> so youngsters??
For a hardcore OpenSolaris user who uses "nothing but" and who has to
constantly consult the userguides, not being able to read them is a major
impediment.
Freedom is not cherished until it's lost. Now I am free, again, not to use
anything else!
As someone else mentioned in
so youngsters??
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I have cleaned up the original pdf file. Please see:
http://tinyurl.com/zfs-pdf
The invisible parts (original) are now visible (corrected).
It is not too difficult a job.
Just wish that we can be more thoughtful.
The only people affected are us hard-core OpenSolaris users.
--
This message pos
Just realized that with all my innuendos and wild suggestions, I failed to
comment on the quality of the documents themselves.
This issue is particularly worth mentioning because (I don't know about you
but) I am very impressed with the quality, especially readability, of Sun's new
generation o
> This is a freetype problem, and such problems can
> impact anything. Nevada builds are anything but
> "lightly tested" developer snapshots. They didn't
> even introduce the problem - freetype folks did!
Hi Akhilesh,
Me again. I understand this can be blamed as a "freetype" problem, but it is
W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
>> Hi Waynel
>>
>> Please don't get me wrong. I myself am responsible
>> for driving openoffice adoption at my work place. I
>> myself have gone from wordstar to word perfect (5.02)
>> to word and then I used star office before openoffice
>> existed. But because I have also wo
> Hi Waynel
>
> Please don't get me wrong. I myself am responsible
> for driving openoffice adoption at my work place. I
> myself have gone from wordstar to word perfect (5.02)
> to word and then I used star office before openoffice
> existed. But because I have also worked with
> documentation t
Hi Waynel
Please don't get me wrong. I myself am responsible for driving openoffice
adoption at my work place. I myself have gone from wordstar to word perfect
(5.02) to word and then I used star office before openoffice existed. But
because I have also worked with documentation team, I have s
> And I don't like
> it a bit; it is very good in generating "documents"
> for documentation purposes but IMO it often causes
> the authors to loose human touch.
"loose" should be --lose--. The choice of the writing tool (in this case, the
"Jive") strongly affects how one writes. I don't like J
> > I don't doubt the superiority of LaTex/Framemaker
> in
> > conjunction with Distiller in producing (the pdf
> > versions of) nicely typeset books and brochures.
> But
> how good is a tool if it produces a product that
> its
> intended users can NOT read? This is what prompted
>
>
> You s
> I don't doubt the superiority of LaTex/Framemaker in
> conjunction with Distiller in producing (the pdf
> versions of) nicely typeset books and brochures. But
> how good is a tool if it produces a product that its
> intended users can NOT read? This is what prompted
>
You seem to have missed
> Please read Akhilesh's answer carefully and stop
> repeating
> the same thing. Staroffice is to Latex/Framemaker
> what a
> mid-size sedan is to an 18-wheeler. To the untrained
> eye,
> they appear to perform similar actions, but the
> actual overlap
> is really small.
>
> > Sorry, can't help
12 matches
Mail list logo
