Craig Gauss wrote:
We just attempted an install on our Tarantella Secure Global Desktop
Servers with MS Office 2000 and Open Office 2.0 Beta. With 1.1.4 you
could associate either program with xls, doc, etc With 2.0 it takes
MS Office completely out of the picture.
---
We just attempted an install on our Tarantella Secure Global Desktop
Servers with MS Office 2000 and Open Office 2.0 Beta. With 1.1.4 you
could associate either program with xls, doc, etc With 2.0 it takes
MS Office completely out of the picture.
-
Robert Derman wrote:
> Robert Derman replies: My OS is Windows XP Home, fully updated with SP
> 2 and some post SP 2 updates. I have and use OOo 1.1.4 and I downloaded
> and installed the official beta. on 3-31 I downloaded and installed
> 1.9.87. All three of these versions of OOo are curr
On 2 Apr 2005 at 11:39, Robert Derman wrote:
> Tony Pursell wrote:
>
> >On 1 Apr 2005 at 11:44, Robert Derman wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Robert Derman replies: I just downloaded and installed the latest
> >>version of OOo 2.0, (1.9.87) and the check boxes came already
> >>checked by default, so ei
Tony Pursell wrote:
On 1 Apr 2005 at 11:44, Robert Derman wrote:
Robert Derman replies: I just downloaded and installed the latest
version of OOo 2.0, (1.9.87) and the check boxes came already checked
by default, so either an error has crept in, or this needs to be
addressed before the final re
On 1 Apr 2005 at 11:44, Robert Derman wrote:
> Robert Derman replies: I just downloaded and installed the latest
> version of OOo 2.0, (1.9.87) and the check boxes came already checked
> by default, so either an error has crept in, or this needs to be
> addressed before the final release of 2.0.
Rod Engelsman wrote:
Ric Hayman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Carrera wrote:
| Rod Engelsman wrote:
|
|
|>This has been an issue for a *l* time, Daniel.
|
|
| My understanding is that the UI has already changed, and now, weeks
before the
| final release, th
On 1 Apr 2005 at 16:51, Ric Hayman wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Daniel Carrera wrote:
> | Rod Engelsman wrote:
> |
> |
> |>This has been an issue for a *l* time, Daniel.
> |
> |
> | My understanding is that the UI has already changed, and now, weeks
> be
Ric Hayman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Carrera wrote:
| Rod Engelsman wrote:
|
|
|>This has been an issue for a *l* time, Daniel.
|
|
| My understanding is that the UI has already changed, and now, weeks
before the
| final release, there is a suggestion f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Carrera wrote:
| Rod Engelsman wrote:
|
|
|>This has been an issue for a *l* time, Daniel.
|
|
| My understanding is that the UI has already changed, and now, weeks
before the
| final release, there is a suggestion for another change.
Well, the numbers are wrong. It's what I get while actually working
(trying to?) while doing email. I have the issue w/ m87, m84 works
fine, and as m88 is only for internal testing, I can't test it with
that.
-gjn
From: Gregory J. Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Ian Lynch wrote:
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 22:35, Rod Engelsman wrote:
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Tony Pursell wrote:
I thought more was going to be done to avoid it and I am amazed that
we still have a setup dialog that virtually invites people to do what they
don't really want to do
Tony Pursell wrote:
> I've tested this out on my wife. She's been a computer user for many
> years and has also done some IT support work in the past. But she
> doesn't have the mistrust of computer systems that 30+ years of
> software development (plus a degree in Psychology) has given me.
I've tested this out on my wife. She's been a computer user for many
years and has also done some IT support work in the past. But she
doesn't have the mistrust of computer systems that 30+ years of
software development (plus a degree in Psychology) has given me.
So when the dialog cam up,
Rod Engelsman wrote:
> That is *really* disingenuous, Daniel. This problem has been discussed
> for *over three years*. UI freeze, my ass! That was before the UI freeze
> for 1.1 for God's sake!!
1) Rod, please calm down.
2) Please read what I've said again. People complained about the dialog.
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 22:35, Rod Engelsman wrote:
> Daniel Carrera wrote:
> > Tony Pursell wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I thought more was going to be done to avoid it and I am amazed that
> >>we still have a setup dialog that virtually invites people to do what they
> >>don't really want to do
> >
> >
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Tony Pursell wrote:
I thought more was going to be done to avoid it and I am amazed that
we still have a setup dialog that virtually invites people to do what they
don't really want to do
But why didn't you say this before the UI freeze?
I saw the OOo snapshot before the U
Enrique wrote:
> Do you see as feasible at this stage to add something like this to that
> wording:
>
> "If you check these boxes OpenOffice 2.0 will replace Microsoft
> applications when opening those files. You will not be able to launch
> Microsoft applications by doubleclicking in that fil
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Now, if you can bring down this UI change to just changing a string, that has a
better chance of success. If you can do that, please file an issue.
OK, Daniel, I was trying to save people like you, regular posters in
these newsgroups, quite a lot or work if OOo 2.0 is reall
Rod Engelsman wrote:
> >Uhhmm... yes it does. It looks very clear to me. It says that OOo will
> >automatically open those file types.
>
> It's not. At least not to new users. What's not clear from the wording
> is whether or not you will be able to open MSO files *at all* if you do
> not chec
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Uhhmm... yes it does. It looks very clear to me. It says that OOo will
automatically open those file types.
It's not. At least not to new users. What's not clear from the wording
is whether or not you will be able to open MSO files *at all* if you do
not check the boxes.
Enrique wrote:
> I posted here, not in IZ, to avoid developer "distraction".
You said you were proposing something. I responded to the proposal.
Cheers,
--
Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect,
Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday.
http://oooauthors.org |
---
Rod Engelsman wrote:
> This has been an issue for a *l* time, Daniel.
My understanding is that the UI has already changed, and now, weeks before the
final release, there is a suggestion for another change.
Cheers,
--
Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect,
Join OOoAuthor
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Enrique wrote:
Before releasing OOo 2.0 I would propose something radical:
Just before a release is not the time to propose something radical.
This has been an issue for a *l* time, Daniel.
Even if you
convince everyone, inc the developers, that droping this dia
OK, Daniel.
I posted here, not in IZ, to avoid developer "distraction".
Cheers
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
25 matches
Mail list logo
