Peter wrote:
> This made me think. Do you think Luxurosity could actually hurt OOo if their
> misrepresentation got linked back to us?
Possible, yes.
Probable, I don't know.
>blames us for the bad press because they think we were involved.
That is quite possible.
If you bought an Office Suite thinking it could replace Acrobat
Distiller, and MSOffice Professional Edition, and discovered taht you
couldn't edit PDF documents, and your $10K Excel addins didn't work,
and you couldn't access your email with it, how would you feel?
That PHB is annoyed, becuase of the misrepresentation, and proceeds to
badmouth the source --- which may be OOo, or may be the company that
did the actual misrepresentation.
> I don't think, at least I hope we don't claim that OOo is 100% perfect
> anywhere in writing. If we do, we should stop.
Some users have written statements to that effect. The majority of
them can be termed "acceptable marketing hyperbole". Especially if it
is one of the lsits, because there usually will be a retort to the
effect of "but OOo can't do some obscure feature nobody needs or uses,
like writing at a 45 degree slant in Write."
[ I was the one who filed that in Issuezilla, as an enhancement
request. There are two writing systems that have that
directionality.]
> Where is this tool?
Technically, it is a tool for _importing_ documents. To export them
you have to use a different PDF export tool.
It runs only on *Nix, and you have to compile it. I am not sure where
I found it. Probably in the abandoned projects at sourceforge. [I
probably found it two and half or so years ago. I don't have it
anymore --- I lost four computers in a two month time span to hardware
failures.]
The edit PDF part is not mentioned in the file description. You learn
how to get it into OOo by reading the source code.
The tool creator does point out that using to read locked PDF files is
a violation of Adobe's license.
xan
jonathon
--
A Fork requires:
Seven systems with:
1+ GHz Processors
2+ GB RAM
0.25 TB Hard drive space
