Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: one language in the installer libre office

Hi :)
If something is really easy to implement in one OS but difficult or impossible in another then  i 
think that it would be dumb to hold it back in the one and criticise the devs for not implementing 
it in the other.  If we play to the weaknesses of all the OSes to ensure that LO appears the same 
on all OSes then it's going to be pretty bad in all.  

I wasn't having a rant although i realise that you could choose to read it that way.  
Regards from
Tom :)


--- On Wed, 25/1/12, webmaster for Kracked Press Productions <webmaster@krackedpress.com> wrote:

From: webmaster for Kracked Press Productions <webmaster@krackedpress.com>
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: one language in the installer libre office
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Date: Wednesday, 25 January, 2012, 15:19

On 01/25/2012 07:42 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2012-01-24 1:46 PM, Tom Davies <tomdavies04@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > HI :)
> > Ahhh, it would be great if Windows had an official package manager
> > that could look after all the apps, not just the MS ones and could make
> > sure everything on the system got updated instead of just patches for
> > Window's own security flaws. Something that could help people pick and
> > choose the packages that got installed for a program so that you could
> > tell it what to install and then walk away with no need to hand-hold it
> > answering questions all the way through and with each program having
> > it's own different 'style'. Hmm, but then it would look a lot less like
> > Windows and might even be a little safer which would be a nightmare for
> > all those antivirus companies.
> > Regards from
> > Tom :)
>
> It would also be nice if Linux would migrate to a universal one size fits all package manager 
> that did everything on your wish list for a windows package manager.
>
> Tom, please keep your stupid anti-microsoft rants to yourself.
There are a lot of issues that MS has to deal with that make it "easier" to use and install 
"certain" software packages.  Linux may have new and different ways of doing things that what 
people have done for years with MS desktops, but it does not mean that one is better than the 
other.  Each has its good points and its bad points.  Now with MS going the way with its desktop 
interface with Win 8, like Ubuntu did going from GNOME 2.x to Unity, there will be much to deal 
with then.  For now, most people prefer Windows over Linux for its ease of use.  Win 8 will change 
that opinion for many users.

So yes, the installer for MS Windows would be much better if it was broken down to installer file 
and language/help pack files, like Linux is currently doing.

NO, Windows is not better than Linux and Linux is not better than Windows, as it currently stands.  
We all have our own opinions which is the better one, but it does not need to be discusses on this 
list.

The real issue is the way LO treats the different platforms with one not needing language packs 
while the other one does.  That should not be.  It should be the same with all the platforms, 
download the installer file and download the language and help packs that are needed beyond the 
basic English ones in the install file.  If you do it for Linux and Mac, you should do the same for 
Windows.  It is only fair, is it not?

Also, with the reworking of parts of LO so it would work properly with Unity, the developers 
will/may need to do the same with Win 8's tablet style of interface on their Win 8 desktops and 
laptops.  Some articles are stating that people may move over to Linux [with not Unity style of 
desktop environment] once Win 8 comes out.  So we will need to help these Windows users with their 
needs, and not rant and rave about how bad Windows is/was.  We need to help them move over to LO 
from MSO and help anyone who moved from Windows to Linux with their issues and needs with dealing 
with LO in the Linux desktop environments.

I use Ubuntu for my desktop since early 2010.  I still use Windows for some systems though.  I like 
the way Linux has everything you may need for software packages without needing to pay all that 
blood-money for doing your needed work.  They should charge for their work, but not prices that 
seen to be made to suck as much blood-money as possible from its users.  Now Linux has issues with 
drivers for the most up-to-date devices, since volunteers have to buy the devices and write the 
drivers for them, instead of the device developers writing one for Linux.  Although there are other 
issues that make Linux not the best for many users, it is still a vital platform of many.  Each has 
its good and bad issues.  Neither it a "perfect" platform.  So let us stop the "my platform is 
better than yours" issues here.  It is hard enough for LO users to get the Windows people to use a 
free package like LO over paying for MSO on their Windows systems.  There is
 where we need to target Windows users, not their use of Windows over Linux platforms.  We need to 
get users to switch to LO, not try to convince them to switch to Linux.  This is the real need.  
This is what we need to keep our energies focused on.  LO is free and is just as good, or better, 
than MSO.  We need to prove it to its users.





-- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted