Thesaurus in right-click context menu (3.3) is going to be a very useful feature.
However, I hope the 'Ribbon' is optional, I just hate it.
I hope they let users decide what they want to use.
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Neither I nor any of my colleagues who have been "blessed" with Office 2007 have "gotten used to" the ribbon interface. It may look pretty, but it kills productivity by burying the commands under an extra level, sometimes in completely counterintuitive places. Because of this, OO has become my refuge on my home computer. Please, don't force this MicroS**t down our throats!
Why incorporate the single most disliked feature of Office 07 / 10? I hope this isn't the start of a trend for other software vendors, open or proprietary, to adopt the Ribbon.
At least then you don't need to worry about document incompatibilities.
Far as I remember, Word 2007 complains when it tries to open a document created with an *older* version of Word (e.g., 2003) but it does offer to convert it to the newer version. That, of course, means that you can't open it in the older version anymore.
In contrast, I've opened an OOo Writer 3.x document with OOo Writer 1.something. Try *that* with Word.
In contrast, I've opened an OOo Writer 3.x document with OOo Writer 1.something. Try *that* with Word.
Just install the office compatibility pack, it makes it seamless...
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=941b3470-3ae9-4aee-8f43-c6bb74cd1466&displaylang=en
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=941b3470-3ae9-4aee-8f43-c6bb74cd1466&displaylang=en
I don't remember ever seeing the compatibility pack as an automatic update. I had to go and hunt it down the first time I received a .docx file and tried to open it in Word 2000. And while the compatibilty pack will allow you to open a Word 2007 document in Word 2000, it removes any features not compatible, so if you save it in 2000 and then reopen it in 2007, any of those features are gone.
This discussion has been taken to The Water Cooler / View thread
Then why don't you just customize it then? Just like you did the old toolbars to fit how you worked and made you productive, you can do with the ribbon.
Like it or not, the ribbon can increase productivity by allowing you to have those tabs at your disposal.
Like it or not, the ribbon can increase productivity by allowing you to have those tabs at your disposal.
That would include New, Open, Save, Print Preview... ya know, all the stuff that used to be one click away and is now buried in menus...
There's a Quick Access toolbar for that very purpose. Office Button -> Options -> Customize.
If you remember the keyboard shortcuts, you can use them without any customization. For instance, Alt e s is short for Edit, Paste-special (so you can select Unformatted Text).
It's a freaking pain. In Autocad it's not bad because you can customize it, you can't customize the ribbon. Even MS says so - http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102277541033.aspx
If they allowed customizable ribbons, sure that'd be fine. I'd just build my standard toolbars back up and never use the stupid tabs.
If they allowed customizable ribbons, sure that'd be fine. I'd just build my standard toolbars back up and never use the stupid tabs.
Sure learning something new is always a pain. Read through the rest of this thread and you'll see there is always another way to skin that cat. You can drop down the little arrow to the right of the command bar, and minimize the ribbon. Then use that drop-down to add commands to the command bar. Or use the old keyboard shortcuts, if you can remember them.
I always hate it when people give that advice why should I have to do that? I use to many functions to memorize short-cut keys or put them on the command bar is unrealistic. Yes one can customize the ribbon, one just has to learn a new language to do it. That is what pisses me off, if I could drop and drag or easily customize ribbons I would not mind it that much.
Everyone does realize a third party sells software that will give one the 2003 menu interface. I think it is about $20 per program, or $50 for the whole suite.
Everyone does realize a third party sells software that will give one the 2003 menu interface. I think it is about $20 per program, or $50 for the whole suite.
Because there isn't an option "turn this back into a menu that allows me to browser hundreds of commands quickly, easily, and reliably, so that they are ALL available, and ALL in the same place no matter what "mode" I'm in".
You CAN'T customize the ribbon sufficiently to solve this problem. There's not enough bloody room.
You CAN'T customize the ribbon sufficiently to solve this problem. There's not enough bloody room.
Let's hope that OpenOffice's developers will have at least the common-sense to allow the users to choose whatever interface suite them: standard or ribbon.
I don't see how ribbonizing OO will be an advantage. I'm willing to bet that MS has patents that will prevent OO from recreating the MS Ribbon very closely.
I invested 20 years in learning the MS menu system. The ribbon has been specifically designed for NEW USERS, not me and people like me.
Sure, there are still ALT access keys to the ribbon, but some (not all) have changed. So it's time to relearn. I'm not against learning, I went back to school at a time when most people are grandparents, but I don't like the way MS forced it on us. I hope OO doesn't follow MS's bad example.
Lets face it, the "Ribbon" is simply shell to access the (menu) commands. Just like Windows was originally a shell to access DOS commands. (Yes that is an oversimplification, but it was true for Win V1.)
My biggest beef with the MS implementation of the ribbon is that it is incomplete. They replaced the menu with the ribbon, but the ribbon still invokes the old command Dialog boxes. I really wish they had completed the conversion of oldstyle dialog boxes to the "Backstage View" format.
If they go with a ribbon, I vigorously hope that OO provides the user with the option of selecting which UI to use. It should be simple enough since many 3rd parties have come up with "menu tab" addons for MS Office.
Sure the Office ribbon has the QAT, but it is s a trivial sop to power users used to customizing the menu. And yes, the 2010 (beta) ribbon allows more GUI based "drag & drop" customization (vs writing XML required by 2007). But it is still limited. You can only hide existing groups, you cannot customize them. When I "recreated" groups, the command button layout did not (and could not be forced) look the same. I can only HOPE (but don't expect), that in the GA version that MS will address those 2 issues.
I invested 20 years in learning the MS menu system. The ribbon has been specifically designed for NEW USERS, not me and people like me.
Sure, there are still ALT access keys to the ribbon, but some (not all) have changed. So it's time to relearn. I'm not against learning, I went back to school at a time when most people are grandparents, but I don't like the way MS forced it on us. I hope OO doesn't follow MS's bad example.
Lets face it, the "Ribbon" is simply shell to access the (menu) commands. Just like Windows was originally a shell to access DOS commands. (Yes that is an oversimplification, but it was true for Win V1.)
My biggest beef with the MS implementation of the ribbon is that it is incomplete. They replaced the menu with the ribbon, but the ribbon still invokes the old command Dialog boxes. I really wish they had completed the conversion of oldstyle dialog boxes to the "Backstage View" format.
If they go with a ribbon, I vigorously hope that OO provides the user with the option of selecting which UI to use. It should be simple enough since many 3rd parties have come up with "menu tab" addons for MS Office.
Sure the Office ribbon has the QAT, but it is s a trivial sop to power users used to customizing the menu. And yes, the 2010 (beta) ribbon allows more GUI based "drag & drop" customization (vs writing XML required by 2007). But it is still limited. You can only hide existing groups, you cannot customize them. When I "recreated" groups, the command button layout did not (and could not be forced) look the same. I can only HOPE (but don't expect), that in the GA version that MS will address those 2 issues.
It is much more difficult to locate the functions in the MS ribbon because of their illogical locations.
The ribbon just about always seems to require more clicks. Just doesn't compete with the older style toolbar that has been configured with the set of icons that I use most often
Question: Why don't you just copy the Ribbon interface of Microsoft Office 2007?
Answer: OpenOffice.org has millions of users all over the world, and for Project Renaissance we have defined the goal to serve them in the best way possible. However, the convenience of the Ribbon UI is still subject to heated discussions among Microsoft Office users and its acceptance among OpenOffice.org users is very low. Therefore, aside from any licensing issues, it is very unlikely that the Microsoft Ribbon UI would be the appropriate solution for OpenOffice.org users.
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Renaissance/FAQ
Answer: OpenOffice.org has millions of users all over the world, and for Project Renaissance we have defined the goal to serve them in the best way possible. However, the convenience of the Ribbon UI is still subject to heated discussions among Microsoft Office users and its acceptance among OpenOffice.org users is very low. Therefore, aside from any licensing issues, it is very unlikely that the Microsoft Ribbon UI would be the appropriate solution for OpenOffice.org users.
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Renaissance/FAQ
I'm SO glad that I learned the Alt- commands from the menu. They're still supported in MS if you know what they are.
But PUHH-LLLEEEZZEE don't put that stupid ribbon in OO!
But PUHH-LLLEEEZZEE don't put that stupid ribbon in OO!
In OO.org, which is most like Office '97, the menus are buried up to 12 deep in some cases to get to functionality people want to use in today's world.
The Ribbon is very easy and far more productive than the old menus.
One only need try to add graphics to a word processor document to find out. You can add, choose text wrap, position, add effects, borders and see all of it real time before applying it, in under 10 seconds by merely moving over galleries of choices.
Because MS came out with the Ribbon the ABMers automatically hate it.
But as you can see, the real open source leaders see that it's vastly better and have been working overtime to get it in the next release to once again "try to keep up with Microsoft".
When is open source going to show innovation, any innovation? Their 20 year journey of trying to catch MS (Shuttleworth has them working on emulating the intergration found between Windows and MS apps as he admits that is where they are far behind and need to catch up...as always).
So please enough with the ABM spam on these blogs and let's talk about technology, not your religious beliefs.
There are other forums for that but it's not welcome here or any other tech site.
But then, you can thank yourself for the snail pace adoption of open source since those who may have considered it have said "No Way" in most all cases I've ever seen because they don't want caught up in some kind of religious software war with zealots who care more about hating the competition, than the software or technology itself.
The Ribbon is very easy and far more productive than the old menus.
One only need try to add graphics to a word processor document to find out. You can add, choose text wrap, position, add effects, borders and see all of it real time before applying it, in under 10 seconds by merely moving over galleries of choices.
Because MS came out with the Ribbon the ABMers automatically hate it.
But as you can see, the real open source leaders see that it's vastly better and have been working overtime to get it in the next release to once again "try to keep up with Microsoft".
When is open source going to show innovation, any innovation? Their 20 year journey of trying to catch MS (Shuttleworth has them working on emulating the intergration found between Windows and MS apps as he admits that is where they are far behind and need to catch up...as always).
So please enough with the ABM spam on these blogs and let's talk about technology, not your religious beliefs.
There are other forums for that but it's not welcome here or any other tech site.
But then, you can thank yourself for the snail pace adoption of open source since those who may have considered it have said "No Way" in most all cases I've ever seen because they don't want caught up in some kind of religious software war with zealots who care more about hating the competition, than the software or technology itself.
After seeing the "I hate the ribbon" army had been here and left it's rhetoric and misguided posts, I thought the same thing as you pal....same old, same old.
The day we can discuss technology, including Microsoft, like adults is actually getting farther away. What a waste.
I see the same posters posting the same hackneyed "quips" or whatever from the 90s day in and day out for years on end.
What a life that must be. But if that's all it takes for you, so be it.
The day we can discuss technology, including Microsoft, like adults is actually getting farther away. What a waste.
I see the same posters posting the same hackneyed "quips" or whatever from the 90s day in and day out for years on end.
What a life that must be. But if that's all it takes for you, so be it.
"In OO.org, which is most like Office '97, the menus are buried up to 12 deep in some cases to get to functionality people want to use in today's world."
That was why there was customer task bars one could add and remove functions depending on what you were doing. I would have a custom bar for graphics, pivot tables, audit function, and macros among others. When I was dealing with one of those functionalities I would add the task bar I needed. When I needed more room I would remove one I was not using and add what I wanted. It might of took 15 to 20 seconds but saved a huge amount of time in development because I might have the set-up for hours.
Plus one can-not put macros on the command bar. I use a lot of macros. How long it takes to apply macros now is annoying. Not being able to run a macro in 2 seconds other than a short cut key sucks. If one could due this with ribbons very easily and add and take away specific custom setesup in less than 10 seconds then yes ribbon would be fine. I would not being advocating menus again. However one can-not due that so the argument still stand. 2003 is still superior to ribbons I have been working daily in 2007 for over a year now. Lets not even get into the new graphics set-up which is so much worse than 2003 in so many ways.
That was why there was customer task bars one could add and remove functions depending on what you were doing. I would have a custom bar for graphics, pivot tables, audit function, and macros among others. When I was dealing with one of those functionalities I would add the task bar I needed. When I needed more room I would remove one I was not using and add what I wanted. It might of took 15 to 20 seconds but saved a huge amount of time in development because I might have the set-up for hours.
Plus one can-not put macros on the command bar. I use a lot of macros. How long it takes to apply macros now is annoying. Not being able to run a macro in 2 seconds other than a short cut key sucks. If one could due this with ribbons very easily and add and take away specific custom setesup in less than 10 seconds then yes ribbon would be fine. I would not being advocating menus again. However one can-not due that so the argument still stand. 2003 is still superior to ribbons I have been working daily in 2007 for over a year now. Lets not even get into the new graphics set-up which is so much worse than 2003 in so many ways.
First, are you saying my example, which granted is just one small area, is not true?
Word (and all office 2007 apps) are context sensitive. When you move to a graphic in your document, the graphic specific ribbon items appear. Have you seen this? If you are creating documents with a lot of graphics, as I do for the domain experts on projects when not using Visio, I can add my grapics anywhere on the page by just clicking a position button, then I can choose text wrap, outlines, effects, shape, you name it in seconds? You are not using it properly if you can't do this.
A document with a lot of graphics that is requested to be heavily edited can literally take 30 minutes to hours to do in 00.org or Word '97 - 2003.
The ribbon interface is easily customized and if that's too difficult for you, you can use the old dialogs by clicking in the lower right corner of any ribbon grouping.
There are thousands of improvements.
That little button called "Remove duplicates" saves me and I'm sure many other people who need to populate excel with data coming from a legacy system, for example, many hours over time. Again, just another small example but when you add all of these up you get major productivity enhancement.
I have found that once I got up to full speed on MSO 2007, I can do things with up to 75% fewer keystrokes and mouseclicks.
Office 2007 has sold in the hundreds of millions and that was by choice. As you may have noticed, businesses didn't see the value in Office 2003 as the it was the same old hierarchical menus with not a lot of improvments to offer (although that was not really true due to the xml advancements) and they said YES to office 2007 in massive numbers.
Again, I can't speak for you, but whoever is in charge of oo.org sees it the opposite way than you.
I will still be using Office 2007 because the intergration is unparalleled. I can feed my users data from SQL backends very easily using MOSS 2007.
Also, Excel and Access have become much more powerful with support that allows much larger solutinos than in the past.
Word (and all office 2007 apps) are context sensitive. When you move to a graphic in your document, the graphic specific ribbon items appear. Have you seen this? If you are creating documents with a lot of graphics, as I do for the domain experts on projects when not using Visio, I can add my grapics anywhere on the page by just clicking a position button, then I can choose text wrap, outlines, effects, shape, you name it in seconds? You are not using it properly if you can't do this.
A document with a lot of graphics that is requested to be heavily edited can literally take 30 minutes to hours to do in 00.org or Word '97 - 2003.
The ribbon interface is easily customized and if that's too difficult for you, you can use the old dialogs by clicking in the lower right corner of any ribbon grouping.
There are thousands of improvements.
That little button called "Remove duplicates" saves me and I'm sure many other people who need to populate excel with data coming from a legacy system, for example, many hours over time. Again, just another small example but when you add all of these up you get major productivity enhancement.
I have found that once I got up to full speed on MSO 2007, I can do things with up to 75% fewer keystrokes and mouseclicks.
Office 2007 has sold in the hundreds of millions and that was by choice. As you may have noticed, businesses didn't see the value in Office 2003 as the it was the same old hierarchical menus with not a lot of improvments to offer (although that was not really true due to the xml advancements) and they said YES to office 2007 in massive numbers.
Again, I can't speak for you, but whoever is in charge of oo.org sees it the opposite way than you.
I will still be using Office 2007 because the intergration is unparalleled. I can feed my users data from SQL backends very easily using MOSS 2007.
Also, Excel and Access have become much more powerful with support that allows much larger solutinos than in the past.
xuniL_z:
I think you are in the minority. The Ribbon is a POS. As an example, depending on the person (e.g. with less then optimal eye sight), they may not use the maximum resolution of the monitor, and may stay with for instance 800x600. This takes up too much "real estate" on the screen. This is why both my wife and I use the free product I talk about in:
http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=331523&messageID=3309378
I've been using Office 2007 solid for about a year, maybe 1.5 years now, and it is still difficult to locate things. I found addontools.com, but when I saw it was in China, I was disappointed (read the above as for the reasons). I then came across the free item (Switzerland):
http://www.ubit.ch/fileadmin/UBitMenu/UBitMenuSetupUK.exe
I think you are in the minority. The Ribbon is a POS. As an example, depending on the person (e.g. with less then optimal eye sight), they may not use the maximum resolution of the monitor, and may stay with for instance 800x600. This takes up too much "real estate" on the screen. This is why both my wife and I use the free product I talk about in:
http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=331523&messageID=3309378
I've been using Office 2007 solid for about a year, maybe 1.5 years now, and it is still difficult to locate things. I found addontools.com, but when I saw it was in China, I was disappointed (read the above as for the reasons). I then came across the free item (Switzerland):
http://www.ubit.ch/fileadmin/UBitMenu/UBitMenuSetupUK.exe
Here's the official statement by Project Renaissance:
Question : Why don't you just copy the Ribbon interface of Microsoft Office 2007?
Answer: OpenOffice.org has millions of users all over the world, and for Project Renaissance we have defined the goal to serve them in the best way possible. However, the convenience of the Ribbon UI is still subject to heated discussions among Microsoft Office users and its acceptance among OpenOffice.org users is very low. Therefore, aside from any licensing issues, it is very unlikely that the Microsoft Ribbon UI would be the appropriate solution for OpenOffice.org users.
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Renaissance/FAQ#The_Ribbon_in_Microsoft_Office_2007
Question : Why don't you just copy the Ribbon interface of Microsoft Office 2007?
Answer: OpenOffice.org has millions of users all over the world, and for Project Renaissance we have defined the goal to serve them in the best way possible. However, the convenience of the Ribbon UI is still subject to heated discussions among Microsoft Office users and its acceptance among OpenOffice.org users is very low. Therefore, aside from any licensing issues, it is very unlikely that the Microsoft Ribbon UI would be the appropriate solution for OpenOffice.org users.
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Renaissance/FAQ#The_Ribbon_in_Microsoft_Office_2007
...mixed UI environment.
The FAQ that you reference is woefully out of date (September 2009).
Here is an official Renaissance GUI Prototype video posted to OOo's Renaissance channel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATIqhqjwUns&feature=related
The FAQ that you reference is woefully out of date (September 2009).
Here is an official Renaissance GUI Prototype video posted to OOo's Renaissance channel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATIqhqjwUns&feature=related
I need merge. You know, where you create a document with various fields and a data source, then merge them.
I use Word 2K merge all the time to covert spreadsheets into formatted documents or to insert incrementing numbers into ticket forms or merging a subscription list to print 6 x 9 catalog envelopes.
None of this can be done in OO because you have to use a wizard which forces you to do only a letter or an email. You can't even just merge a list into a page of labels.
And I won't go into the nightmare if you want to add postal barcodes to addresses.
I really don't think this is an esoteric function but it is what keeps me from converting to OO.
I use Word 2K merge all the time to covert spreadsheets into formatted documents or to insert incrementing numbers into ticket forms or merging a subscription list to print 6 x 9 catalog envelopes.
None of this can be done in OO because you have to use a wizard which forces you to do only a letter or an email. You can't even just merge a list into a page of labels.
And I won't go into the nightmare if you want to add postal barcodes to addresses.
I really don't think this is an esoteric function but it is what keeps me from converting to OO.
#2: Work with text inside PDF files as text data -- NOT as graphics files. We need to edit the WORDS in a pdf, and the wrapper-around-a-picture approach doesn't support this.
#3: Find/Replace formatting symbols (this was covered well by a couple of other replies.)
#4: Improved auto-Index, auto-Table-of-Contents, and Footnote management.
#3: Find/Replace formatting symbols (this was covered well by a couple of other replies.)
#4: Improved auto-Index, auto-Table-of-Contents, and Footnote management.
Does this mean Open Office will now open those stupid .docx files everyone insists on sending me instead of .doc?
@Thomas: The current version of OO does handle .***x files. It will not write to that format, but it will read them. You might want to update
From my own experience, and from what I have read here in the comments, I imagine that someone who had had no exposure to MS Office would be perfectly content with OOo. One thing that is blatantly absent from OOo though, is an Outlook-compatible mail client. I think if they included that, they would sway a lot more users away from MS Office. I haven't used OOo much, so I really can't speak on a comparison of the two other than the missing mail client. I do like that OOo will have a thesaurus just one click away, and that it will have SVG support.
Every single person's needs are unique, so the trick is to hit on the points that are requested by the most people. It's the age-old "squeaky wheel" principle. And bear in mind that OOo is free software, so it's a pretty darn good deal for the price.
And just as an aside, why do many of these comment threads migrate into heated discussions concerning the OS of choice, or in this case, whether or not Java is considered an OS? If you can't boot up and run the computer with it, then it's not an OS. Maybe the argument stems from people not knowing what the term 'Operating System' really means.
Every single person's needs are unique, so the trick is to hit on the points that are requested by the most people. It's the age-old "squeaky wheel" principle. And bear in mind that OOo is free software, so it's a pretty darn good deal for the price.
And just as an aside, why do many of these comment threads migrate into heated discussions concerning the OS of choice, or in this case, whether or not Java is considered an OS? If you can't boot up and run the computer with it, then it's not an OS. Maybe the argument stems from people not knowing what the term 'Operating System' really means.
I've seen several places on TR where authors (mainline - like Jack Wallen [I'm not saying Mr. Wallen is, just giving an example]) that promote the Office 2003 menus by http://www.addintools.com, a Chinese company. But, there is a free one called UBitMenu (Switzerland). :
http://www.ubit.ch/fileadmin/UBitMenu/UBitMenuSetupUK.exe
***My wife and I do our best*** not to use products from China, as much as possible. These are countless reasons, but some EXAMPLES are:
01. Portable baby swings that entrap youngsters;
02. Swimming pool ladders that break;
03. Faulty baby carriers;
04. Easy-Bake Ovens that trap children's fingers in openings;
05. Oscillating tower fans whose faulty wiring;
06. Exploding air pumps;
07. Bargain-priced oil-filled electric heaters, selling for less than $50, that burn down homes;
08. Notebook computer batteries that burn up computers;
09. Circular saws with faulty blade guards.
10. "180 food factories in China" had "tons of candy, pickles, crackers and seafood tainted with formaldehyde, illegal dyes and industrial wax."
11. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has placed a hold on five types of farmed fish and seafood containing traces of antifungal and antibiotic drugs that are potentially harmful to humans.
12. The FDA said that between October 2006 and May 2007, tests on some imported Chinese fish repeatedly found traces of the antibiotics nitrofuran and fluoroquinolones, as well as antifungals malachite green and gentian violet. The fluoroquinolones are of particular concern. These drugs are part of a family of widely used human antibiotics that the FDA forbids in seafood, in part to prevent bacteria from developing resistance to the drugs.
13. The FDA increased inspection of toothpaste made in China after reports that some of the products may contain an ingredient used in antifreeze. The ingredient, diethylene glycol, is a thickening agent not normally used in toothpaste. Diethylene glycol was found in three products manufactured by Goldcredit International Trading in China
14. The same chemical found in the toothpaste was blamed for the deaths of 51 people in Panama after they ingested tainted cough medicine.
15. Some 1.2 million ceramic heaters made in China and distributed by Lasko Products Inc., of West Chester, Pa., were recalled because of safety concerns. The heaters were a possible fire hazard, due to faulty power cords that overheated where they entered the base of the units.
16. The Play Wonder Toy Grill, also recalled due to safety concerns. The circular ash tray attached to the stainless steel legs of the grill could contain sharp edges.
17. The popular Thomas and Friends Wooden Railway toys were voluntarily recalled due to the presence of lead in some of the surface paints.
18. U.S. regulators have ordered tire importer Foreign Tire Sales, based in Union, N.J., to recall as many as 450,000 tires. The company reported that the treads on light-truck radials manufactured by Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber Co. in Hangzhou, China, might separate.
19. Wheat gluten imported from China was linked to the deaths of pets nationwide.
The above is only a small sampling of things that are bad from China. There are countless items that have been recalled. If they are so irresponsible to make products that will hurt infants/children, I don't think they would have a second thought of having malware within the software. Heck, there has even been recalls for antifreeze in toothpaste!
So if you are using MS Office 2007; you may want to consider the free product and boycott the Chinese product from addontools, let alone anything you can from China, for your safety.
http://www.ubit.ch/fileadmin/UBitMenu/UBitMenuSetupUK.exe
***My wife and I do our best*** not to use products from China, as much as possible. These are countless reasons, but some EXAMPLES are:
01. Portable baby swings that entrap youngsters;
02. Swimming pool ladders that break;
03. Faulty baby carriers;
04. Easy-Bake Ovens that trap children's fingers in openings;
05. Oscillating tower fans whose faulty wiring;
06. Exploding air pumps;
07. Bargain-priced oil-filled electric heaters, selling for less than $50, that burn down homes;
08. Notebook computer batteries that burn up computers;
09. Circular saws with faulty blade guards.
10. "180 food factories in China" had "tons of candy, pickles, crackers and seafood tainted with formaldehyde, illegal dyes and industrial wax."
11. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has placed a hold on five types of farmed fish and seafood containing traces of antifungal and antibiotic drugs that are potentially harmful to humans.
12. The FDA said that between October 2006 and May 2007, tests on some imported Chinese fish repeatedly found traces of the antibiotics nitrofuran and fluoroquinolones, as well as antifungals malachite green and gentian violet. The fluoroquinolones are of particular concern. These drugs are part of a family of widely used human antibiotics that the FDA forbids in seafood, in part to prevent bacteria from developing resistance to the drugs.
13. The FDA increased inspection of toothpaste made in China after reports that some of the products may contain an ingredient used in antifreeze. The ingredient, diethylene glycol, is a thickening agent not normally used in toothpaste. Diethylene glycol was found in three products manufactured by Goldcredit International Trading in China
14. The same chemical found in the toothpaste was blamed for the deaths of 51 people in Panama after they ingested tainted cough medicine.
15. Some 1.2 million ceramic heaters made in China and distributed by Lasko Products Inc., of West Chester, Pa., were recalled because of safety concerns. The heaters were a possible fire hazard, due to faulty power cords that overheated where they entered the base of the units.
16. The Play Wonder Toy Grill, also recalled due to safety concerns. The circular ash tray attached to the stainless steel legs of the grill could contain sharp edges.
17. The popular Thomas and Friends Wooden Railway toys were voluntarily recalled due to the presence of lead in some of the surface paints.
18. U.S. regulators have ordered tire importer Foreign Tire Sales, based in Union, N.J., to recall as many as 450,000 tires. The company reported that the treads on light-truck radials manufactured by Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber Co. in Hangzhou, China, might separate.
19. Wheat gluten imported from China was linked to the deaths of pets nationwide.
The above is only a small sampling of things that are bad from China. There are countless items that have been recalled. If they are so irresponsible to make products that will hurt infants/children, I don't think they would have a second thought of having malware within the software. Heck, there has even been recalls for antifreeze in toothpaste!
So if you are using MS Office 2007; you may want to consider the free product and boycott the Chinese product from addontools, let alone anything you can from China, for your safety.
As a translator and editor, I've regularly used most versions of MS Office (since version 6) and OpenOffice (since Star Office) for many years. What I have always missed in OOo is Find/Replace Special - such as replacing manual line breaks with paragraph marks. This prevents me from switching completely to OOo.
The only reasons I keep a copy of MS Office around are the find/replace special characters and changing sentence case features.
The Alternative dialog Find & Replace for Writer, by Tomas Bilek:
http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/project/AltSearch
http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/project/AltSearch
You can use regular expressions for this. The latest post in my blog (http://descasa.i.ph) covers this, then I expanded this in a post in Free Software Magazine (http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com) to create a macro to effect search-and-replace of hard line breaks to soft ones.
Field codes, tabs, etc.?
Some of us are hardware geeks and can't do much more with software than "hello world" in VB. Say what you will, MS made the search for these characters easy with ^l for line breaks, ^p for paragraph markers, ^t for tabs, and many others.
Some of us are hardware geeks and can't do much more with software than "hello world" in VB. Say what you will, MS made the search for these characters easy with ^l for line breaks, ^p for paragraph markers, ^t for tabs, and many others.
dropping it's requirement for an OS on top of your os fr it's "wizards"
kill the java requirement for full functionality.
I do NOT need the extra os.
kill the java requirement for full functionality.
I do NOT need the extra os.
Sorry, but Java is not an OS, it's a programming language that needs runtime support. It's the same as saying you don't want to use .Net in Windows. Even good old VB needs a runtime installed before you can use any VB programs or scripts.
the Java VM [ VIRTUAL MAACHINE ] is an OS.
and at 350 MB, it's bloated to uselessness.
and at 350 MB, it's bloated to uselessness.
seriously....
does it comunicate directly to hardware, or is it "just" another software package just like .net framework is...
excactly! just another software package that (might!) be memory hungry...
does it comunicate directly to hardware, or is it "just" another software package just like .net framework is...
excactly! just another software package that (might!) be memory hungry...
when it's 350 mb to install on GNU/Linux, which can be only 50 mb itself, it's a resource hog that needs to be garbaged.
Java may use a lot of memory etc, that's a valid debate. But that doesn't make it an OS just 'cos it's got a large footprint. In fact most large applications are larger than the OS itself. An OS doesn't have to be large, in fact a good OS should use minimum resources to leave as much free for apps as possible.
On this measure Windows is not a good OS because it consumes a huge amount of resource itself.
The OS provides the interface between hardware and software, and manages running processes, among other things. The Java VM does none of this, it's what it says, a "virtual" machine, it needs an OS to interface to a real machine.
I guess this is getting OT now!
On this measure Windows is not a good OS because it consumes a huge amount of resource itself.
The OS provides the interface between hardware and software, and manages running processes, among other things. The Java VM does none of this, it's what it says, a "virtual" machine, it needs an OS to interface to a real machine.
I guess this is getting OT now!
a) Comparing Java to an OS and calling it bloated, is just as rediculous as saying a motorcar is a bloated steering wheel... They both allow you to travel from A to B but only the car interfaces with the roads. A steering wheel is not a mode of transportation
b) FYI, jre6 == 68Mb installed, with all (unnecessary) optional extras. As far as I recall there's no need to have the JDK installed in order to run OOo
c) The full JDK has a smaller footprint than .NET, because if you want to "fairly" compare the two, you have to include Visual Studio in the comparison, since the .NET framework ships with... well, nothing, except the framework and CLI compilers. The JDK ships with compilers, instrumentation tools, security management tools, application packaging, remoting servers etc. etc. It's only missing an IDE, and trust me, a decent IDE does not come at the cost of 2Gb+ (msi compressed, installation ISO) Visual Studio.
If you want "just the framework" in Java terms, install the JRE and stop complaining about something you don't understand
b) FYI, jre6 == 68Mb installed, with all (unnecessary) optional extras. As far as I recall there's no need to have the JDK installed in order to run OOo
c) The full JDK has a smaller footprint than .NET, because if you want to "fairly" compare the two, you have to include Visual Studio in the comparison, since the .NET framework ships with... well, nothing, except the framework and CLI compilers. The JDK ships with compilers, instrumentation tools, security management tools, application packaging, remoting servers etc. etc. It's only missing an IDE, and trust me, a decent IDE does not come at the cost of 2Gb+ (msi compressed, installation ISO) Visual Studio.
If you want "just the framework" in Java terms, install the JRE and stop complaining about something you don't understand
I don't mind Java but I refuse to have .NET on any PCs I support.
If it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck!
java provides all of the hooks, just like an OS does. It lives in its own little world, surrounded by hardware and ANOTHER OS, but java has evolved (bloated itself) into so many OS functions that it's hard to argue that it's not one.
Just because a computer boots a VM OS, and then boots Windows under the VM, that doesn't mean that Windows is not an OS. In a VM environment, Windows does not "communicate directly to the hardware." Even within windows, some system calls are performed through BIOS rather than directly to the hardware. That doesn't change the fact that Windows is an OS. Likewise, just because java boots under Windows or OS/X or Linux doesn't mean java is not an OS - in fact the java sandbox was probably one of the first virtual machines.
And as Jaqui said, it's grown to 350MB now. It's a monster.
So yes, java IS an OS.
java provides all of the hooks, just like an OS does. It lives in its own little world, surrounded by hardware and ANOTHER OS, but java has evolved (bloated itself) into so many OS functions that it's hard to argue that it's not one.
Just because a computer boots a VM OS, and then boots Windows under the VM, that doesn't mean that Windows is not an OS. In a VM environment, Windows does not "communicate directly to the hardware." Even within windows, some system calls are performed through BIOS rather than directly to the hardware. That doesn't change the fact that Windows is an OS. Likewise, just because java boots under Windows or OS/X or Linux doesn't mean java is not an OS - in fact the java sandbox was probably one of the first virtual machines.
And as Jaqui said, it's grown to 350MB now. It's a monster.
So yes, java IS an OS.
I have done a lot of dev on the Dallas TINI, which is a small ethernet capable SBC, and it uses a Java Micro Edition version of 1.18 as the full OS, with login shell and web server, all on 512KB of RAM. Now, 512KB is a bit small for a 35MB download. I CAN BE an OS, not IS and OS, the JVM has NO access to hardware whatsoever, that's their whole paradigm, to be hardware agnostic. Without JNI and natively written code for your specific platform, Java cannot touch your hardware, and is therefore not an interface between userland and hardware (which includes the BIOS, otherwise DOS wouldn't be an OS either). Even on the TINI, the 1.18 JDK has to interface with lower level assembler routines using JNI to access resources.
The latest JRE is (release 20) is 79?788?328 bytes in size; period. OOo does not use the JDK, so why install it?
Would you make your end users install Visual Studio with the sourcecode to the framework just to use .NET framework?
I was just trying to make the point that there is a huge distinction between the JDK and the JRE, and coming in under 80MB it's really not "bloated" at all. With its "compile once, run anywhere" feature, the JDK cannot have low-level hardware access because the same program is guaranteed to run on a JavaPen, a Smart Card and, a Sun E10,000 and a Mac or PC, without recompiling, as long as you are not using APIs that are not available on that platform. Notice the fine line here: API does not imply that it talks to the hardware directly, it simply means that there is an implementation of native code on a given platform that conforms to the JSR. etc. nevermind.
Apologies, didn't want to start an argument, so yes, it CAN be an OS, but running OOo through the JRE is certainly not a prime example of this.
Cheers,
Andi
The latest JRE is (release 20) is 79?788?328 bytes in size; period. OOo does not use the JDK, so why install it?
Would you make your end users install Visual Studio with the sourcecode to the framework just to use .NET framework?
I was just trying to make the point that there is a huge distinction between the JDK and the JRE, and coming in under 80MB it's really not "bloated" at all. With its "compile once, run anywhere" feature, the JDK cannot have low-level hardware access because the same program is guaranteed to run on a JavaPen, a Smart Card and, a Sun E10,000 and a Mac or PC, without recompiling, as long as you are not using APIs that are not available on that platform. Notice the fine line here: API does not imply that it talks to the hardware directly, it simply means that there is an implementation of native code on a given platform that conforms to the JSR. etc. nevermind.
Apologies, didn't want to start an argument, so yes, it CAN be an OS, but running OOo through the JRE is certainly not a prime example of this.
Cheers,
Andi
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
