LibreOffice 3.5.1 Released With Fixes 128
Thinkcloud writes "The Document Foundation has released LibreOffice 3.5.1. Some of the core fixes include: don't crash for empty input data in charts, UI fix on PDF export dialog, don't copy page styles into temporary clipboard doc, and use the correct db range for the copy. 'Another milestone for the LibreOffice project was hit this past month as well. "The number of TDF hackers has overtaken the threshold of 400 code developers, with a large majority of independent volunteers and several companies paying full time hackers." Although some are paid developers, no company employs more than 7% of developers, keeping the project independent and self-governing.'"
Finally get good doc support? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Biggest flaw remains unfixed- (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, people are adverse to change. That doesn't mean change is bad, but neither does it mean it is good. Rather, it puts the onus on the person suggesting the change to show why the disruption and re-learning that will need to take place is worthwhile.
If, as you say, it is a "nice UI that really isn't very different than the old UI" then why is it necessary to force people to spend any time re-learning the interface? Why take up more real estate to do so and then tell users "well if you want it back, just minimize our annoying new UI?" This isn't somebody's pet project; it's an enterprise-class software suite used by literally millions and millions of people around the world. Change for the sake of change is not helpful; it is actively counter-productive in the most literal sense of the term.
I honestly can't decide if communication is Microsoft's great failure or if they really don't have a coherent reason for the things they do. It's happening again with Windows 8. Is the UI change just the stupidest possible idea in the world, or is it the greatest thing since sliced bread and they have just been utterly failing at actually communicating why? Don't get me wrong, I see how it's beneficial to THEM to essentially be able to focus on one UI across devices, but I don't see why I should want a touch-driven UI for my computer with mouse support tacked on top instead of an operating system built for that usage--and more importantly, one I have been largely familiar with for what, 15 years?
So yeah, I'm not adverse to change but somebody needs to show me why the learning curve and lost productivity is ultimately worthwhile. I don't care if that learning curve is five seconds or five years. If they can't do that, they deserve the derision. It's not like they don't have the budget for it, so I have to assume it's because they don't have the rationale.
Re:Quick question (Score:5, Informative)
According to the System Requirements [libreoffice.org] documentation, LibreOffice will run without Java, but still has some features that make use of it.
Re:Quick question (Score:5, Informative)
Work is under way, but it's a non-trivial task since large bits of the code are in Java, most notably in Base. The rest will as far as I know run without it but you might get errors when you try to use some functionality. Patience, my friend.
Re:Quick question (Score:2, Informative)
Not yet, there is only so fast they can remove it without breaking working features, they are making progress though. Among other gradual improvements help has just been made Java independent and there has been some rather extensive work on wizards, although I understand the latter is not yet good enough to use for end users.
Re:Finally get good doc support? (Score:4, Informative)
It might have to do with MS not releasing how OOXML does some things like âoeAuto Space like Word 95â.
MS also has 2 versions of OOXML:
-OOXML original flavour (what current version of MsOffice writes)
-OOXML ISO-flavour (version of OOXML that MS was able to buy an ISO standard for.)
I don't know which version LO supports.
Re:Finally get good doc support? (Score:3, Informative)
OpenOffice had the same problem and probably still does.
I'm sure I'll be modded down into oblivion for saying the following, but it bears repeating and it's true, so... yeah. I really don't care if a bunch of people want to be shut out from hearing something true but uncomfortable.
The inability to nail down problems like this is one of the reasons open source is not always taken seriously in the business world. You can't claim to be a good alternative to the paid thing if your product doesn't do what it's supposed to do. Companies (and many individuals) need close to 100% reliability as possible. Too many FOSS projects seem to have people focused on geeky technical details (we made it 5% more RAM efficient!) and less so on user-friendliness or functionality.
I've tried to introduce people to OpenOffice (and LibreOffice after they forked from OO). I've had more than a few instances where a friend tries to open an old college assignment or something in OO/LO and the formatting is completely fucked. They deride it as being completely unusable when said document would open just fine in any version of Microsoft Office from that year or later, and inquire about pricing or where to grab a bootleg.
I mean, we all know that usability and function should win? If something has the features the majority of people want and make it easy as shit to use, they're going to take over the market. This is why the iPod and iPad are so successful compared to their competitors - they make it shiny, and they make it easy. Lots of open source software (specifically, all of the stuff marketed as "alternatives" to commercial products: OO/LO, Linux and its distros, GIMP, etc.) fails miserably at both and they're never going to gain any ground until they remedy that.
(Hoo boy, I just said Apple was better than open source software at something. I had better stock up on the KY for the reaming I'm about to get in downmods.)
P.S., I used OpenOffice and now use LibreOffice in my home on all of my computers and I love it. It's great when you create documents natively in it. It just isn't always that great when opening docs from other programs, but I'm a technically-savvy person and I can adjust. The layperson can not.