hi everyone! Am Samstag, den 25.09.2010, 22:21 -0600 schrieb Larry Gusaas: On 2010/09/25 9:16 PM Harold Fuchs wrote: Ah. OK Now I see, thanks. The icon for each type of *document* - text, spreadsheet, presentation etc. Yes, I agree. That's very poor and should be changed. Has someone filed an issue? What Issue Number? - I'll vote for it. Issue #112141. Currently 240 votes for it. The new icons were imposed on us by the ODF cabal and Oracle despite protests and lack of proper community input. Despite protests the decision has not been changed. It seems to be a political decision beyond the control of the developers or the community. So much for the fiction that OOo is a community driven project. Without being able to add something substantial at the moment; there is also a request to the OpenOffice.org Community Council to discuss this issue. Besides the issue, it might help to know more about the involved parties. In the agenda table, please scroll down to 2010-04-29#2. The page: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Agenda Bye, Christoph Hi Chris, I've pretty much avoided this whole conversation, the color in icon part of it anyway, but a good time to jump in and yes hijack this thread perhaps. I say hijack because, IMO, the root cause of the longevity and the evolving tenor of this issue is not monochromatic icons. Nor is it the absurd amount of time it's taking to all nod in agreement on a logo and it's uses, or the broader question of Branding. However, Branding may be the term that gets closest to the actual, IMO, issues at play. OpenOffice.org is FOSS - by definition then there is always the option for members of the project to fork to another. There is in the end nothing the parent project can do about it, short of keeping folks in such a mind that they choose not to do so. If however some segment of the project members do choose to do so, there really isn't any way to stop them. What the parent project can do is control copyrighted materials - the branding. Sun had, it appears, a rather liberal policy, by action perhaps more then stated policy, when it came to who could do what with these branding items. Which can be stated another way - they did very little to defend their copyright claims with regards to OpenOffice.org branding elements. I recall that one of the first discussions I joined on an OO.o mailing list was in regards to vendors on the internet selling download links for OpenOffice.org binaries - pretty much a straight off scam, if nothing else a totally un-ethical business. Time wise that was somewhere in late 2004, early 2005. I will not make a long story out of this point, as most reading here already know it. When however did the owner of the project finally get around to enforcing the copyrights - just before the Oracle buy out. Do you not think this was Oracle insisting that Sun actually get about doing their fiduciary responsibility with regards to the item for sale, OpenOffice.org. Of course it was, IMO. A good thing for the common person, sure, the driving reason for the action, less certain. I think that of more concern to Oracle were the members of the OpenOffice.org community already developing and supporting shallow forks of the code. Those that used not only the code but the branding elements also, being of most concern, yet not exclusive of those with much different branding. Right here I want to say one thing - there is nothing in any of that which is inappropriate from the perspective of any organization looking to acquire the assets of another. Now, to expand a little and more conjecture on my part - there was another process in play. The realization by many that the real benefits of what started 10 years ago, perhaps the longest term benefits, will be realized not by having a binary copy of OpenOffice.org 5 on 51% of the desktops in the world, 10 years hence. Rather it would be more important to have 51% of all documents created 10 years form now in an open standard format. I think they are right. That doesn't mean that I don't want to also see 51% of the desktops with OpenOffice.org, I do, and I believe that was (is) true for the group of individuals who proposed the idea of a more universal iconography for ODF mime types. The problem here is that to do this right would take a lot of interaction with other projects and that means a lot of time. Remember though that in the discussions, particularly on the UX mailing lists, the term 'urgency' was used a number of times. At one point someone even said (paraphrasing here) that if you knew what I know as a way to enhance this need for swift action in making the changes. Why this urgency. My *guess* - a response to Oracle's assertiveness and the realization perhaps that Oracle was not
Re: [discuss] Re: OOo Icons
Hi everyone! Am Samstag, den 25.09.2010, 22:21 -0600 schrieb Larry Gusaas: On 2010/09/25 9:16 PM Harold Fuchs wrote: Ah. OK Now I see, thanks. The icon for each type of *document* - text, spreadsheet, presentation etc. Yes, I agree. That's very poor and should be changed. Has someone filed an issue? What Issue Number? - I'll vote for it. Issue #112141. Currently 240 votes for it. The new icons were imposed on us by the ODF cabal and Oracle despite protests and lack of proper community input. Despite protests the decision has not been changed. It seems to be a political decision beyond the control of the developers or the community. So much for the fiction that OOo is a community driven project. Without being able to add something substantial at the moment; there is also a request to the OpenOffice.org Community Council to discuss this issue. Besides the issue, it might help to know more about the involved parties. In the agenda table, please scroll down to 2010-04-29#2. The page: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Agenda Bye, Christoph - To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-h...@openoffice.org
Re: [discuss] Re: OOo Icons
On 09/26/2010 04:21 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote: So much for the fiction that OOo is a community driven project. OOo has _NEVER_been a community driven project. It has always been nothing more than propaganda stunt by Sun. Sun never grokked FLOSS. Oracle has never been FLOSS friendly, and is now bound and determined to become the poster child of corporate hostility towards FLOSS. jonathon -- No human will see non-list, non-bulk, non-junk email sent to this address. It all gets forwarded to /dev/null signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [discuss] Re: OOo Icons
jonathon wrote: On 09/26/2010 04:21 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote: So much for the fiction that OOo is a community driven project. OOo has _NEVER_been a community driven project. It has always been nothing more than propaganda stunt by Sun. Sun never grokked FLOSS. Oracle has never been FLOSS friendly, and is now bound and determined to become the poster child of corporate hostility towards FLOSS. jonathon If all this is true, why not simply fork OOo and take it away from the corporate world. Re name it FLOSS office, and perhaps even stipulate that corporate sponsorship is welcome only if it does not include an intention to control the direction of development.
Re: [discuss] Re: OOo Icons
Quick warning it's a Sunday email and I ramble a bit... On 09/26/2010 07:46 AM, Christoph Noack wrote: Hi everyone! Am Samstag, den 25.09.2010, 22:21 -0600 schrieb Larry Gusaas: On 2010/09/25 9:16 PM Harold Fuchs wrote: Ah. OK Now I see, thanks. The icon for each type of *document* - text, spreadsheet, presentation etc. Yes, I agree. That's very poor and should be changed. Has someone filed an issue? What Issue Number? - I'll vote for it. Issue #112141. Currently 240 votes for it. The new icons were imposed on us by the ODF cabal and Oracle despite protests and lack of proper community input. Despite protests the decision has not been changed. It seems to be a political decision beyond the control of the developers or the community. So much for the fiction that OOo is a community driven project. Without being able to add something substantial at the moment; there is also a request to the OpenOffice.org Community Council to discuss this issue. Besides the issue, it might help to know more about the involved parties. In the agenda table, please scroll down to 2010-04-29#2. The page: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Agenda Bye, Christoph Hi Chris, I've pretty much avoided this whole conversation, the color in icon part of it anyway, but a good time to jump in and yes hijack this thread perhaps. I say hijack because, IMO, the root cause of the longevity and the evolving tenor of this issue is not monochromatic icons. Nor is it the absurd amount of time it's taking to all nod in agreement on a logo and it's uses, or the broader question of Branding. However, Branding may be the term that gets closest to the actual, IMO, issues at play. OpenOffice.org is FOSS - by definition then there is always the option for members of the project to fork to another. There is in the end nothing the parent project can do about it, short of keeping folks in such a mind that they choose not to do so. If however some segment of the project members do choose to do so, there really isn't any way to stop them. What the parent project can do is control copyrighted materials - the branding. Sun had, it appears, a rather liberal policy, by action perhaps more then stated policy, when it came to who could do what with these branding items. Which can be stated another way - they did very little to defend their copyright claims with regards to OpenOffice.org branding elements. I recall that one of the first discussions I joined on an OO.o mailing list was in regards to vendors on the internet selling download links for OpenOffice.org binaries - pretty much a straight off scam, if nothing else a totally un-ethical business. Time wise that was somewhere in late 2004, early 2005. I will not make a long story out of this point, as most reading here already know it. When however did the owner of the project finally get around to enforcing the copyrights - just before the Oracle buy out. Do you not think this was Oracle insisting that Sun actually get about doing their fiduciary responsibility with regards to the item for sale, OpenOffice.org. Of course it was, IMO. A good thing for the common person, sure, the driving reason for the action, less certain. I think that of more concern to Oracle were the members of the OpenOffice.org community already developing and supporting shallow forks of the code. Those that used not only the code but the branding elements also, being of most concern, yet not exclusive of those with much different branding. Right here I want to say one thing - there is nothing in any of that which is inappropriate from the perspective of any organization looking to acquire the assets of another. Now, to expand a little and more conjecture on my part - there was another process in play. The realization by many that the real benefits of what started 10 years ago, perhaps the longest term benefits, will be realized not by having a binary copy of OpenOffice.org 5 on 51% of the desktops in the world, 10 years hence. Rather it would be more important to have 51% of all documents created 10 years form now in an open standard format. I think they are right. That doesn't mean that I don't want to also see 51% of the desktops with OpenOffice.org, I do, and I believe that was (is) true for the group of individuals who proposed the idea of a more universal iconography for ODF mime types. The problem here is that to do this right would take a lot of interaction with other projects and that means a lot of time. Remember though that in the discussions, particularly on the UX mailing lists, the term 'urgency' was used a number of times. At one point someone even said (paraphrasing here) that if you knew what I know as a way to enhance this need for swift action in making the changes. Why this urgency. My *guess* - a response to Oracle's assertiveness and the realization perhaps that Oracle was not viewing OpenOffice.org
Re: [discuss] Re: OOo Icons
Drew Jensen wrote: Quick warning it's a Sunday email and I ramble a bit... On 09/26/2010 07:46 AM, Christoph Noack wrote: Hi everyone! Am Samstag, den 25.09.2010, 22:21 -0600 schrieb Larry Gusaas: On 2010/09/25 9:16 PM Harold Fuchs wrote: Ah. OK Now I see, thanks. The icon for each type of *document* - text, spreadsheet, presentation etc. Yes, I agree. That's very poor and should be changed. Has someone filed an issue? What Issue Number? - I'll vote for it. Issue #112141. Currently 240 votes for it. The new icons were imposed on us by the ODF cabal and Oracle despite protests and lack of proper community input. Despite protests the decision has not been changed. It seems to be a political decision beyond the control of the developers or the community. So much for the fiction that OOo is a community driven project. Without being able to add something substantial at the moment; there is also a request to the OpenOffice.org Community Council to discuss this issue. Besides the issue, it might help to know more about the involved parties. In the agenda table, please scroll down to 2010-04-29#2. The page: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Agenda Bye, Christoph Hi Chris, I've pretty much avoided this whole conversation, the color in icon part of it anyway, but a good time to jump in and yes hijack this thread perhaps. I say hijack because, IMO, the root cause of the longevity and the evolving tenor of this issue is not monochromatic icons. Nor is it the absurd amount of time it's taking to all nod in agreement on a logo and it's uses, or the broader question of Branding. However, Branding may be the term that gets closest to the actual, IMO, issues at play. OpenOffice.org is FOSS - by definition then there is always the option for members of the project to fork to another. There is in the end nothing the parent project can do about it, short of keeping folks in such a mind that they choose not to do so. If however some segment of the project members do choose to do so, there really isn't any way to stop them. What the parent project can do is control copyrighted materials - the branding. Sun had, it appears, a rather liberal policy, by action perhaps more then stated policy, when it came to who could do what with these branding items. Which can be stated another way - they did very little to defend their copyright claims with regards to OpenOffice.org branding elements. I recall that one of the first discussions I joined on an OO.o mailing list was in regards to vendors on the internet selling download links for OpenOffice.org binaries - pretty much a straight off scam, if nothing else a totally un-ethical business. Time wise that was somewhere in late 2004, early 2005. I will not make a long story out of this point, as most reading here already know it. When however did the owner of the project finally get around to enforcing the copyrights - just before the Oracle buy out. Do you not think this was Oracle insisting that Sun actually get about doing their fiduciary responsibility with regards to the item for sale, OpenOffice.org. Of course it was, IMO. A good thing for the common person, sure, the driving reason for the action, less certain. I think that of more concern to Oracle were the members of the OpenOffice.org community already developing and supporting shallow forks of the code. Those that used not only the code but the branding elements also, being of most concern, yet not exclusive of those with much different branding. Right here I want to say one thing - there is nothing in any of that which is inappropriate from the perspective of any organization looking to acquire the assets of another. text section cut OpenWorld is over - Oracle Cloud Office has been revealed and is TTBOMK a proprietary software application, built with proprietary tools, specifically JavaFX. The Sun folks in Hamburg and the Oracle staff had to know that if this was to be the Oracle plan that it would test the strength of the bonds within the OpenOffice.org community. Here I do not mean only those, like myself, acting as individuals, but that it would stress the bonds with the different commercial vendors and non-profit organizations that make up the bulk of the community. The last word, as found in the referenced Community Council minutes above, is that some modification to the icons, for UX reason, would begin - that this will now include the wider community, but with limits. OK, actually that's fair enough. I would suppose that given the covers are finally off the new Oracle product the time to openly discuss, in detail, the future of the current OpenOffice.org code line is also finally here. Icons included.. Best wishes to all those that read this, those I know personally and those for whom I have not yet had the pleasure, Drew I could very well be wrong in this, but I think that Oracle could without
Re: [discuss] Re: OOo Icons
On 09/26/2010 03:13 PM, Robert Derman wrote: why not simply fork OOo and take it away from the corporate world. What makes you think that a group has not already started that process? jonathon -- No human will see non-list, non-bulk, non-junk email sent to this address. It all gets forwarded to /dev/null signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [discuss] Re: OOo Icons
Sir, I have downloaded OOo 3.1. I am not able to open the files saved under OOO2.3A message appears saying MS Visual C++ Runtimr Library-C/programfiles/openofficeorg3/program/soffice.bin This application has requested the Runtime to terminate it in an unusual way. Kindly tell me what to do and how I can open my files. Thanks, Regards, Sam On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Harold Fuchs hwfa.gmanen...@googlemail.com wrote: Barbara Duprey b...@onr.com wrote in message news:4c9e116a.8070...@onr.com... On 9/25/2010 3:14 AM, Harold Fuchs wrote: Gentlepeople, In us...@openoffice.org Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org said, about OOo 3.2's icons: === begin quote === Obviously someone on the OOo development team simply doesn't care how badly they screw things up for users (as evidenced by the brain-dead decision to switch from colored icons to greyscale)... === end quote === I have the latest (3.2.1, is that the latest?) OOo on Vista Home Premium and on Win XP Pro. The icons are *not* greyscale, they are coloured. What am I missing, please. As I understand it, the icons in question are those that represent the OOo component (that is, those for Writer, Calc, etc.) -- not the ones in toolbars, for example. What do you see for these? Not sure what you mean; I only have the Quickstarter in my System Tray and do everything from there. Ah. If I create a shortcut on my desktop for, say, Writer then that shortcut has an icon that is blue, white and grey. The icon is two circles. The larger is for Writer as opposed to Calc or Impress or It is grey and white. The other, smaller circle partly overlaps the larger at about 10 o'clock. It represents OOo (two birds) and is blue and white. The Calc shortcut has the same smaller circle as Writer's but a different larger one although that too is grey and white. Is this what the debate is about? -- Harold Fuchs London, England - To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-h...@openoffice.org -- SAM
Re: [discuss] Re: OOo Icons
On 9/25/2010 12:02 PM, Harold Fuchs wrote: Barbara Duprey b...@onr.com wrote in message news:4c9e116a.8070...@onr.com... On 9/25/2010 3:14 AM, Harold Fuchs wrote: Gentlepeople, In us...@openoffice.org Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org said, about OOo 3.2's icons: === begin quote === Obviously someone on the OOo development team simply doesn't care how badly they screw things up for users (as evidenced by the brain-dead decision to switch from colored icons to greyscale)... === end quote === I have the latest (3.2.1, is that the latest?) OOo on Vista Home Premium and on Win XP Pro. The icons are *not* greyscale, they are coloured. What am I missing, please. As I understand it, the icons in question are those that represent the OOo component (that is, those for Writer, Calc, etc.) -- not the ones in toolbars, for example. What do you see for these? Not sure what you mean; I only have the Quickstarter in my System Tray and do everything from there. Ah. If I create a shortcut on my desktop for, say, Writer then that shortcut has an icon that is blue, white and grey. The icon is two circles. The larger is for Writer as opposed to Calc or Impress or It is grey and white. The other, smaller circle partly overlaps the larger at about 10 o'clock. It represents OOo (two birds) and is blue and white. The Calc shortcut has the same smaller circle as Writer's but a different larger one although that too is grey and white. Is this what the debate is about? Yes, I think so. Part of the discussion has been about readily identifying individual documents on the desktop or in folders with mixed content. They used to be easily differentiated by color, but now they all look very similar. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: discuss-h...@openoffice.org
