OOo contributors make a dash for LibreOffice

The OO committee can't match their warranty of archival standard software.

I mean I really DO like Open Office - but a FEW really really fundamentally STUPID omissions - like the prohibition of the embedding of ones own fonts into ones own documents, is indefensible.

There are two parts to graphically conveying information:

1. The first and most important part IS the layout - it's the image. It's the FONTS, it's the location, it's the tables, the diagrams, the margins, the headers, headings and the foot notes and the pictures etc...

2. And every part of the document - revolves around the font and the font size.

And if you cannot embed your own fonts into your own documents - when a document is constituted with a specific layout, font types and sizes;

And when those specific layouts are re-opened on a machine without the system fonts in it - then there goes your entire project - everything turns to shit.

The very structure of a document - IS it's FONTS.

Then you get the people who refuse to allow people to embed their own fonts as a native function; and then you get moderators who defend that position - and who ban you and side line the issue when you confront them.......

In spite of the OO committee's claims that it meets the standard for public storage, and backward compatibility etc., what the lack of embedding does is make the software NON archival quality... It cannot be pulled out of storage 50 years after it was produced - in the as produced layout.

My money is on the group who make functional software, instead of fundamentally inescusable restrictions - that at a core level - are even worse than Microsoft's IDIOT ribbon interface.

Splitters? Nah...

.. the word Ellison probably used was "forkers". That was just after they asked if they could take the name with them and suggested that Oracleś version be renamed "Larry's Leisure Suite".

Odd question

Well if the Snoreacle OOo engineering team rejects most external contributions and most of the external contributors have just left to start a new fork, surely that means that this is very likely to bring significant changes to the codebase? About as significant as one could get.

Not the first time

Disputes about the management of the XFree86 windowing system resulted in the X.org fork. No one bothers with XFree86 anymore, this has effectively been killed by the X.Org fork proving itself the more vigorous and effective development.

Disputes over project management will occur. The advantage of open source here is the evolutionary benefit of survival of the fittest. When there is a dispute over the management of a closed source program there is no guarantee that the leadership chosen by management are the fittest for purpose. Does a genome care if one branch becomes incompatible with another ? Most of the time the better branch will survive, in other cases 2 species emerge into different evolutionary niches.

Fail

Get a decent X11 platform, and you have a far better set of editing shortcuts for free. No need for different applications - like an office suite - to go around reinventing that wheel.

If M$ windows 2000 instead of Office 2000 had got generic, cross-application facilities, it could've caught up with 1990 leading-edge technology.

Big Blue

Have their own version built on OOo - Lotus Symphony

Title? What title?

We use MSO at work, but I have a WinPenPack release of the latest LibreOffice beta. Been many a time I've used LO as opposed to MSO due to Microsloth's limitations. (spreadsheet row/column number limitations, row height limitation, and text file import).

Use open office at home with no issues whatsoever. the only reason I'm using the LO version occasionally at work is the OO version has that damn ugly Oracle logo on it's splash screen and it complaining about a missing file.

Libre Office does have some patches implemented in it that OO doesn't (don't recall the extra features/improvements) so it's probably going to have improvements happen faster than in OO.

Clever Idea.

"At the moment, the OOo code is good enough for basic needs and I think there should be EU competition questions why no PC supplier pre-loads either version on a PC, but does stuff the box with a 30-days-to-get-you-addicted MS Office copy."

Very Good Idea:

I REALLY do LIKE Open Office / Libre Office....

I am So grateful that there is a BACK DOOR to Microsoft and their bullshit...

But I also have a tendancy to wind off the dial when faced with "free range losers" who call "having opinions in forums" as a valid substitute for a social life and being generally innovative and productive.

It especially irks when they do REALLY dumb shit like "The Microsoft Ribbon"...with the unreserved mentality of "Oh the car jack and spare tyre are features that we want you to be aware of, so we will mount them on your cars dash board"....

As one poster noted in the idiots that were clowning around with a hand gun at a Russian wedding video - and one "guest" assumed the hand gun was empty - and grabbed it from the other guy, stuck it to his temple and pulled the trigger and shot himself in the head....

The poster said, "Yeah good one dick head."

And so it is with the Open Office crowd - and one pill of a moderator in the forums...

Open Office DOES NOT embed the fonts used in it.....

AND they do NOT allow you to embed your own fonts into your own documents either;

So when you produce your "Jumbo the Circus Elephant" poster, in amazing fonts, with great layouts and spiffy word and letter spacing, and in curves, and letter outlining etc...

When that document is sent to someone else, OR moved to another machine, or archived and reconstituted for later use on a different system - your Circus Maximus font - and all the layout reverts to 12 point times new roman....

There goes your poster.... or ready to publish book, or flyer or what ever.....

You can buy CD's with 10,000 fonts on them - for $10..... and the people who put OO together deliberately STOPPED people from embedding their own fonts into their own documents; then you get moderators in the OO forums who DEFEND that position.

Then they ban you for calling them on their "put the spare wheel and car jack on the dashboard and call it a feature" mindset....

I mean I really DO like Open Office - but a FEW really really fundamentally STUPID omissions - like the prohibition of the embedding of ones own fonts into ones own documents, is indefensible.

There are two parts to graphically conveying information:

1. The first and most important part IS the layout - it's the image. It's the FONTS, it's the layout, it's the tables, the diagrams, the margins, the headers, headings and the foot notesand the pictures etc...

2. And every part of the document - revolves around the font and the font size.

And if you cannot embed your own fonts into your own documents - when a document is constituted with a specific layout and font types and sizes;

And when those specific layouts are re-opened on a machine without the system fonts in it - then there goes your entire project - everything turns to shit.

The very structure of a document - IS it's FONTS.

Then you get the people who refuse to allow people to embed their own fonts as a native function; and then you get moderators who defend that position - and who ban you when you confront them, "Hey guys - the spare wheel and jack on the dash board - it's a fucking stupid idea - or hasn't this occured to you? And I don't want my car to come with this configuration"..