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.'"
I wish... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Access 2003? Even Access 2000 would be a huge landmark for open source!
Re: (Score:2)
Because a real DB is also free so why use a dumbed down one?
Re:I wish... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I wish... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Would you rather have a 1 million line excel spreedsheet where there are 5 different versions all emailed around and not synchronized instead? Yes, this happens because people do not have time to wait for I.T. and some BS policy on databases. This causes a lot more headaches.
I will take access thank you.
If it is such a pain do not buy an Oracle License. Use Mysql or postgresql and use ODBC as an external datasource. A fresh college grad making websites in college should be able to set it up in about a day o
Re: (Score:2)
Would you rather have a 1 million line excel spreedsheet where there are 5 different versions all emailed around and not synchronized instead?
We have that anyway. Every day there is another Excel spreadsheet unleashed that some guy cobbled together to pull in data from twelve other spreadsheets and two external data feeds that he gave to his buddies and now he has left the company and the hard coded credentials he had embedded in the macro no longer works. We are called to "fix" the problem and it needs to be done in less than 10 minutes for a report that is critical to the business.
Yes, this happens because people do not have time to wait for I.T. and some BS policy on databases. This causes a lot more headaches.
Who said anything about waiting for IT? The tools and abilit
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure that Access' mission in life is making it comparatively easy for people to develop database frontends(and often get in over their heads and produce some real nightmares...) not to be a database per se. Although I think that MS has been moving toward killing JET, in favor of SQL Server 3-legged-puppy edition, to make upselling to SQL server proper easier, the point is making it easy to dump some forms and buttons in place without having to be a real programmer.
It was... However the latest ribbonified reincarnation of Access is a big bucket of wtf. Its uglier than a hat full of arseholes and as user friendly as a razor blade ice cream. Now its like some sort of bastardized excel with forms. And whilst you might be able to make a case for the ribbon tool bar on word and excel (NOOOOO! I will hate if for EVER!) it sure as hell doesn't belong on a development platform.
(Can someone please explain to me how the new navigation thingy works? What was so hard about 'table
Re: (Score:1)
LOL, no way. Open source might need the equivalent of 4th dimension.
Unless the recent versions of Access allow multiuser concurrent connection, and feature an automatic web frontend and server, Access it is utterly useless for modern scenarios.
legacy access DBs -> mdbtools or plain csv export -> web2py is the best route IMHO.
Or, if you are illiterate wrt programming, wagn or pythoncard.
Re: (Score:1)
You should try Access 2007, minutes later you'll be reading in braille.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because it is not a server database.
It is a personal one. If you need real databases then use an external source like SQL Server or even Mysql through ODBC.
Access has a great gui that a non IT professional can create a solution quickly without having the hell of 5 versions of a 1 million line excel spreadsheet emailed and unsynchronized floating on the network were 1 - 2 hours a day are spent finding errors. Yes corporate America is doing this more commonly thanks to restrictive I.T. and the high demand for
Re: (Score:2)
Because Base is horrid at letting you quickly and easily connect two different data sources together and move data from A to B. In MSAccess, you simply link to the tables and can write queries to move from one to the other, or write out to a temporary table temporarily, etc.
Or the whole "can't import/export to CSV without going through Calc" nonsense?
Base is a toy, and a not very useful one at that.
Re: (Score:2)
I would like you to expand on your reply. As far as I know, linking tables in Base is just drawing a line between them. You may be right about moving data -- but doesn't Base allow SQL?
Temporary tables, temporarily? Wouldn't that need table descriptions to be executed? I imagine that would be a bit beyond what Base is intended for.
I thought the purpose of Base was to allow table, form, and report design. And allow links from the tables to spreadsheet and word processor.
You can put buttons and stuff on a for
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting how un-Access-like the base app is. Is Access 2003's functionality that hard to duplicate?
Having a manual?
The problem with Base isn't that it's clunky. From my perspective sooner or later *any* product like this starts to look clunky. The problem with Base is that it's almost entirely undocumented except for a handful of "how to's".
Take the underlying database engine: HSQL. It's actually quite a nice system. Even the rather old version that ships with LibreOffice is head and shoulders above Microsoft's JET both in correctness and standards compliance. And HSQL has pretty good documentation. So
Re: (Score:2)
Do you really need a crappy integrated database app? Aren't one of the powerful free stand alone databases capable enough?
Finally get good doc support? (Score:5, Informative)
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: (Score:3)
My pet peeve is really on Calc. Why the hell can't I merge cells which were previously merged?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I tried using calc the other day to deal with a table of hex values. The built-in hex2dec() function couldn't handle a leading '0x'! I tried working around it with a custom function written in basic and ran into endless problems dealing with the poorly documented API/language.
The word processor is fine for basic work, but for spreadsheets I'll stick with the copy of MS-Office provided by my employer.
Re: (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 s
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You shouldn't get reamed out for that
But I will (and you probably will, too). I already have a bit, judging by the comment history. Talking about Linux or FOSS here in anything other than a positive light is tantamount to sacrilege. It'd be as if I went to the Apple community and called Steve Jobs anything other than a technological revolutionary. It's not a big deal, though - every community has its unreasonable fanatics.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Works other ways too: last autumn a schoolwork doc of mine including charts and line art was all Looney Tunes when afterwards viewed in MS Word. For this kind of quirks LibreOffice is too dangerous to be used in the real world.
The thing is, as a word processor, LO is excellent. But the compatibility with Word needs more work regarding the accuracy how documents are displayed and opened/saved. This is important thing to get right.
Repeatability (Score:2)
Otherwise, print-repeatability is out the window.
You were saying...?
Re:Finally get good doc support? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's hilarious how people bash LO for not being 100% compatible with what is effectively an undocumented, proprietary format that shifts greatly between versions. Even OOXML is deeply tied into Microsoft internals and features a ridiculously large spec full of binary blobs. Seriously, I'd buy the criticisms if the all of the formats were open and fully documented but virtually every criticism is specific to undocumented formats that the vendors leverage to hinder competitors from encroaching on their market share.
The rest of your arguments are off topic for the subject at hand.
Ironically, if I were to downmod you rather than post, it'd be because of this silly passive-aggressive statement.
Re: (Score:3)
It's hilarious how people bash LO for not being 100% compatible with what is effectively an undocumented, proprietary format that shifts greatly between versions.
...that nearly every business, government, university, high school, and grade school in the world uses.
Use, .doc, .docx, OOXML, etc. are fucked, but they are the (unfortunate) standard. And if LO/OO can't render them properly then they are all but useless in those situations, which is honestly the majority of places you would use a word processor.
And I'm not passive agressive. You're passive agressive! And kind of a poopy head! So there. d=
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't passive aggressive. It was a common strategy on Slashdot (I've seen it several times and it always seems to work) for pre-empting downmods and gaining up mods. I'm not sure why it works but it does.
Re: (Score:2)
Ditto. It's funny that even old, updated Office 2000 SR-3(?) with converter packs, does a good job handling with all newer Office documents. LibreOffice and OpenOffice still can't. :(
Re: (Score:2)
Let me explain that to you: OpenOffice/LibreOffice is supposed to allow word processing, creating and editing spreadsheets and presentations. It is not a product supposed to import Microsoft files. Once you accept that, you have to say that OOo/LOo do what they are
Re: (Score:2)
Let me explain that to you: OpenOffice/LibreOffice is supposed to allow word processing, creating and editing spreadsheets and presentations. It is not a product supposed to import Microsoft files. Once you accept that, you have to say that OOo/LOo do what they are supposed to do. And they do it well.
I... I am aware of this. Perhaps you did not read my post in its entirety?
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.
The problem isn't one person using LO/OO. It's someone else using Word and sending a document to someone who uses LO/OO. Even if you can get them to put in the effort to change it to a different format (and if it's some luddite manager up in a corner office, you can forget that shit ever happening), the majority of people will not and you are still out in the cold.
I also take issue with the whole "it's not supposed to support Microsof
Re: (Score:2)
One thing people need to keep in mind is that POORLY FORMATTED documents will usually fall apart when anything is changed. Just because something looks good on the screen at the moment, doesn't mean proper formatted was used.
For example, a document that did not use tab stops, but someone just used a bunch of spaces to position something- if the destination system doesn't have the EXACT SAME FONT, the spacing will change and the wrapping might fall apart. Same thing with lines- it is SO common for people t
Re: (Score:1)
OOXML standard is a few dozen megabytes, and that is without the scripting part. While OpenDocument standard is a 7,4 Mb zip file. It isn't suprising that LO couldn't support OOXML properly.
Re: (Score:2)
My experience is that it is MSWord that is incompatible, I have fixed broken Word documents using LibreOffice to get them to open in Word ... and corrected layout issues in LibreOffice because I could not fix them in Word
So when will Open Office merge? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
As I understand it LibreOffice nabs anything useful from OpenOffice anyway since it open source and LibreOffice doesn't need any copyright assignment. So in practice I just expect it to slowly die off like xfree86 did after everyone continued on as xorg. Maybe they get the name back or maybe they don't, but it'll practically be a rename not a merger.
Thank you, TDF! (Score:2)
I hate office suites, but they're a necessary evil. And I'm beginning to mellow and even like certain parts of LibreOffice like the spreadsheet component.
Thanks for all the hard work, TDF guys and gals.
Re:Thank you, TDF! (Score:4, Interesting)
I just installed the new version because I needed to work on an old Visio diagram & I had read that Draw supports Visio imports. It didn't actually support the ancient version I was dealing with, but I was pleasantly surprised at how easy it was to just duplicate the old diagram in Draw, connectors & all. Big thumbs up!
Re: (Score:2)
Please note that there is almost NO difference in LO Draw and OO Draw. But your discovery is typical... most people have NO IDEA how powerful Draw is. It is actually quite useful and flexible.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it better than Inkscape?
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on what one means by "better". I would say there are features in both that are better than the others. The primary advantage of Draw is that it is contained in the same suite as the other OpenOffice apps. So the menus, use, etc are consistent and easier to learn. It is also more tightly integrated with the rest. But IInkscape has certainly progressed beyond the capabilities of Draw.
I drew a scale, many-layer vector diagram of a huge facility in Draw. With connected objects, snap grid, etc.
Quick question (Score:5, Insightful)
Did they, finally, remove that nonsensical Java dependency?
It made strategical sense as long as it was Sun's baby. But, technically, it really is just a huge "WTF?"
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:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The java features were the wizards ( the GUIs for them ). If you do anything more than type a note you would miss their presence.
Seriously, they should write new things, fast things, to replace that stuff.
Re: (Score:1)
That's why gentoo use flags exist! :D
Re: (Score:1)
You means, when you have the memory to spare for what is universally agreed to be a large JVM by any reasonable measure. On older machines, dragging in such dependencies can completely kill performance. So please, put things into proper perspective. Simply saying, "well it works for me", means exactly that and no more. In other words, you wasted our time.
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: (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:Biggest flaw remains unfixed- (Score:5, Funny)
It's more like MS Office than current versions of MS Office... ribbonless, the way I likes it. Now get off my lawn!
Re:Biggest flaw remains unfixed- (Score:5, Insightful)
The ribbon is a nice UI that really isn't very different than the old UI. It takes vertical drop-down menus and makes them horizontal. Then it ads pictures.
Big deal.
Some people claim that it takes up more space, but that is debatable. If you're truly hard-up for space you can always minimize the ribbon. Apparently in the next version of Office it will be minimized by default.
Dunno why people bitch about the ribbon so much. I think it's a combination of "I don't care why they changed it, it's different and I HATE different" and "Look! Microsoft is doing something! LET'S HATE ON IT!"
Re:Biggest flaw remains unfixed- (Score:5, Insightful)
I mostly blame the fuckers who killed 16:10, since that can't be fixed in software; but it wasn't a helpful coincidence.
Re: (Score:1)
Trust the fungus.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Oh, not so different, eh?
How about those who use keyboard shortcuts? Alt+F, P. Hmmm, no printing? WTF? Alt+F, A. No save as?
Yes, totally identical.
Re:Biggest flaw remains unfixed- (Score:4, Insightful)
WTF, WTF'er?
Word 2007.
ALT-F. A. Save-As dialog pops up
ALT-F. P. Print dialog pops up.
For crepe's sake, it even DISPLAYS the letters for you for keyboard navigation of the ribbon. It's almost like EMACs, except you can see where the heck you're diving down into.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, not so different, eh?
How about those who use keyboard shortcuts? Alt+F, P. Hmmm, no printing? WTF? Alt+F, A. No save as?
Yes, totally identical.
What about those keyboard shortcuts? A quick test in Excel 2010:
Alt+F,P -> Print
Alt+F,A -> Save As
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:Biggest flaw remains unfixed- (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft has to change Office every so often. Its necessay otherwise how do they sell the same product over and over again ? It sure isn't getting new functions is it ? Oh maybe in 2 decades we will make the emacs joke about Office. But until then, to get the suckers (consumers, enterprises, etc...) to lay down $$$ every 3 years for whats basically a glorifed typewriter they have to change, even if its superficial change. Office attaigned maturity with the 95 version. Since then its been about superficial changes and format changes of course.
Re: (Score:2)
The folks in Redmond were caught by surprise again. Only this time, it was by tablets (which is surprising since they tried to push it ten years ago) and they are reacting how they always react. That is, by leveraging their desktop monopoly to break into new markets.
The new ui in windows 8 is forcing people to learn how to use their new fancy tablet UI so users can transition between Microsoft devices with little adjustment. That's the idea. While this ui appears to be pissing off the technical crowd,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Which I love they do. IT helps me push Libre office.
Not only does it have Lower TCO, but it also has ZERO training for the users.
Allowed us to avoid the MSFT Office tax cince 2005.
Re: (Score:1)
Good luck having another supplier, vendor, or another business view your documents and have them all looking funny?
Their is a reason businesses standardize on Office. Every office user who is not a FOSS zealot hates Libra Office with a passion and I have worked in projects before where it was replaced with Office so they can work and do things like everyone else.
Maybe in the future it will take off, just like these same office workers scorend Firefox and went back to IE 6 because it felt better. But Libra O
Re:Biggest flaw remains unfixed- (Score:5, Insightful)
> Good luck having another supplier, vendor, or another business view your documents
Who has to conform to whom depends on who is the dominating partner in a communication. If the dominating partner mandates that all communication with him from now has to be LO-compatible, as a supplier you have to become LO-compatible, or you wont get his business.
The key to establish LO in the office space is to make a few influential players start using it, everybody who depends on them in some way will have to follow.
> and have them all looking funny?
If they depend on getting money from you, it suddenly is their documents looking funny, not yours. It is just a matter of perspective.
Re: (Score:1)
Call me cynical.
But I once told an I.T. consulting executive, that I love FOSS because it is free and it is the best!
He rolled his eyes and decided I not important enough to do business with. Doesn't even prefer expensive solutions and loves shareware?? This was 10 years ago and Linux was a toy compared to NT 4 in his eyes probably. But it was embarasing for me.
I guess it depends how big you are. There is a reason many businesses still use IE 6 in 2012 like I mentioned above. It is because if you are Volksw
Re: (Score:2)
"resume's need to be in an editable format" so you can remove the offensive extraneous apostrophe's!
Re: (Score:2)
Dumb argument anyway. I have TONS of clients that are moving to LO. Big stodgy corporate clients, too.
Re: (Score:2)
No problem at all, we send them PDF files. What fool would send a contractor or supplier/vendor a DOC file? In fact we have less problems with all the customers and suppliers/ etc cxince we changed from MS office.
P.S. The office people LOVE that save as PDF is native unlike the substandard MS office product.
Re: (Score:1)
How would they edit the forms then?
How can someone highlight your resume and make amendments when copying the file back and forth between people?
Re: (Score:1)
Why would a contractor or supplier/vendor highlight your resume? I believe that the GP doesn't want to send editable forms to such people.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would a contractor or supplier/vendor highlight your resume? I believe that the GP doesn't want to send editable forms to such people.
This argument really refers to recruitment agencies, who love to receive people's CVs (resumes) in Word format so they can quickly copy and paste the information into their own template and thus make it look like they have added some value as part of the justification for their fees..
But this is a relatively specialised case, normally when you send documents to external customers, contractors or whoever you don't normally want them to be editable.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with this completely. You dont communicate with other businesses with office documents, you send PDF's. You want something that maintains presentation, while giving you some piece of mind that some desk jockey isnt editing away at your document only to be picked up by a manager/executive and then wondering why you are offering low prices etc.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the wonderful thing about corporate software. If there's something that they decide is too expensive to maintain, they drop it. Then you have to retrain all your employees. Remember that again the next time someone talks about TCO...
Re: (Score:1)
People bitch about the ribbon because they knew exactly where to find features in the past, and now they can't find it.
It's so simple... first you look across the TOP to find the ribbon you want. Click that. Then, look across the BOTTOM to find the group of icons you want. Then, look in the MIDDLE for the icon you're looking for. If you can't find it, see if there's a tiny arrow in the lower right of the icon group. Click that, and you will get a dialog with more options. Now, isn't that easier than a borin
Re: (Score:2)
I love the ribbon now and I cringe going back to menus.
It has its benefits and if you hit the alt key, it will even number the shortcuts. You can preview changes by just having the mouse cursor over all the settings. I love it and the ribbon bashing is so 2007.
It reminds me of those whinning about guis and how CLI terminals and DOS were soo awesome.
It took a week to learn but unlike METRO solid R&D was behind it in usability. Word is certainly more tolerable.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry Latex does not cut it for marketing shops creating brochures and imageMagik or whatever it is called is no photoshop.
If marketing shops are too stupid to use LaTeX, then why should I bother with them?
Businesses exist to provide a service/product and make money, not to take part in software religious wars. They want common tools to be good enough to do what they want and not require specialised knowledge or expertise. If you can knock out your material on Word, anyone you employ can get straight down to working on it rather than having to learn LaTex
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Problems with the Ribbon:
- the change was done with no regard for longtime users who lose ALL of their knowledge of where to find what feature, with no option to revert to the old ways.
- Worse, Microsoft threw out conventions like the menu order (File, Edit) that have been the same in all Windows programs since W3.1. Again, loss of knowledge.
- it takes much longer to go through all the Ribbons to find a feature than to drag through the menus. You could drag through all of the menus with a single click-and-d
Re: (Score:2)
> All of this for the sake of being more newbie-friendly and ooh-shiny.
Thats the PR make-believe.
The real reason is that many businesses refuse to upgrade their XP/2003 offices because they work too well. So you have to intentionally break them by getting all new office users used to the ribbon, so when they get into a company still using XP/2003, they feel helpless and ask for 2007 because of the ribbon.
This is something I've observed over the years, users accustomed to the ribbon complain much more abo
Re: (Score:3)
Dunno why people bitch about the ribbon so much.
I'll list my particular grievances:
1. It undoes 15 years of expertise I had in using Excel and Word. I've been using the ribbon now for over a year and still find myself hunting occasionally - my productivity has still not caught up to the "old" interface.
2. It changes depending on window size/screen size. On my laptop with a small screen, the ribbons are subtly rearranged compared to those on my desktop. On my desktop, I don't run Word full screen, since my monitor is large. Depending on how large I make t
Re: (Score:2)
But Excel's graphing options are pretty much stuck in 1996.
MS Office's graphs are intended for general business users. If you have some especially complex technical graphing requirement, you should be using another or an additional piece of software. But for the majority of people, it's more convenient to have adequate graphing features built into the software you're already using.
For work, most people use basic line/.bar and pie charts, and that's about it.
Right tool for the right job, as always.
Re: (Score:2)
Whatever Excel was "for", it has become a jack of all trades. It is often the quick dirty way to look at some data. And some of it's features, like pivot tables, make it even more powerful than some of the "additional pieces of software" you mention. I'm not afraid to get my hands dirty with Matlab - but Matlab is really more suited to analyzing the same kind of data set over and over. Excel is far more flexible, even though it is not nearly as powerful overall.
The only place I would caution people away fro
Re: (Score:2)
The ribbon is a nice UI that really isn't very different than the old UI.
Sorry but I found the ribbon tedious and confusing but maybe that's because I'm an infrequent MS Office user.
Re:Biggest flaw remains unfixed- (Score:4)
Personally, I have found the buttons to be meaningless and totally non-descriptive. Words do a much better (and more consistent!) job of explaining what a task is supposed to do rather than a picture. For example, how does one distinguish between single spacing, 1.5 spacing and double spacing using an image? The icons are about 30 pixels square, and the image is basically just a series of vaguely shaded lines. On the other hand, it makes a lot more sense to me to click on the Format menu, then Paragraph, then find the Spacing portion of the dialog box. There are some things you just can't express using images (much less images which are less than a centimeter in size) that you can using words for directing workflow in a complex program like a document typesetter. I also take issue with the way things are organized, but I can't really give a concrete example - it's been years since I've used Office anyways.
I think the appeal of the ribbon is not cause it's better but because it caters to people who don't spend any effort thinking about how they can do what they want to. Usability, organization and workflow suffer as a result. This is why a disproportionately large fraction of /.ers hate it while pretty much everyone else likes it.
Re: (Score:1)
W8 is clearly going to be a massive flop, so Office is MS's last living cash-cow and for most people, Libre is just a much better suite. The shills will be desperate to spread FUD before people realise just how much better.
Expect more dirt than discussion.
The biggest problem is not the UI (Score:2)
OpenOffice faithfully replicates the MS Office way of doing things, even if it is the wrong way.
Text styles for instance.
Every sensible program assigns a style to a paragraph, and a style update will change all paragraphs that have this style assigned. Same for character styles.
MS Word messed this up royally. Half the documents I open have all paragraphs use the Normal style with different customisations on every paragraph. Cleaning this up is a nightmare. And the list goes on.
Re: (Score:2)
Word can work that way, but it's not obvious or easy (to me, anyway) so no one does it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
OpenOffice/LibreOffice is not Microsoft Office.
Now, in OOo/LO, try
Tools/Macros/Organize Macros/LibreOffice Basic (or Python, JavaScript, BeanShell).
If you've choosen LibreOffice (since this major discussion is about LibreOffice 3.5.1 and the minor discussion appears to be about "VBA" or LibreOffice BASIC), you will see My Macros/LibreOffice Macros, and the individual documents. Under each of these, you will see library names, module names, and then the macros.
I assume you knew this, given that you were tryi
Re: (Score:2)
With Further investigating, it appears Calc is attempting to Interpret code that isn't supposed to run --- Older versions of functions (backed up) before significant changes were made to the functions. So the interpreter is bailing cuz unused code has errors in it. As I stated the Script Editor was opening due to interpreter errors. When
Re: (Score:3)
Calc doesn't do VBA. Different Macro semantics. If you want help in the conversion, you can contact me at fred (dot) weigel (at) zylog (dot) ca.
Assuming you want to go it alone:
ActiveWorkBook is replaced with ThisComponent
ActiveSheet is replaced with ThisComponent.CurrentController.ActiveSheet
ActiveCell is replaced with ThisComponent.getCurrentSelection
etc.
try http://www.openoffice.org/api/docs/common/ref/index-files/index-1.html [openoffice.org]
Basically, OOo BASIC macros are really not that useful for beginners -- there i
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry for replying to my own post. Note that I don't do this for free -- it's a commercial service. There should be some other benefit for your selection of OOs over Microsoft Office. Simply saving a couple of bucks on licensing won't make up our conversion fee. However, platform support, ability to control both the app and platform layers, ability to write extensions in other languages, whatever, may justify the conversion.
Re: (Score:1)
Wow!
Also, in Linux, typing "del *.*" says "zsh: command not found: del".
So Linux is so buggy that it is, as you said, USELESS. It can't even handle a simple delete command using del/erase.
Like if your English would not work eg in Spain. That's because Spain is a defective, useless country. Right?
Re: (Score:2)
Can't question Open Source on Slashdot, I guess.
It was actually a valid question I thought. I didn't realize OO/Libre Office was so broken that it couldn't understand VBA. I don't see how any IT Manager could convince Upper Management to switch over from MS Office to OO/Libre when VBA is broken out of the box.
Re: (Score:1)
I've quit MSOffice at 97 version for OOo ~1.1 and I've never heard such an argument.
There's not about price or freedom. OOo/LO is technically superior for the average user. I don't care if it lacks a special feature of MSO. It had pdf support from 1.x versions which Word97 lacked -- a deal breaker, it had infinite spell checkers, not just English and the local language, and above all, it has a consistent and logical, predictable UI. After I quit Windows in early 00's, it was not an issue at all, since MSO d
Re: (Score:2)
What are you talking about? I have evolution linked with calendars and addresses. Trolling are we? Maybe YOU are slow?