On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 10:11:51 -0400
Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
Hello Adam,
>In order to show them more appropriate advertising!
Indeed. Although that wasn't the reason I was thinking of, it's at least
as good as, probably better.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious i
On Tue, 2015-08-25 at 15:05 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 12:50:07 -0700
> James E Lang wrote:
> > So PC Magazine links (pcmag.com) in UK get converted to
> > uk.pcmag.com
> > and some place else they get converted to au.pcmag.com? Nasty! It's
> > hard to communicate that way. Ce
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 12:50:07 -0700
James E Lang wrote:
Hello James,
>So PC Magazine links (pcmag.com) in UK get converted to uk.pcmag.com
>and some place else they get converted to au.pcmag.com? Nasty! It's
>hard to communicate that way. Censorship?
Unlikely. It's more likely that the web site
9:20
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice 5.0 Review & Rating | PCMag.com
On 20/08/15 12:20, Pedro wrote:
> steveedmonds wrote
>> On 2015-08-19 12:55, James Knott wrote:
>>> On 08/18/2015 07:23 PM, Steve Edmonds wrote:
>>>> Hi. Is this a review for
2015-08-24 22:59 GMT+02:00 Tom Davies :
> Hi :)
> I think it is important to get some good comments in there quickly. It
> would be good to do this to any other articles about LibreOffice too.
>
> It is best to write more comments for articles that are properly
> pro-LibreOffice so that their aut
Hi :)
I think it is important to get some good comments in there quickly. It
would be good to do this to any other articles about LibreOffice too.
It is best to write more comments for articles that are properly
pro-LibreOffice so that their authors get seen positively by whoever
publishes such a
Hi :)
I got the 4.0 article from the original link too even though i'm not in the
southern hemisphere and don't have my monitor upside down either. Guess it
is another Firefox issue. Even going to the author's page and clicking on
the 5.0 link got me to the 4.0 review. Also the font size kept ju
2015-08-24 16:36 GMT+02:00 toki :
> On 21/08/15 11:02, Pedro wrote:
>
> > I disagree that the UI is the biggest problem...
>
> The acid test is whether or not the UI passes or fails Section 508
> criteria.
>
> Currently, LibO fails Section 508 criteria.
> (Draw fails everything. Impress fails most
On 21/08/15 11:02, Pedro wrote:
> I disagree that the UI is the biggest problem...
The acid test is whether or not the UI passes or fails Section 508 criteria.
Currently, LibO fails Section 508 criteria.
(Draw fails everything. Impress fails most of the time.)
jonathon
--
To unsubscribe e-ma
: Pedro
Cc: users@global.libreoffice.org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice 5.0 Review & Rating |
PCMag.com
Nice article indeed.
I personally like the structured way of the menus. I am a long time user of
OpenOffice, and later LibreOffice.
When MS started with the ribbon, I
Nice article indeed.
I personally like the structured way of the menus. I am a long time user of
OpenOffice, and later LibreOffice.
When MS started with the ribbon, I just didn't use MS office anymore, and on my
newer systems (Mac's and PCs) I only install LO.
Recently I experienced that I ca
Jack Wallen wrote
> Thought I'd share this. One of my latest open source pieces for
> TechRepublic about LibreOffice 5.0.
>
> http://www.techrepublic.com/article/libreoffice-5-0-the-strongest-release-to-date/
Nice article.
I disagree that the UI is the biggest problem...
If you are a NEW use
On 20/08/15 12:20, Pedro wrote:
steveedmonds wrote
On 2015-08-19 12:55, James Knott wrote:
On 08/18/2015 07:23 PM, Steve Edmonds wrote:
Hi. Is this a review for LO 4? When I click on the link I get a review
for 4.0
It says 5.0, when I click on the link.
Must be a redirect because that link
I managed to get the original article by using google translate, and
than choose to see the original language ;)
The lay-out is cluttered, but the article is readable.
https://translate.google.be/translate?hl=nl&sl=en&tl=nl&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pcmag.com%2Farticle2%2F0%2C2817%2C2418419%2C00.asp&ann
steveedmonds wrote
> On 2015-08-19 12:55, James Knott wrote:
>> On 08/18/2015 07:23 PM, Steve Edmonds wrote:
>>> Hi. Is this a review for LO 4? When I click on the link I get a review
>>> for 4.0
>> It says 5.0, when I click on the link.
>>
>>
> Must be a redirect because that link takes me to
> h
15 matches
Mail list logo
