Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

OpenOffice.org 2.4 Released

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the free-and-friendly dept.

Software 222

ahziem writes "The multiplatform, multilingual office suite OpenOffice.org has announced the release of version 2.4. New features include 5 PDF export enhancements, text to columns in Calc, rectangular selection in Writer, bug fixes, performance improvements, improvements supporting the growing library of extensions such as 3D OpenGL transitions in Impress, and much more. Downloads are available either direct or P2P. In September, OpenOffice.org 3.0 will add PDF import, Microsoft Office 2007 file format support, and ODF 1.2."

cancel ×

222 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

PDF import? (5, Interesting)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884208)

I can't wait for that. PDF import will turn OpenOffice.org into a poor-man's Adobe Acrobat.

Re:PDF import? (-1)

robo_mojo (997193) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884244)

Or, you could just use KPDF to read PDFs instead of using a whole office suite / word processor.

Re:PDF import? (3, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884272)

Acrobat is for editing and creating PDFs, not displaying them (although it can do that too). KPDF does not have this support.

Re:PDF import? (5, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884344)

Note the difference between Adobe Acrobat and Adobe Reader. Adobe Reader is one of several PDF readers available on Linux, along with evince, KPDF, xpdf, etc. Acrobat lets you create and modify PDFs. Right now, OOo only lets you create PDFs -- modifying them is currently not possible.

Re:PDF import? (1)

robo_mojo (997193) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884602)

You're right. I was under the impression that PDF is only intended as a "display" format. In my years of dealing with computer users nobody ever asked me how to edit a PDF.

If you wanted to change a PDF you would change the underlying LaTeX or OO file you produced it from. :)

Re:PDF import? (2, Insightful)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885512)

Just FYI, Acrobat can do a million things more than just creating dumb display-only files.

Re:PDF import? (4, Informative)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884680)

Note the difference between Adobe Acrobat and Adobe Reader.

A note for clarification: Adobe Reader used to be named Acrobat Reader, so users mistaking one for the other have been understandably mislead by Adobe's own marketing in the past.

Re:PDF import? (1)

absoluteflatness (913952) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885090)

Well, if anything, Acrobat Reader is more precise of a name. It reads Acrobat files. Seems pretty clear to me.

Re:PDF import? (5, Informative)

Schnapple (262314) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885286)

Well, if anything, Acrobat Reader is more precise of a name. It reads Acrobat files. Seems pretty clear to me.
Yeah but I think the problem Adobe was having is that no one got that Adobe Acrobat != Adobe Acrobat Reader. They probably couldn't sell Acrobat at all since people saw they were charging $200 or whatever for Acrobat and said "Why would I pay for that? I can get 'Acrobat' for free online!" while at the same time wondering how one would make PDF files (this is before PrimoPDF and another hundred good ways to make simple PDF files became available). Worse than that, people would go to the Adobe site and look for "Acrobat", find the not-free Acrobat product instead of the free Acrobat Reader, think that suddenly they needed to pay money to view a PDF file, and leave in disgust. Renaming the product Adobe Reader, in theory, avoids this confusion and also makes it out like Reader is a generic viewing app that reads PDF's.

Re:PDF import? (1, Interesting)

Daath (225404) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885758)

Well, technically Adobe Reader is more correct, and much less confusing (just see above).
The program Adobe Acrobat creates PDFs (Portable Document Files). Adobe Reader displays PDF-files.
A PDF isn't an "Acrobat file" ;) Acrobat is just a name.

Re:PDF import? (4, Interesting)

an.echte.trilingue (1063180) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884852)

Even with acrobat pro, you can't do too much editing to existing to PDFs: change a little text here and there, add comments and that's about it.

I understood that this was because of the way that PDFs store information based on positioning, curves, gradients, etc, so I am skeptical about what this feature of OOo actually does, given that some very expensive commercial software does not even do this. If, however, OOo does allow users to really load and edit PDFs, this could be the break though that it has been waiting for.

Re:PDF import? (0, Offtopic)

orasio (188021) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885214)

I understood that this was because of the way that PDFs store information based on positioning, curves, gradients, etc, so I am skeptical about what this feature of OOo actually does, given that some very expensive commercial software does not even do this.
Price is orthogonal to quality.
Eclipse is free, VS2008 is expensive. I can tell you first hand that the former is much easier to use, yet more powerful.
Air is free, pure nitrogen is more expensive.

Re:PDF import? (1)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885362)

Not true in all cases.

If there is a monopoly condition, price approaches infinity according to needs. Talk to any company that did software contracts with MS during the 90's.

Re:PDF import? (0, Offtopic)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885522)

Eclipse is free, VS2008 is expensive. I can tell you first hand that the former is much easier to use, yet more powerful.

Oh god, did I LOL.

Re:PDF import? (2, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885706)

You can put pretty much any arbitrary metadata you want into a PDF. There is a nice service for OS X that takes the selected text and runs it through pdflatex to give a typeset equation. It also embeds the LaTeX source in the metadata, so it can reverse the process and let you edit the code again later. You could put the contents of an ODF file in PDF metadata if you wanted, which would then allow editors to modify the content and readers to just display it. I believe this has been proposed before, so it might be what they are doing (for other PDFs, you can often edit the text and line art, but you might lose some of the layout stuff).

Goatse (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22884422)

Goatse. [twofo.co.uk] [goatse.ch]

You nerdy faggots love it.

Re:PDF import? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22884486)

I can't wait for that. PDF import will turn OpenOffice.org into a poor-man's Adobe Acrobat.

I was thinking rich mans Adobe Acrobat. Say you bought MS Office and Adobe...$1000?

Put $1000 in the bank, each year take out $50 and spend it on beer. With interest, that could last a long time!

Re:PDF import? (1)

snarfies (115214) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884558)

PDF import isn't that impressive - GIMP has been able to do that for some time.

The fact that Openoffice 2.4 can EXPORT PDF, that's a bit more interesting.

Re:PDF import? (3, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884604)

OOo has had PDF export for quite some time -- since around v2.0 or so. GIMP's support for importing PDFs is limited to the images, I believe.

Re:PDF import? (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885660)

I can't wait for that. PDF import will turn OpenOffice.org into a poor-man's Adobe Acrobat.
I thought Adobe already made a poor man's Acrobat... no, wait, that's a piggy, bloated Acrobat. My mistake.

Re:PDF import? (1)

mrbluze (1034940) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885682)

I can't wait for that. PDF import will turn OpenOffice.org into a poor-man's Adobe Acrobat.
I want a portable ODF viewer with print functionality. That's what's stopping me from actually using OpenOffice over PDF for some applications at the moment.

Re:PDF import? (4, Insightful)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885696)

"I can't wait for that. PDF import will turn OpenOffice.org into a poor-man's Adobe Acrobat."

I would rather say a free man's Adobe Acrobat. It's not about the cost - it's about the freedom.

Problems with Xmonad and OO (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22884212)

I'm using XMonad and all my OpenOffice menus open in the lower right corner (instead of directly under the menu bar). It worked fine with OO 2.3...

hopefully (1, Funny)

OrochimaruVoldemort (1248060) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884240)

when 3 hits the market, there will be an outlook-like email client

Re:hopefully (2, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884364)

That already exists. It's called Evolution.

Re:hopefully (1)

myz24 (256948) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884758)

Do you truly use Evolution daily or do you just know that it exists? I find Evolution to be, mediocre at best.

Re:hopefully (3, Funny)

compro01 (777531) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885290)

the GP did ask for an "outlook-like" email client. ;)

Re:hopefully (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885326)

I don't use it every day anymore. I used to. But my wife does. I keep my e-mail for a long time and build up a big mailbox, and found that Evolution was very slow and unreliable in handling large mailboxes. Other than that, I used it for 2 years as an outlook replacement in a corporate environment. Worked great.

Re:hopefully (2, Informative)

Drinking Bleach (975757) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884370)

Why something like Outlook? KMail beats it in every way.

Re:hopefully (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884480)

wait when id KMail get x.400 support and exchange sync?

Re:hopefully (1)

websitebroke (996163) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884896)

Uh, has KMail gotten around to composing HTML Mail or making it easy to insert links yet? Last I heard, the developers seemed to have a philosophical thing against HTML for some reason. Yeah, most of my emails are plain text, but I do end up sending links to people quite often, and having to copy a plain text link out of an email client into a web browser is a lot slower than just clicking on a link. It's also nice to send and HTML email from time to time. If you prefer not to write HTML email, that's nice, but I take it as a limit on choice.

On the other hand, Thunderbird has an extension that allows you to directly edit the HTML. I've got other gripes with Thunderbird, but at least I have a choice in what kind of email to send.

Re:hopefully (4, Informative)

xaxa (988988) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885142)


Uh, has KMail gotten around to composing HTML Mail or making it easy to insert links yet? Last I heard, the developers seemed to have a philosophical thing against HTML for some reason.

KMail will compose HTML emails. At the moment, it won't reply to the HTML part of a multipart message in HTML, it will take the plain text part.

They don't have a philosophical objection to adding support for this though. I had a look on the mailing list a couple of weeks ago (this came up in a sub-thread somewhere). The current developers don't want to spend time implementing it, they're unpaid so they do what they want to do on Kontact/KMail. They're happy for someone else to add the functionality though, or for someone to pay someone else to add it.

Yeah, most of my emails are plain text, but I do end up sending links to people quite often, and having to copy a plain text link out of an email client into a web browser is a lot slower than just clicking on a link. It's also nice to send and HTML email from time to time. If you prefer not to write HTML email, that's nice, but I take it as a limit on choice.
In the composer window, click Options, Formatting (HTML).
KMail highlights links it finds in the text, it's good at this (I've never had to copy and paste a link from a plain text message).

Re:hopefully (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22885156)

It is wise to not allow HTML in your e-mail but a satisfactory compromise would be the ability to tell your e-mail client not to grab content from external links in the mail.

Mac Version (5, Informative)

rubeng (1263328) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884264)

I'm really looking forwards to a native (non X11) Mac version. NeoOffice works OK but seems a bit slow. I see that about a week ago a new native development shapshot was released [openoffice.org] .

Re:Mac Version (1)

ooglek (98453) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884356)

I went to the site to try to download the X11 version 2.4.0 but it is not there. I get an error. What's up with that? Anyone else finding problems (or success) in getting 2.4.0 for OSX? Even the x11 version?

no, there is no 2.4 for OS X yet (apparently) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22884578)

- it's not there (at least for Engrish users)... i did see a 2.3.1 X11 version and an alpha Aqua version tho...

Re:Mac Version (3, Informative)

panda (10044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884846)

2.4 is supposed to be the last X11 release for Mac OS X. There have been some QA hold ups on the Mac OS X port. It will likely lag behind the other ports by a day or two in getting out. See http://porting.openoffice.org/servlets/BrowseList?list=mac&by=thread&from=1981668 [openoffice.org]

3.0 should be Aqua-only for Mac OS X. At least, that is the stated goal.

Re:Mac Version (5, Interesting)

w3c.org (1039484) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884894)

Yeah I've been using the 3.0 beta for a week now, on my good ol' powerbook, and it rocks. Really. No X11, it's quick (can't tell how fast loading is from NeoOffice, but quite faster). I didn't run NeoOffice since. Sure, it can be quirky, it has its glitches, but it runs ok, and saves & restores document perfectly if it crashes (happened just an hour early, got everything I was working on restored). Great thing. Go, OpenOffice team, go! :)

Re:Mac Version (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885082)

Doe sit crash less than neo office? Are there less glitches ? If you search my comment history, I'm not a heavy office user anymore, but I do want a office suite that won't crash period.

Re:Mac Version (1)

w3c.org (1039484) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885382)

There are less glitches than in NeoOffice. I can't tell if it crashes more or not, because NeoOffice never crashed a lot on my computer; apart from that I've only been using OpenOffice 3 for a week. And it's a beta, so ... can't garantee it won't crash. But I'm impatiently waiting for the release of 3.0 stable.

Also, Neooffice 2.2.3 (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22884278)

FWIW, NeoOffice [neooffice.org] , a Mac Os X port of OpenOffice.org just had a new release last week. It's based on the 2.2.1 code and adds Quicktime video support, import from scanners and cameras, Mac OS grammar checking in Leopard, and some more stuff. Details here [neooffice.org] . Don't forget if you download it to grab the latest patch [neooffice.org] too.

The insane thing is NeoOffice only has two code developers.

Most useful extension (4, Informative)

phayes (202222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884298)

REGEXP search & replace! Supposing you're a geek... Of course we're all geeks here on slashdot, right?

Re:Most useful extension (4, Informative)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884884)

It's had regex find/replace by default for years... Not sure if 1.x had it, but the beta builds of 2.x and everything since has.

Re:Most useful extension (1)

panda (10044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885192)

Hey. Don't I feel silly now?

It's under "More Options" on the Search and Replace dialog.

Re:Most useful extension (1)

Negadecimal (78403) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885810)

It's had regex find/replace by default for years...

The funny thing is that MS Word has had regex for years, as well... though like everything Microsoft, they've wandered a bit from standards.

Re:Most useful extension (1)

panda (10044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884906)

Ok. Excellent idea. It's one of the features that I miss from Nisus Writer.

I'll file an issue tonight as a feature request. It might not make it into 3.0 at this point, but maybe 3.1.

A leaf out of iWorks? (1)

wallyhall (665610) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884300)

Looks like (with the 3D effeects) that they've taken a (nice) leaf out of the iWorks book. Cool!

http://www.apple.com/iwork/keynote/#effects

Re:A leaf out of iWorks? (2, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884394)

Looks like (with the 3D effeects) that they've taken a (nice) leaf out of the iWorks book. Cool!
Ummm...more like Keynote took a leaf out of Impress' book.

You see, OpenGL support was once present in StarOffice, but was removed due to problems with the newer OOo code.

Re:A leaf out of iWorks? (2, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884574)

You see, OpenGL support was once present in StarOffice, but was removed due to problems with the newer OOo code.
For transitions? Really? I used StarOffice 5.0, 5.1, 5.2 and 6.0, but I don't remember Impress doing 3D transitions. I do remember some OpenGL-based 3D options in the drawing tool...

Re:A leaf out of iWorks? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884666)

IIRC, there was very limited support for OpenGL transitions, but it was there.

Another proof why C++ rocks (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22884312)

I am with Bjarne on this one.
Bjarne Stroustrup, creator of the C++ programming language, claims that C++ is experiencing a revival and
that there is a backlash against newer programming languages such as Java and C#. "C++ is bigger than ever.
There are more than three million C++ programmers. Everywhere I look there has been an uprising
- more and more projects are using C++. A lot of teaching was going to Java, but more are teaching C++ again.
There has been a backlash.", said Stroustrup.

He continues.. ..What would the world be like without Google?... Only C++ can allow you to create applications as powerful as MapReduce which allows them to create fast searches.

I totally agree. If Java ( or Pyhton etc. for that matter ) were fast enough why did Google choose C++ to build their insanely fast search engine. MapReduce rocks.. No Java solution can even come close.
I rest my case.

Prototyping. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22884910)

Python especially is very suitable for prototyping a project. The write it once to prove the concept and then rewrite it once you actually know what you need idea. C++ has lots of power but it is a finicky beast - one little mistake and your computer eats your children. Python is very forgiving, doing more what you want it to do than what you actually told it to do. It's referred to as executable pseudo-code for a reason. Then once you have your prototype complete in Python, if - IF it needs speed improvements then you rewrite the damn thing properly in C++.

Thank god! (5, Insightful)

Digi-John (692918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884352)

My life has been empty without the ability to switch between slides in STUNNING 3-D! I seriously just peed a little in excitement.
Come on; there's not even a reason to have *any* transitions between slides. Nothing says "Oh god, what an amateur" than seeing slide after slide spiral into another one, or slowly dissolve, etc. Transitions are just a way to waste your time trying out different possibilities instead of polishing your content or doing something else useful.

Re:Thank god! (5, Insightful)

stuporglue (1167677) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884396)

Nothing says "Oh god, what an amateur" than seeing slide after slide spiral into another one, or slowly dissolve, etc.

Depends on the transition, the material and the audience. For example, if you're switching between a before and after slide (eg. with photos) using a crossfade can make it more clear what the differences are. Also, some suits prefer a smooth transition to a blocky sudden switch.

Re:Thank god! (1)

toleraen (831634) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884438)

Agreed. Nothing ticks me off more than trying to quickly scroll through an embedded presentation only to be immediately halted by a bunch of ridiculous transitions. They were cool to play with in 8th grade speech class, but I've never seen them used effectively other than for a quick laugh.

Re:Thank god! (2, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884452)

Yeah, for that matter, we should just go back to using transparencies and overhead projectors. REAL professionals don't embed video or audio or anything in their presentations either. Just an outline. Why, back in my day, we just wrote on big sheets of paper with a marker!

C'mon, don't be such a luddite.

Re:Thank god! (5, Insightful)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884614)

The GP's complaint against transitions is that they serve no functional purpose. One reply pointed out that in some very limited cases, they do (before/after photos benefit from a crossfade), which is reasonable. Your reply equates transitions with video and audio, which is absolutely unreasonable in the framework of the GP's post. Video and audio have obvious utility. Transitions are almost always decoration, and I agree with the GP that they're usually a distraction from the material.

Re:Thank god! (5, Funny)

Thornburg (264444) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885088)

Hey, this is Slashdot! You're not allowed to use interpretive thought or intelligible communication. Please go to some communication-nerd website and post your well-reasoned, level-headed thoughts there. We don't want them here!

(For those completely devoid of sarcasm detection skills, the above post may be used to calibrate your Sarcastometer--it should score 8.6).

Re:Thank god! (0, Offtopic)

BytePusher (209961) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885346)

Do sarcastometers use a logarithmic or linear scale? If logarithmic, at 8.6 your post should have left me whimpering and gently twitching in a corner wishing for the good old days before "it" happened.

Re:Thank god! (1)

strabes (1075839) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884930)

I would greatly prefer being handed an outline than trying to quickly type out notes from professors' powerpoint presentations.

Re:Thank god! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22884582)

A minor amount of visual motion up on display can focus the attention on the audience (and keep them awake).

When used during a transition, it won't distract from the material the way it could if used to make things fly around while displaying a single slide.

Re:Thank god! (1)

toleraen (831634) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884700)

If you need transitions to keep your audience awake, you need to work on your public speaking skills.

Re:Thank god! (1)

Relden (1030180) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884590)

When was the last time you sat through a presentation--with or without transitions, etc--and thought "Wow is this ever useful. Not at all a waste of time!" The transitions at least give you something to laugh at.

Re:Thank god! (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884600)

Come on; there's not even a reason to have *any* transitions between slides.
I favour a minimal approach to slides, but the last talk I gave I thought, twice, that my slide had failed to change because there was no transition. I also like using something like a flip or cube rotate effect between sections to indicate to the audience that I am shifting topics.

Re:Thank god! (4, Insightful)

claus.wilke (51904) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884634)

I would argue that if you are preparing a presentation that is running by itself, without a human presenter, a simple but elegant transition effect will work better than no effect at all. This might be quite useful for exhibits at tradeshows and similar occasions.

Not all presentations are dull (2, Interesting)

BovineSpirit (247170) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884656)

I see Keynote used on big televised awards ceremonies a lot. The companies doing the graphics buy Macs to run Keynote, and they want Keynote for the transitions. Those kind of presentations are not done by amateurs. If OpenOffice is just going for the 'engineer making presentations to management' market then yes, OpenGL is a waste of time. However if they're looking a bit further then it is worth it.

Re:Thank god! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22885690)

I've seen two good uses of transitions: one was to show a timeline along multiple slides. Each slide, er, slid to the left. But it was after removing all the annotations, so it was just the timeline that appeared to slide.

The other also took "slide" literally, in showing a bunch of nostalgia-kitch pictures, and a transition that made it look like they were being shown on an old-fashioned slide projector. More for laughs, that one.

If you have a really big screen, you want a wee bit of crossfade for related slides, and cuts with a short blackout for new topics. That's more appropriate for a global setting and not as a special effect though.

Only one comment (4, Interesting)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884456)

I'm using Office XP Pro side by side with OO. There is really no major differences now between the two in my use of office packages. One thing is for certain, at this update rate I could not afford the MS version of updates, but with OpenOffice... meh, this is great. If I could get a car manufacturer to upgrade my vehicle for free once a year (new cupholders, dash panel, etc.) It would also be great, but I'll settle for what I get with OpenOffice thank you very much.

Re:Only one comment (1)

Changa_MC (827317) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884674)

Maybe a silly question, but, does OOo have an option for keyboard shortcuts yet? I can't live without ctrl-b for bold ctrl-i for italics, and I really like ctrl-+ for increasing fonts. I won't give up MS Word until I can have those.

OTOH, I have given up powerpoint altogether -- it's safer to have open office presentations + OOo installer on a CD than to have a powerpoint presentation and hope they have the right version of MS office.

Re:Only one comment (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884762)

Those standard shortcuts work fine for me. I'd miss those too if they didn't work. I type faster than quite a few people who are hired partly on their typing speed... shortcuts are very fast if you have the 'skilz' for it :)

Re:Only one comment (2, Informative)

snilloc (470200) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884964)

Tools Menu --> Customize --> Keyboard

(I abso-friggin'-lutely needed ctrl-d to fill down in Calc.)

Re:Only one comment (1)

cronot (530669) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884992)

You haven't tried OO in a long time, it seems... I can't even remember when was it that OO didn't have the CTRL+B / CTRL+I shortcuts, I think they are pretty standard for any Office suite these days. As for CTRL-+ for increasing fonts, it isn't available by default, but you can easily customize the keyboard shortcuts to mimic that behavior by going into the "Tools" / "Customize" menu, in the "Keyboard" tab.

Re:Only one comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22885194)

Yes, they work. But I feel easier and faster to type words between * to make then bold. If you type *bold* openoffice (and thunderbird and a couple of others) will change it to the word bold in bold.

Re:Only one comment (1)

boris111 (837756) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885380)

I just tried ctrl-+ on Word 2003. All it did was make the text subscript. Experimenting Ctrl } made the font larger. I will use that now.

Re:Only one comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22885652)

"I can't live without ctrl-b for bold ctrl-i for italics..."

Sounds like you would love WordStar (the 1985 version). Oh, those were the days.

Re:Only one comment (5, Informative)

vertickle (1263292) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884792)

Thank them with your wallet. http://contributing.openoffice.org/donate.html [openoffice.org]

Re:Only one comment (3, Insightful)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885424)

I do. Also contribute to EFF, Chronix Radio, Ubuntu, and several other F/OSS applications. I don't think everything should be free, but I feel damned comfortable paying what feels comfortable to me in a value for dollar kind of way. I happened to pay $45 for OOo and think it was a damned good deal at that price.

You *can* get a free update to your car every year (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884848)

It's called leasing.

You should compare leasing costs against buying + finance + depreciation. It's not so different.

 

Re:Only one comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22885568)

Office XP Pro side by side with OO


So the new OO is just about as good as a seven year old version of Office? Let me run over and download that right now!

Surprisingly negative (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22884532)

There's a lot of negative crap posted there from naysayers.
It's a shame really, it's a nice little tweak, there's no reason to stick the boot in because you like Apple's products. They can coexist, this does not threaten the Apple mothership.

New features include [...] bug fixes (2, Insightful)

phaunt (1079975) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884596)

Since when is a bug fix a new feature?

Re:New features include [...] bug fixes (1)

Tranzistors (1180307) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884720)

Just be happy "bugs" are not features.
Though the tendency is worrying.

Re:New features include [...] bug fixes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22884990)

Ask apple. There were over 300 in the switch from Tiger to Leoturd.

Does it load any faster? (2, Interesting)

Nozsd (1080965) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884644)

I'm not a big word processing or spreadsheet person. The only complaint I really have about OO is that it takes an eternity and a half to start up. Whether or not I use that quick-start-up feature doesn't seem to make a bit of difference. The only thing that feature does is making Windows many many seconds slower to start up. Does 2.4 improve OO's start up time in any way? Is this even an issue that the developers consider to be a problem?

Re:Does it load any faster? (3, Informative)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885670)

See the link to "performance improvements" in the summary? FWIW, startup is considerably faster for me in Ubuntu 8.04 beta (on a regular business laptop from last year).

Any word (3, Informative)

Kelz (611260) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884804)

On when they're going to fix autoformat? Has anyone else ever tried to make a resume in OO (god forbid you use bullets or tabs)?

Pet Peeve... (3, Informative)

mutube (981006) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885058)

Auto-completing words when writing bullet lists. If you don't end the lines with full-stops, hitting Enter will auto-complete some random word instead of starting a new line. You're list of "My Favourite Animals" becomes:

catastrophicdogmaticfishfingermousetrap

Which, as you can imagine, is quite distressing.

I wish OOo would sign (PGP or authenticode) (4, Interesting)

mlts (1038732) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884818)

I wish the OpenOffice.org project maintainers would PGP/gpg sign their MD5 sum files at the least, or if they can get a code signing key, Authenticode sign their installer on Windows.

PGP/gpg is available at no cost, and having the key available from keyservers (and signed by a good number of people) would provide basic software assurance.

I know this is a relatively small gripe, but just for integrity reasons it would be nice that they did so, so I knew a copy I have was not corrupted (or even worse, tampered with.) OOo does such a major role in day to day use for a lot of organizations that if a compromised version made its way around the Internet, it could mean a major disaster.

Last, and I know I'm boring with this, a number of companies won't install anything on their machines unless the files are cryptographically signed in some way. This is more of a legal CYA policy, but it would be nice to be able to use OOo in places like this and have validated, signed executables.

Re:I wish OOo would sign (PGP or authenticode) (2, Insightful)

Zadaz (950521) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885376)

a number of companies won't install anything on their machines unless the files are cryptographically signed in some way

Sure! Just like my copy of Windows, OSX, Photoshop, Acrobat, Office, Toast, and... every other commercial application that I've ever had are cryptographi--

Oh, wait. Hell, even Firefox doesn't have a sig. to download.

I'm not saying the danger isn't there, but generally if someone has access to make nefarious changes to an archive, modifying the signature as well is pretty trivial, if not mandatory.

Re:I wish OOo would sign (PGP or authenticode) (1)

ichthus (72442) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885460)

You're right. Your post was boring, but a good thought nonetheless. :)

There probably isn't much worry if you're downloading directly from Sun/OOo -- if that copy is somehow compromized, so would be the checksum.

I usually download OOo from my ISP's mirror. They provide MD5's or SHA1's or something, and I believe that if my sum matches my ISP's, and my ISP's sum matches the original... looks good to me.

But, your last paragraph brings up an interesting and valid point -- and probably the best reason for crypto-signing the releases. I would encourage you to email the good people at OOo, in addition to your boring, yet insightful, interesting post.

Re:I wish OOo would sign (PGP or authenticode) (1)

nuzak (959558) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885744)

Most distributions have extra downstream packaging work to do, which means signing is up to the redistributor. Your package manager should check it automatically -- apt and yum certainly do. It makes a little more sense for windows distributions where people would get it straight from OOo, but I think the number of people that actually verify the checksum is vanishingly small.

What I hope for (3, Interesting)

the_crowbar (149535) | more than 6 years ago | (#22884946)

Two things that bug me about OOo 2.3:

1) On Linux Impress can not handle more than a few slides before using 100% CPU power. We have several digital billboards (50" Plasma Tvs) and I was tasked with making sure they had something to display. No prob I thought. I set up 3 media pc cases with Ubuntu 7.10 (i386, onboard nvidia gpu) and installed OOo. I was having some problems creating the slide shows with OOo Linux. I switched to my Windows box and was able to create a basic slide show. (1280x720 resolution maybe 10 slides) I tried running the show on my Ubuntu desktop (amd64) as well as the media pcs (Ubuntu i386) and OOo Impress would jump to 100% CPU after a few slides. In the end I used Wine and PowerPoint viewer to display the slideshow because it worked without killing the CPU. Here's hoping 2.4 fixes this bug.

2) OOo base is unable to open a new form from a button on a form. I was trying to use OOo Base as a quick proof of concept for a new HR database. It is easy enough to connect Base to a MySQL DB and create a form to modify records. The problem came when I tried to create a search page. The search was fine. I could display the results in a table, but then there is no way to select a result from the table and then open it in another form. This is not really a bug rather than a much needed feature. At this point Base is ok for only the simplest of things.

the_crowbar

I can't wait to try out OOo 2.4 to see if they have fixed these two things.

no news (-1, Troll)

esaul (686848) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885012)

OO is one of the most impossible, fat, ugly, aneurysm driving, horrible packages to compile. You only have to edit header files like 20 times only to realize that it won't link anyway on a 64 bit box. Y'all enjoy your precompiled binaries, and depend yourselves on proprietary Java code, but I tells you - OO is a big pile of stinking manure, and given the number of people that depend on it, their management should have the balls to ditch the Sun's empirialistic position, start complying with standards, and put forward a solid piece of software

Re:no news (2, Informative)

j79zlr (930600) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885274)

If you are actually compiling OO.o by hand, you do not need java. Just take a look at the Gentoo ebuild and you will see that if the "java" use flag is not set, there is no dependency on java.

does it fix the OO writer table bugs? (1)

rla3rd (596810) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885066)

Hopefully, they fixed the table bugs on oowriter. Using oowriter as a way of creating long complex forms is a nightmare. Once the document gets over a certain page limit, it continually crashes, and is unrecoverable. I found myself installing my old copy of windows XP using innotek virtualbox and installing my old copy of office xp professional just to be able to create the document. Unless the table bugs are fixed, I don't see my reliance on Microsoft Office going away anytime soon.

Smooth drawings? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22885174)

I wander if circles and such draws smoothly on the edges as MS Office does. i guess that is related to anti-aliasing on drawing objects.

bad timing (0)

doti (966971) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885190)

probably won't make into hardy heron

Re:bad timing (5, Informative)

Tranzistors (1180307) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885298)

Um, it is already there. Right now only release candidate.

Damnit! (1)

corychristison (951993) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885406)

I finally finished compiling 2.0 and now this comes out!

I am going to write a letter!

[yes, this is clearly a terrible joke]

Huuuge memory footprint, even when closed? (2, Interesting)

tommyhj (944468) | more than 6 years ago | (#22885694)

soffice.bin: 267 MB... And I even quit writer, so it's just the quickstart program using 267 MB... had the exact same problem with 2.3, can't believe they didn't fix something THAT obvious... It's got to do with the non-english dictionary I use. When I write a word wrong, it loads ALL included dictionaries into memory (german, thai, engrish, etc.) before deciding that it can't find the word, giving up and underlining the word. The 200 MB hogged memory is never freed either. There was an old bug-report about it, but they marked it "fixed" which I really don't understand. Anyone?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>