Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 6/6/12 4:17 AM, Shenfeng Liu wrote: As I remember, it is the 2nd customer complaint we got on this issue. And some of us (e.g. Jihui) has confirmed it. If that's the case, my question is do we have a defect id to trace it? If no, let's create one. And I will suggest it as 3.4.1 must fix. an issue is good but we should be careful and should define a potential new default in detail. How exactly we want define the new default, having 2 complaints is not much compared to thousand of Windows users. I don't say that we shouldn't change it but we should be clear of what we are doing. We can't change things every time when 1 single person don't like the default. Juergen 2012/6/6 Andrew Douglas Pitonyak and...@pitonyak.org Now that would be hilarious if that were the problem. Well, I am not calling him back to ask him what file extension, I spent about an hour chatting with him. I do not have time for a repeat. On 06/05/2012 03:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: It seems that Windows 7 Wordpad will also open for an ODT file if no Microsoft Office or *Office[.org] application has claimed the default. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mckenna@comcast.**netkeith.mcke...@comcast.net ] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 05:34 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: On 06/04/2012 11:07 AM, Phillip Rhodes wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: . In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type. I'd say In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type which is already associated with another program. That is, we shouldn't steal file associations. If, OTOH, someone is installing AOO on a box without MS Office, then it makes perfect sense to make AOO the default program for .doc, .ppt, etc. Likewise, most people probably don't have a native ODF program on their systems, and installing AOO as the default for ODF would probably make sense in most cases. Phil Claim is that it hijacked files from word pad. No idea what that extension might be, i did not ask him. the default extension for wordpad is rtf and AOO does appear to define itself as the default for that extension. regards Keith -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/**AndrewMacro.odthttp://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
Juergen, Agree with you! My personal opinion is that it must be an explicit place for user to choose the file association, in installer, or option dialog... Well, we need UX experts here... - Simon 2012/6/6 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com On 6/6/12 4:17 AM, Shenfeng Liu wrote: As I remember, it is the 2nd customer complaint we got on this issue. And some of us (e.g. Jihui) has confirmed it. If that's the case, my question is do we have a defect id to trace it? If no, let's create one. And I will suggest it as 3.4.1 must fix. an issue is good but we should be careful and should define a potential new default in detail. How exactly we want define the new default, having 2 complaints is not much compared to thousand of Windows users. I don't say that we shouldn't change it but we should be clear of what we are doing. We can't change things every time when 1 single person don't like the default. Juergen 2012/6/6 Andrew Douglas Pitonyak and...@pitonyak.org Now that would be hilarious if that were the problem. Well, I am not calling him back to ask him what file extension, I spent about an hour chatting with him. I do not have time for a repeat. On 06/05/2012 03:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: It seems that Windows 7 Wordpad will also open for an ODT file if no Microsoft Office or *Office[.org] application has claimed the default. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mckenna@comcast.**net keith.mcke...@comcast.net ] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 05:34 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: On 06/04/2012 11:07 AM, Phillip Rhodes wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: . In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type. I'd say In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type which is already associated with another program. That is, we shouldn't steal file associations. If, OTOH, someone is installing AOO on a box without MS Office, then it makes perfect sense to make AOO the default program for .doc, .ppt, etc. Likewise, most people probably don't have a native ODF program on their systems, and installing AOO as the default for ODF would probably make sense in most cases. Phil Claim is that it hijacked files from word pad. No idea what that extension might be, i did not ask him. the default extension for wordpad is rtf and AOO does appear to define itself as the default for that extension. regards Keith -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/**AndrewMacro.odt http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
Am 06.06.2012 10:33, schrieb Shenfeng Liu: Juergen, Agree with you! My personal opinion is that it must be an explicit place for user to choose the file association, in installer, or option dialog... Well, we need UX experts here... We should be aware that file association written by the Options dialog won't be removed by the setup. The setup doesn't know the registry keys written by the application. Groetjes, Olaf - Simon 2012/6/6 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com On 6/6/12 4:17 AM, Shenfeng Liu wrote: As I remember, it is the 2nd customer complaint we got on this issue. And some of us (e.g. Jihui) has confirmed it. If that's the case, my question is do we have a defect id to trace it? If no, let's create one. And I will suggest it as 3.4.1 must fix. an issue is good but we should be careful and should define a potential new default in detail. How exactly we want define the new default, having 2 complaints is not much compared to thousand of Windows users. I don't say that we shouldn't change it but we should be clear of what we are doing. We can't change things every time when 1 single person don't like the default. Juergen
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
One more question is: what's the behavior in 3.3? In my desktop, doc was auto-associated to AOO 3.4, but not ppt or xls. It does not look like an intentional design. If it is just a regression, I will suggest to simply rolling back to 3.3 for now. - Simon 发自我的 iPhone 在 2012-6-6，17:07，O.Felka olaf-openoff...@gmx.de 写道： Am 06.06.2012 10:33, schrieb Shenfeng Liu: Juergen, Agree with you! My personal opinion is that it must be an explicit place for user to choose the file association, in installer, or option dialog... Well, we need UX experts here... We should be aware that file association written by the Options dialog won't be removed by the setup. The setup doesn't know the registry keys written by the application. Groetjes, Olaf - Simon 2012/6/6 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com On 6/6/12 4:17 AM, Shenfeng Liu wrote: As I remember, it is the 2nd customer complaint we got on this issue. And some of us (e.g. Jihui) has confirmed it. If that's the case, my question is do we have a defect id to trace it? If no, let's create one. And I will suggest it as 3.4.1 must fix. an issue is good but we should be careful and should define a potential new default in detail. How exactly we want define the new default, having 2 complaints is not much compared to thousand of Windows users. I don't say that we shouldn't change it but we should be clear of what we are doing. We can't change things every time when 1 single person don't like the default. Juergen
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
For most of our customers, how computers work inside is magic... they do not want to know how it works. Entering into a setup page is a crazy thing to do, the computer will surely break down. For them, if double clicking in the file does not go to where it went yesterday, what is broken is the application (you broke my MS Word, it does not work any more). They do not know any other way to access that application. In migration processes, you have to install the new applications and then manage the change process. Forcing change from one day to the next might fully break the process and the migration will fail because the new application will be rejected by users who have not yet been trained. In my opinion AOO needs to have (even for legal reason, maybe) the user click on something that says that they accept the associations (or not) as it used to have. For silent installation, there should be an option to do it or not. I think that the idea of allowing the change from the application itself is very good. Users like to use the application... not mess up with the system. Cheers, Javier On 6/6/12 7:07 PM, Shenfeng Liu wrote: One more question is: what's the behavior in 3.3? In my desktop, doc was auto-associated to AOO 3.4, but not ppt or xls. It does not look like an intentional design. If it is just a regression, I will suggest to simply rolling back to 3.3 for now. - Simon 发自我的 iPhone 在 2012-6-6，17:07，O.Felkaolaf-openoff...@gmx.de 写道： Am 06.06.2012 10:33, schrieb Shenfeng Liu: Juergen, Agree with you! My personal opinion is that it must be an explicit place for user to choose the file association, in installer, or option dialog... Well, we need UX experts here... We should be aware that file association written by the Options dialog won't be removed by the setup. The setup doesn't know the registry keys written by the application. Groetjes, Olaf - Simon 2012/6/6 Jürgen Schmidtjogischm...@googlemail.com On 6/6/12 4:17 AM, Shenfeng Liu wrote: As I remember, it is the 2nd customer complaint we got on this issue. And some of us (e.g. Jihui) has confirmed it. If that's the case, my question is do we have a defect id to trace it? If no, let's create one. And I will suggest it as 3.4.1 must fix. an issue is good but we should be careful and should define a potential new default in detail. How exactly we want define the new default, having 2 complaints is not much compared to thousand of Windows users. I don't say that we shouldn't change it but we should be clear of what we are doing. We can't change things every time when 1 single person don't like the default. Juergen
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: On 06/04/2012 11:07 AM, Phillip Rhodes wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: . In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type. I'd say In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type which is already associated with another program. That is, we shouldn't steal file associations. If, OTOH, someone is installing AOO on a box without MS Office, then it makes perfect sense to make AOO the default program for .doc, .ppt, etc. Likewise, most people probably don't have a native ODF program on their systems, and installing AOO as the default for ODF would probably make sense in most cases. Phil Claim is that it hijacked files from word pad. No idea what that extension might be, i did not ask him. the default extension for wordpad is rtf and AOO does appear to define itself as the default for that extension. regards Keith
RE: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
It seems that Windows 7 Wordpad will also open for an ODT file if no Microsoft Office or *Office[.org] application has claimed the default. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 05:34 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: On 06/04/2012 11:07 AM, Phillip Rhodes wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: . In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type. I'd say In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type which is already associated with another program. That is, we shouldn't steal file associations. If, OTOH, someone is installing AOO on a box without MS Office, then it makes perfect sense to make AOO the default program for .doc, .ppt, etc. Likewise, most people probably don't have a native ODF program on their systems, and installing AOO as the default for ODF would probably make sense in most cases. Phil Claim is that it hijacked files from word pad. No idea what that extension might be, i did not ask him. the default extension for wordpad is rtf and AOO does appear to define itself as the default for that extension. regards Keith
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
Now that would be hilarious if that were the problem. Well, I am not calling him back to ask him what file extension, I spent about an hour chatting with him. I do not have time for a repeat. On 06/05/2012 03:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: It seems that Windows 7 Wordpad will also open for an ODT file if no Microsoft Office or *Office[.org] application has claimed the default. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 05:34 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: On 06/04/2012 11:07 AM, Phillip Rhodes wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: . In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type. I'd say In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type which is already associated with another program. That is, we shouldn't steal file associations. If, OTOH, someone is installing AOO on a box without MS Office, then it makes perfect sense to make AOO the default program for .doc, .ppt, etc. Likewise, most people probably don't have a native ODF program on their systems, and installing AOO as the default for ODF would probably make sense in most cases. Phil Claim is that it hijacked files from word pad. No idea what that extension might be, i did not ask him. the default extension for wordpad is rtf and AOO does appear to define itself as the default for that extension. regards Keith -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
As I remember, it is the 2nd customer complaint we got on this issue. And some of us (e.g. Jihui) has confirmed it. If that's the case, my question is do we have a defect id to trace it? If no, let's create one. And I will suggest it as 3.4.1 must fix. - Simon 2012/6/6 Andrew Douglas Pitonyak and...@pitonyak.org Now that would be hilarious if that were the problem. Well, I am not calling him back to ask him what file extension, I spent about an hour chatting with him. I do not have time for a repeat. On 06/05/2012 03:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: It seems that Windows 7 Wordpad will also open for an ODT file if no Microsoft Office or *Office[.org] application has claimed the default. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mckenna@comcast.**netkeith.mcke...@comcast.net ] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 05:34 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: On 06/04/2012 11:07 AM, Phillip Rhodes wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: . In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type. I'd say In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type which is already associated with another program. That is, we shouldn't steal file associations. If, OTOH, someone is installing AOO on a box without MS Office, then it makes perfect sense to make AOO the default program for .doc, .ppt, etc. Likewise, most people probably don't have a native ODF program on their systems, and installing AOO as the default for ODF would probably make sense in most cases. Phil Claim is that it hijacked files from word pad. No idea what that extension might be, i did not ask him. the default extension for wordpad is rtf and AOO does appear to define itself as the default for that extension. regards Keith -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/**AndrewMacro.odthttp://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 6/3/12 10:37 PM, drew wrote: On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 09:30 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the default option. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. Making the opposite default could be wrong as well. For example, the user could have had one of those 30-day trial versions of MS Office that are commonly bundled with new PC's. The trial expires and they install AOO. If we don't default to taking the file extensions, then the user is left in a tough position. Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each file extension and then switch the owner. So they could assign an extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS Office if they wanted. Well, I admit that I didn't do it this last time - but there has been an option for this, for a long time. The person running the installer has to choose custom install to see it is all - or did this change along the way. Making an intelligent choice for default behavior is important and needs to be, the desire being to server most users best by limiting the amount of interaction required to perform the installation. It is my feeling, given the small of number of (small but also of a frequency over time) individuals commenting in the negative on this choice, that for the majority it is the correct choice. I agree 100%, we should be open and listen to all concerns but we should analyze it case by case. As Drew has pointed out it is not easy to find the right defaults and our goal is to find the right ones to address the majority of users. After a small discussion with my Apache peers we can think of an option to trigger this at any time later. But this will trigger potentially other problems and needs further investigation (e.g. access rights, global settings versus user setting, ...) But if anybody is interested in this, discussion and solutions are welcome and I offer support where possible. Juergen It also seems to me that in most of the cases where a person did contact one of our support channels regarding the changes that a fairly quick response about file associations did the trick. I'm sure however that a better way of informing the user of the option could be found, as most things can be improved. Though it seems to me that in the particular this has not a big issue for most Windows users. //drew Regards, Dave -- Regards, JiHui Choi
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 6/3/12 11:34 PM, Rory O'Farrell wrote: On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 16:44:28 -0400 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:37 PM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote: On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 09:30 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the default option. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. Making the opposite default could be wrong as well. For example, the user could have had one of those 30-day trial versions of MS Office that are commonly bundled with new PC's. The trial expires and they install AOO. If we don't default to taking the file extensions, then the user is left in a tough position. Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each file extension and then switch the owner. So they could assign an extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS Office if they wanted. Well, I admit that I didn't do it this last time - but there has been an option for this, for a long time. The person running the installer has to choose custom install to see it is all - or did this change along the way. Making an intelligent choice for default behavior is important and needs to be, the desire being to server most users best by limiting the amount of interaction required to perform the installation. It is my feeling, given the small of number of (small but also of a frequency over time) individuals commenting in the negative on this choice, that for the majority it is the correct choice. Good point. 2.7 million downloads and a handful of complaints. Certainly there are more complaints unreported, but this is still very small percentage wise. It also seems to me that in most of the cases where a person did contact one of our support channels regarding the changes that a fairly quick response about file associations did the trick. I'm sure however that a better way of informing the user of the option could be found, as most things can be improved. Though it seems to me that in the particular this has not a big issue for most Windows users. Do we have any FAQ's for AOO 3.4? Do we have a sense of what the common questions are at this point, based on the forums and ooo-users? Putting such FAQ's in a prominent place would help. Three immediate subjects for such an FAQ come to mind: 1) The file associations just discussed 2) When Java is needed for Windows it should be 32bit and version 1.6 it can be a 64 bit version but needs to be configured to run in 32bit mode for AOO. Java options - JVM flag -d32 when I remember it correctly from my brain without checking it in detail. Juergen 3) that there is currently no 64 bit AOO for Windows
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 6/4/12 11:04 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 6/3/12 10:37 PM, drew wrote: On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 09:30 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the default option. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. Making the opposite default could be wrong as well. For example, the user could have had one of those 30-day trial versions of MS Office that are commonly bundled with new PC's. The trial expires and they install AOO. If we don't default to taking the file extensions, then the user is left in a tough position. Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each file extension and then switch the owner. So they could assign an extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS Office if they wanted. Well, I admit that I didn't do it this last time - but there has been an option for this, for a long time. The person running the installer has to choose custom install to see it is all - or did this change along the way. Making an intelligent choice for default behavior is important and needs to be, the desire being to server most users best by limiting the amount of interaction required to perform the installation. It is my feeling, given the small of number of (small but also of a frequency over time) individuals commenting in the negative on this choice, that for the majority it is the correct choice. I agree 100%, we should be open and listen to all concerns but we should analyze it case by case. As Drew has pointed out it is not easy to find the right defaults and our goal is to find the right ones to address the majority of users. After a small discussion with my Apache peers we can think of an option to trigger this at any time later. But this will trigger potentially other problems and needs further investigation (e.g. access rights, global settings versus user setting, ...) ok Rob mentioned something like that already ;-) Juergen But if anybody is interested in this, discussion and solutions are welcome and I offer support where possible. Juergen It also seems to me that in most of the cases where a person did contact one of our support channels regarding the changes that a fairly quick response about file associations did the trick. I'm sure however that a better way of informing the user of the option could be found, as most things can be improved. Though it seems to me that in the particular this has not a big issue for most Windows users. //drew Regards, Dave -- Regards, JiHui Choi
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 15:35 +0200, RGB ES wrote: 2012/6/2 Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org: On 6/2/12, Wolf Halton wolf.hal...@gmail.com wrote: When the US gov went to word from wordperfect sometime around 1994, pretty much everybody who interacted with the government went to MS Office within a year or so. I expect we will see a similar effect from Brazil and other governments moving to OFF. When I installed 3.4 on windows 7 and on Ubuntu Linux, I was given an option to allow or not allow OO to open MS formats by default. The problem may be that the default state of the check-boxes is for the file association to be with OO. Recently my copy of MS Office 2010 stole back the associations, so I had to fix them to point back to OO3.4. Thus I can appreciate the feelings of the original post. This goes with my point that this is an expected behavior of any software. Including AOO, MSO has it, same as other non office software like browsers, media players, zip utilities, etc. File association can be reversed from the OS level or also use the Open with... option. So is not the end of the world or a intrusive behavior. Like people here want us to think like. Of course it is not the end of the world, but it IS an intrusive behaviour: most PC users are completely illiterate on the administration of their own systems so asking them to *manually* change file association is like asking for building a rocket... AFAIK, AOO installer on windows ask for file association, but maybe not with enough insistence: while I agree that the next, next, end + needed OK without thinking culture on this day computer world is plain wrong, it is not our task to change it. Just my 2¢ Regards Hi Ricardo Well, I can not agree that the 'next, next...' culture is wrong - that culture BTW is changing to just one click install. Soon IMO this small number of steps to install an end user application will likely be completely unacceptable. There is no good reason that a person needs to know anything about the OS for daily performance of their tasks, unless they want to enter the field as a vocation or advocation. Just my .02 //drew
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: . In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type. I'd say In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type which is already associated with another program. That is, we shouldn't steal file associations. If, OTOH, someone is installing AOO on a box without MS Office, then it makes perfect sense to make AOO the default program for .doc, .ppt, etc. Likewise, most people probably don't have a native ODF program on their systems, and installing AOO as the default for ODF would probably make sense in most cases. Phil
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 9:43 AM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote: Well, I can not agree that the 'next, next...' culture is wrong - that culture BTW is changing to just one click install. Soon IMO this small number of steps to install an end user application will likely be completely unacceptable. I'm not convinced, personally. Unacceptable to who, exactly? And are we to believe that context is irrelevant, and that the install process for every program will be exactly the same. There is no good reason that a person needs to know anything about the OS for daily performance of their tasks, unless they want to enter the field as a vocation or advocation. This sounds like the argument a person doesn't need to know how an internal combustion engine works, in order to drive a car. And that's mostly true, but a car owner does need to know enough to check the oil every so often, or know enough to know to have someone else check the oil every so often. As analogies go, I think this holds up here. Someone using a computer needs to know a little bit of basic maintenance stuff or must rely on *someone* to provide the knowledge. I don't think it makes sense to say the user can just abdicate all responsibility for knowing the basics about the tool they are using. Just my $0.02 worth... Phil
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
2012/6/4 Phillip Rhodes motley.crue@gmail.com: On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 9:43 AM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote: Well, I can not agree that the 'next, next...' culture is wrong - that culture BTW is changing to just one click install. Soon IMO this small number of steps to install an end user application will likely be completely unacceptable. I'm not convinced, personally. Unacceptable to who, exactly? And are we to believe that context is irrelevant, and that the install process for every program will be exactly the same. There is no good reason that a person needs to know anything about the OS for daily performance of their tasks, unless they want to enter the field as a vocation or advocation. This sounds like the argument a person doesn't need to know how an internal combustion engine works, in order to drive a car. And that's mostly true, but a car owner does need to know enough to check the oil every so often, or know enough to know to have someone else check the oil every so often. As analogies go, I think this holds up here. Someone using a computer needs to know a little bit of basic maintenance stuff or must rely on *someone* to provide the knowledge. I don't think it makes sense to say the user can just abdicate all responsibility for knowing the basics about the tool they are using. Just my $0.02 worth... Phil +1. And remember: you need to learn a lot of rules and approve two exams before you get a driving license! Regards Ricardo
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 23:53 +0200, RGB ES wrote: 2012/6/4 Phillip Rhodes motley.crue@gmail.com: On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 9:43 AM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote: Well, I can not agree that the 'next, next...' culture is wrong - that culture BTW is changing to just one click install. Soon IMO this small number of steps to install an end user application will likely be completely unacceptable. I'm not convinced, personally. Unacceptable to who, exactly? And are we to believe that context is irrelevant, and that the install process for every program will be exactly the same. There is no good reason that a person needs to know anything about the OS for daily performance of their tasks, unless they want to enter the field as a vocation or advocation. This sounds like the argument a person doesn't need to know how an internal combustion engine works, in order to drive a car. And that's mostly true, but a car owner does need to know enough to check the oil every so often, or know enough to know to have someone else check the oil every so often. As analogies go, I think this holds up here. Someone using a computer needs to know a little bit of basic maintenance stuff or must rely on *someone* to provide the knowledge. I don't think it makes sense to say the user can just abdicate all responsibility for knowing the basics about the tool they are using. Just my $0.02 worth... Phil +1. And remember: you need to learn a lot of rules and approve two exams before you get a driving license! *smile*... well, some people ask why not; Others ask why - and expect their hand held computing device to understand the question, and give a verbal response.. Beyond that - yes I agree, mastery of ones tools is always a good thing. //drew Regards Ricardo
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 06/03/2012 05:34 PM, Rory O'Farrell wrote: Three immediate subjects for such an FAQ come to mind: 1) The file associations just discussed 2) When Java is needed for Windows it should be 32bit and version 1.6 I stressed over this one and simply installed multiple versions of Java to see what worked. Annoying. 3) that there is currently no 64 bit AOO for Windows -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 06/04/2012 11:07 AM, Phillip Rhodes wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: . In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type. I'd say In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type which is already associated with another program. That is, we shouldn't steal file associations. If, OTOH, someone is installing AOO on a box without MS Office, then it makes perfect sense to make AOO the default program for .doc, .ppt, etc. Likewise, most people probably don't have a native ODF program on their systems, and installing AOO as the default for ODF would probably make sense in most cases. Phil Claim is that it hijacked files from word pad. No idea what that extension might be, i did not ask him. -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 06/01/2012 09:48 PM, Felix Brown wrote: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 was: Today the automatic update to 3.4 happened. Today I opened a WordPad file, (Which I open often; It's my list of birthdays.); And to my surprise, Your piece of junk software had hijacked all of my documents to where they open with Open Office ; AND THAT SURE AS HECK WAS NOT A CHOICE THAT I MADE. I hate programs that act like a virus. Fix this ; Then tell me, (IN PERSON, BY EMAIL OF PHONE.) ; And then, MAYBE I'LL REINSTALL IT. Felix Brown 316 722-3744 buy-a-thing-or-...@sbcglobal.net Felix Brown was running an older version of OOo and the software was automatically updated to 3.4 using a secondary package. He does not believe that he said it was OK to change the permissions, but after removing OOo his file associations are back to pre-OOo state. OOo is no longer currently installed on the computer. The primary purpose of his post was to indicate why he had removed OOo so that it might be fixed in a future version. -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 09:30 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the default option. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. Making the opposite default could be wrong as well. For example, the user could have had one of those 30-day trial versions of MS Office that are commonly bundled with new PC's. The trial expires and they install AOO. If we don't default to taking the file extensions, then the user is left in a tough position. Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each file extension and then switch the owner. So they could assign an extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS Office if they wanted. Well, I admit that I didn't do it this last time - but there has been an option for this, for a long time. The person running the installer has to choose custom install to see it is all - or did this change along the way. Making an intelligent choice for default behavior is important and needs to be, the desire being to server most users best by limiting the amount of interaction required to perform the installation. It is my feeling, given the small of number of (small but also of a frequency over time) individuals commenting in the negative on this choice, that for the majority it is the correct choice. It also seems to me that in most of the cases where a person did contact one of our support channels regarding the changes that a fairly quick response about file associations did the trick. I'm sure however that a better way of informing the user of the option could be found, as most things can be improved. Though it seems to me that in the particular this has not a big issue for most Windows users. //drew Regards, Dave -- Regards, JiHui Choi
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:37 PM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote: On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 09:30 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the default option. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. Making the opposite default could be wrong as well. For example, the user could have had one of those 30-day trial versions of MS Office that are commonly bundled with new PC's. The trial expires and they install AOO. If we don't default to taking the file extensions, then the user is left in a tough position. Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each file extension and then switch the owner. So they could assign an extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS Office if they wanted. Well, I admit that I didn't do it this last time - but there has been an option for this, for a long time. The person running the installer has to choose custom install to see it is all - or did this change along the way. Making an intelligent choice for default behavior is important and needs to be, the desire being to server most users best by limiting the amount of interaction required to perform the installation. It is my feeling, given the small of number of (small but also of a frequency over time) individuals commenting in the negative on this choice, that for the majority it is the correct choice. Good point. 2.7 million downloads and a handful of complaints. Certainly there are more complaints unreported, but this is still very small percentage wise. It also seems to me that in most of the cases where a person did contact one of our support channels regarding the changes that a fairly quick response about file associations did the trick. I'm sure however that a better way of informing the user of the option could be found, as most things can be improved. Though it seems to me that in the particular this has not a big issue for most Windows users. Do we have any FAQ's for AOO 3.4? Do we have a sense of what the common questions are at this point, based on the forums and ooo-users? Putting such FAQ's in a prominent place would help. //drew Regards, Dave -- Regards, JiHui Choi
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 16:44:28 -0400 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:37 PM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote: On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 09:30 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the default option. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. Making the opposite default could be wrong as well. For example, the user could have had one of those 30-day trial versions of MS Office that are commonly bundled with new PC's. The trial expires and they install AOO. If we don't default to taking the file extensions, then the user is left in a tough position. Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each file extension and then switch the owner. So they could assign an extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS Office if they wanted. Well, I admit that I didn't do it this last time - but there has been an option for this, for a long time. The person running the installer has to choose custom install to see it is all - or did this change along the way. Making an intelligent choice for default behavior is important and needs to be, the desire being to server most users best by limiting the amount of interaction required to perform the installation. It is my feeling, given the small of number of (small but also of a frequency over time) individuals commenting in the negative on this choice, that for the majority it is the correct choice. Good point. 2.7 million downloads and a handful of complaints. Certainly there are more complaints unreported, but this is still very small percentage wise. It also seems to me that in most of the cases where a person did contact one of our support channels regarding the changes that a fairly quick response about file associations did the trick. I'm sure however that a better way of informing the user of the option could be found, as most things can be improved. Though it seems to me that in the particular this has not a big issue for most Windows users. Do we have any FAQ's for AOO 3.4? Do we have a sense of what the common questions are at this point, based on the forums and ooo-users? Putting such FAQ's in a prominent place would help. Three immediate subjects for such an FAQ come to mind: 1) The file associations just discussed 2) When Java is needed for Windows it should be 32bit and version 1.6 3) that there is currently no 64 bit AOO for Windows -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie
AOO 3.4 FAQ's (was: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4)
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote: On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 16:44:28 -0400 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: snip Moving this to its own thread. Do we have any FAQ's for AOO 3.4? Do we have a sense of what the common questions are at this point, based on the forums and ooo-users? Putting such FAQ's in a prominent place would help. Three immediate subjects for such an FAQ come to mind: 1) The file associations just discussed 2) When Java is needed for Windows it should be 32bit and version 1.6 3) that there is currently no 64 bit AOO for Windows Maybe also: - What about language X, why is it not included? -Rob
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each file extension and then switch the owner. So they could assign an extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS Office if they wanted. +1 That' s the approach I' d like to see. FC
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
2012/6/3 Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each file extension and then switch the owner. So they could assign an extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS Office if they wanted. +1 +1 That' s the approach I' d like to see. FC -- Paulo de Souza Lima http://almalivre.wordpress.com Curitiba - PR Linux User #432358 Ubuntu User #28729
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
+1. Even it's not available currently, we should make it happen in coming future. 2012/6/4 Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each file extension and then switch the owner. So they could assign an extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS Office if they wanted. +1 That' s the approach I' d like to see. FC
Re: AOO 3.4 FAQ's (was: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4)
My question fyi: 1) Any requirement for OS/software/hardware before installation of Aoo 3.4? If java is necessary/unnecessary for Windows/Linux/Mac, then list it and our recommendation. If no 64 bit Aoo for windows, shall we list all platforms we support/don't support? 2) I wonder if differences/new features between 3.4 and previous one should be included? Seems to be a long list from my view. Or some may be put to release notes and we give a link inf FAQ? No idea. Regards 2012/6/4 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote: On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 16:44:28 -0400 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: snip Moving this to its own thread. Do we have any FAQ's for AOO 3.4? Do we have a sense of what the common questions are at this point, based on the forums and ooo-users? Putting such FAQ's in a prominent place would help. Three immediate subjects for such an FAQ come to mind: 1) The file associations just discussed 2) When Java is needed for Windows it should be 32bit and version 1.6 3) that there is currently no 64 bit AOO for Windows Maybe also: - What about language X, why is it not included? -Rob
RE: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
-Original Message- From: Jihui Choi [mailto:jihui.c...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, 2 June 2012 1:54 PM To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. It's simple. I installed AOO 3.4 and I realized there's no option for choosing file association. I read every sentences on each dialogue box, but there's no mention or no option. As an alternative in the meantime: Right click the file , choose 'Open With' 'Choose Default Program' , then choose To have your .doc open in MS Office (Word) again. (Ensure 'Always use the selected Program to open this kind of file' is ticked.) HTH Gav... I installed AOO 3.4 again on another computer. It's on Windows XP and there is MS Office 2007. After I installed AOO 3.4, .docx, .xls, .xlsx are opened in MS Office. However .doc is opened in AOO. And as I said there was no option nor mention about file association while installing AOO. I can't check what exactly happened in registry because I don't have a authority for that, but I'm sure AOO changed something without user's agreement or notice. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. I totally agree with you, dave. and this one should go to bugzilla. -- Regards, JiHui Choi
RE: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
-Original Message- From: Graham Wright [mailto:gwright2...@hotmail.es] Sent: Saturday, 2 June 2012 2:01 PM To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 I often wonder why somebody that has Microsoft Office would have the need to install Open Office anyway! Isn't Open Office mainly for those people who cannot afford, or who are unwilling to pay for Microsoft Office? Perhaps to evaluate it , compare etc, so that next time renewal/upgrade of MS Office comes long, they might decide the free OOo is good enough instead. One can't decide which is best without trying. Also, on this 'dev' list, you will find many (such as me) with both for testing purposes. (This apparent error obviously slipped the net) Gav...
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
2012/6/2 Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au -Original Message- From: Graham Wright [mailto:gwright2...@hotmail.es] Sent: Saturday, 2 June 2012 2:01 PM To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 I often wonder why somebody that has Microsoft Office would have the need to install Open Office anyway! Isn't Open Office mainly for those people who cannot afford, or who are unwilling to pay for Microsoft Office? Perhaps to evaluate it , compare etc, so that next time renewal/upgrade of MS Office comes long, they might decide the free OOo is good enough instead. One can't decide which is best without trying. Also, on this 'dev' list, you will find many (such as me) with both for testing purposes. (This apparent error obviously slipped the net) Gav... Hi. That's not the case for this issue, but many governments (Brasil is the best example I can giveyou) are choosing ODF as the standard format for documents. Ms Windows 2007 and below aren 't able to open ODF files. That's one reason why many people have another office suite installed in their computers. Regards -- Paulo de Souza Lima http://almalivre.wordpress.com Curitiba - PR Linux User #432358 Ubuntu User #28729
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 6/1/12, Graham Wright gwright2...@hotmail.es wrote: On 02/06/2012 03:40, Dave Fisher wrote: On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Coloradoj...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the default option. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. Regards, Dave -- Regards, JiHui Choi I often wonder why somebody that has Microsoft Office would have the need to install Open Office anyway! Isn't Open Office mainly for those people who cannot afford, or who are unwilling to pay for Microsoft Office? No openoffice is for people that want to SWITCH to a free software alternative. Most people have IE and they install Mozilla Firefox. -- Alexandro Colorado OpenOffice.org Español http://es.openoffice.org
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
When the US gov went to word from wordperfect sometime around 1994, pretty much everybody who interacted with the government went to MS Office within a year or so. I expect we will see a similar effect from Brazil and other governments moving to OFF. When I installed 3.4 on windows 7 and on Ubuntu Linux, I was given an option to allow or not allow OO to open MS formats by default. The problem may be that the default state of the check-boxes is for the file association to be with OO. Recently my copy of MS Office 2010 stole back the associations, so I had to fix them to point back to OO3.4. Thus I can appreciate the feelings of the original post. Wolf PS Sorry for the top-post. Writing this from my phone. http://evergreen-community-01.lyrasistechnology.org http://sourcefreedom.com Apache developer: wolfhal...@apache.org On Jun 2, 2012 8:58 AM, Paulo de Souza Lima paulo.s.l...@varekai.org wrote: 2012/6/2 Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au -Original Message- From: Graham Wright [mailto:gwright2...@hotmail.es] Sent: Saturday, 2 June 2012 2:01 PM To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 I often wonder why somebody that has Microsoft Office would have the need to install Open Office anyway! Isn't Open Office mainly for those people who cannot afford, or who are unwilling to pay for Microsoft Office? Perhaps to evaluate it , compare etc, so that next time renewal/upgrade of MS Office comes long, they might decide the free OOo is good enough instead. One can't decide which is best without trying. Also, on this 'dev' list, you will find many (such as me) with both for testing purposes. (This apparent error obviously slipped the net) Gav... Hi. That's not the case for this issue, but many governments (Brasil is the best example I can giveyou) are choosing ODF as the standard format for documents. Ms Windows 2007 and below aren 't able to open ODF files. That's one reason why many people have another office suite installed in their computers. Regards -- Paulo de Souza Lima http://almalivre.wordpress.com Curitiba - PR Linux User #432358 Ubuntu User #28729
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 6/2/12, Wolf Halton wolf.hal...@gmail.com wrote: When the US gov went to word from wordperfect sometime around 1994, pretty much everybody who interacted with the government went to MS Office within a year or so. I expect we will see a similar effect from Brazil and other governments moving to OFF. When I installed 3.4 on windows 7 and on Ubuntu Linux, I was given an option to allow or not allow OO to open MS formats by default. The problem may be that the default state of the check-boxes is for the file association to be with OO. Recently my copy of MS Office 2010 stole back the associations, so I had to fix them to point back to OO3.4. Thus I can appreciate the feelings of the original post. This goes with my point that this is an expected behavior of any software. Including AOO, MSO has it, same as other non office software like browsers, media players, zip utilities, etc. File association can be reversed from the OS level or also use the Open with... option. So is not the end of the world or a intrusive behavior. Like people here want us to think like. Wolf PS Sorry for the top-post. Writing this from my phone. http://evergreen-community-01.lyrasistechnology.org http://sourcefreedom.com Apache developer: wolfhal...@apache.org On Jun 2, 2012 8:58 AM, Paulo de Souza Lima paulo.s.l...@varekai.org wrote: 2012/6/2 Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au -Original Message- From: Graham Wright [mailto:gwright2...@hotmail.es] Sent: Saturday, 2 June 2012 2:01 PM To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 I often wonder why somebody that has Microsoft Office would have the need to install Open Office anyway! Isn't Open Office mainly for those people who cannot afford, or who are unwilling to pay for Microsoft Office? Perhaps to evaluate it , compare etc, so that next time renewal/upgrade of MS Office comes long, they might decide the free OOo is good enough instead. One can't decide which is best without trying. Also, on this 'dev' list, you will find many (such as me) with both for testing purposes. (This apparent error obviously slipped the net) Gav... Hi. That's not the case for this issue, but many governments (Brasil is the best example I can giveyou) are choosing ODF as the standard format for documents. Ms Windows 2007 and below aren 't able to open ODF files. That's one reason why many people have another office suite installed in their computers. Regards -- Paulo de Souza Lima http://almalivre.wordpress.com Curitiba - PR Linux User #432358 Ubuntu User #28729 -- Alexandro Colorado OpenOffice.org Español http://es.openoffice.org
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the default option. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. Making the opposite default could be wrong as well. For example, the user could have had one of those 30-day trial versions of MS Office that are commonly bundled with new PC's. The trial expires and they install AOO. If we don't default to taking the file extensions, then the user is left in a tough position. Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each file extension and then switch the owner. So they could assign an extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS Office if they wanted. Regards, Dave -- Regards, JiHui Choi
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
2012/6/2 Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org: On 6/2/12, Wolf Halton wolf.hal...@gmail.com wrote: When the US gov went to word from wordperfect sometime around 1994, pretty much everybody who interacted with the government went to MS Office within a year or so. I expect we will see a similar effect from Brazil and other governments moving to OFF. When I installed 3.4 on windows 7 and on Ubuntu Linux, I was given an option to allow or not allow OO to open MS formats by default. The problem may be that the default state of the check-boxes is for the file association to be with OO. Recently my copy of MS Office 2010 stole back the associations, so I had to fix them to point back to OO3.4. Thus I can appreciate the feelings of the original post. This goes with my point that this is an expected behavior of any software. Including AOO, MSO has it, same as other non office software like browsers, media players, zip utilities, etc. File association can be reversed from the OS level or also use the Open with... option. So is not the end of the world or a intrusive behavior. Like people here want us to think like. Of course it is not the end of the world, but it IS an intrusive behaviour: most PC users are completely illiterate on the administration of their own systems so asking them to *manually* change file association is like asking for building a rocket... AFAIK, AOO installer on windows ask for file association, but maybe not with enough insistence: while I agree that the next, next, end + needed OK without thinking culture on this day computer world is plain wrong, it is not our task to change it. Just my 2¢ Regards Ricardo
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:35 PM, RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com wrote: AFAIK, AOO installer on windows ask for file association, but maybe not with enough insistence: while I agree that the next, next, end + needed OK without thinking culture on this day computer world is plain wrong, it is not our task to change it. It's not. That is the problem at this point. AOO installer doesn't ask me whether it will open MS office format files by itself. I read all sentences carefully even inside custom installation option while I installed AOO 3.4 three times for testing this problem. If it does, no problem at all. :) -- Regards, JiHui Choi
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 02/06/2012 Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:35 PM, RGB ES wrote: AFAIK, AOO installer on windows ask for file association, but maybe not with enough insistence: while I agree that the next, next, end + needed OK without thinking culture on this day computer world is plain wrong, it is not our task to change it. It's not. That is the problem at this point. AOO installer doesn't ask me whether it will open MS office format files by itself. If I recall correctly (from when this was changed, years ago), the installer is set to silently associate .doc, .xls and .ppt files with OpenOffice if it can't detect that they are already associated to Microsoft Office; otherwise is ignores them. Then comment 73 by Olaf in https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=96594#c73 seems to state that the option has been reintroduced... So I honestly don't know what the expected behavior is as of version 3.4 (and I can't test the actual behavior at the moment, but I would suggest to try both a scenario where doc/xls/ppt are already associated to Microsoft Office and one where they aren't). Regards, Andrea.
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 7:01 AM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 02/06/2012 Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:35 PM, RGB ES wrote: AFAIK, AOO installer on windows ask for file association, but maybe not with enough insistence: while I agree that the next, next, end + needed OK without thinking culture on this day computer world is plain wrong, it is not our task to change it. It's not. That is the problem at this point. AOO installer doesn't ask me whether it will open MS office format files by itself. If I recall correctly (from when this was changed, years ago), the installer is set to silently associate .doc, .xls and .ppt files with OpenOffice if it can't detect that they are already associated to Microsoft Office; otherwise is ignores them. If this is still true (I don't use MS Windows) -- this is bad! From what I recall when I did use Windows, many apps ask if you want product x to be the default for whatever-mime-type. Folks then have the opportunity to say yes or no. The other side of the coin is dealing with de-installation of product x. The user should be given some way of making reassignments to whatever mime types have been changed. In the latter case, I don't recall how good some apps were about this -- maybe not very good. Since I haven't used Windows since 2001, I haven't kept up with this stuff. In no circumstance should AOO establish itself as a default for any file type. Then comment 73 by Olaf in https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=96594#c73https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=96594#c73 seems to state that the option has been reintroduced... So I honestly don't know what the expected behavior is as of version 3.4 (and I can't test the actual behavior at the moment, but I would suggest to try both a scenario where doc/xls/ppt are already associated to Microsoft Office and one where they aren't). Regards, Andrea. -- MzK So let it rock, let it roll Let the bible belt come and save my soul Hold on to sixteen as long as you can Changes come around real soon make us woman and men. -- Jack and Diane, John Mellencamp
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice On 6/1/12, Felix Brown buy-a-thing-or-...@sbcglobal.net wrote: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 was: Today the automatic update to 3.4 happened. Today I opened a WordPad file, (Which I open often; It's my list of birthdays.); And to my surprise, Your piece of junk software had hijacked all of my documents to where they open with Open Office ; AND THAT SURE AS HECK WAS NOT A CHOICE THAT I MADE. I hate programs that act like a virus. Fix this ; Then tell me, (IN PERSON, BY EMAIL OF PHONE.) ; And then, MAYBE I'LL REINSTALL IT. Felix Brown 316 722-3744 buy-a-thing-or-...@sbcglobal.net -- Alexandro Colorado OpenOffice.org Español http://es.openoffice.org
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. -- Regards, JiHui Choi
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
This is normal behavior on EVERY software. If you install firefox a dialog of You want to make firefox your default browser as you install. Same in Chrome and any other software. Winzip, iTunes, etc. On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Jihui Choi jihui.c...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. -- Regards, JiHui Choi
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the default option. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. Regards, Dave -- Regards, JiHui Choi
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. It's simple. I installed AOO 3.4 and I realized there's no option for choosing file association. I read every sentences on each dialogue box, but there's no mention or no option. I installed AOO 3.4 again on another computer. It's on Windows XP and there is MS Office 2007. After I installed AOO 3.4, .docx, .xls, .xlsx are opened in MS Office. However .doc is opened in AOO. And as I said there was no option nor mention about file association while installing AOO. I can't check what exactly happened in registry because I don't have a authority for that, but I'm sure AOO changed something without user's agreement or notice. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. I totally agree with you, dave. and this one should go to bugzilla. -- Regards, JiHui Choi
Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4
On 02/06/2012 03:40, Dave Fisher wrote: On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Coloradoj...@oooes.org wrote: When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office formats in AOO. And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open them in AOO or not. But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to check this on Windows 7 32bit. It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed. I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report. If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the default option. The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents. Regards, Dave -- Regards, JiHui Choi I often wonder why somebody that has Microsoft Office would have the need to install Open Office anyway! Isn't Open Office mainly for those people who cannot afford, or who are unwilling to pay for Microsoft Office?
