No. Not ready for Government academic or business users. What's worse,
the accessibility problems "inferior jre" with windows registry patch
merged didn't start in libreoffice at all. Those same problems exist in
openoffice 3.45 which I think is its current version. Something or
somethings were broken before the import or copy over of code from
openoffice to libreoffice. The accessibility problems put libreoffice
in a Section 508 violation situation.
On Sat, 2 Jun 2012, Spencer Graves wrote:
On 6/2/2012 8:37 AM, Andreas S?ger wrote:
Am 02.06.2012 16:46, webmaster-Kracked_P_P wrote:
There seems to be differenting opinions on how business ready 3.5.3 was
So now that LO 3.5.4 is out,
I ask the users, is it ready to be deployed to my/our business users?
We really need to know.
The last "official" word on the 3.5.x line was that business users would
research the package before downloading and installing it.
Well, I do not know how they will to all that research, or where they
will get the documentation for it, before downloading it.
So I am asking LO users the question.
Is 3.5.4 ready for our business and/or enterprise users?
The doc people are work hard to get more 3.5.x line documentation out,
but to be honest about it people can still use 3.3.x and 3.4.x docs till
3.5.x comes out.
What is the problem with 3.5? What are your conclusions when a user like me
or Tom states that everything is fine with 3.5? I am a completely untypical
user who skipped the whole 3.4 series after writing a bunch of bug reports.
Tom has an entirely non-technical view on the project. The overall service
quality of this particular user list is really bad.
The bug tracker can tell all unresolved issues that do exist in 3.5 but not
in 3.4? Don't ask me how. I file my bugs to the AOO tracker where it serves
What does it need to do to be "business ready"?
I don't know, but I suspect that Google probably uses it. I heard over
a year ago that Google employees were forbidden to use MS Windows: The
primary alternatives were Mac OS and Linux. I was also told that Google paid
people full time to do nothing but contribute to open source projects. I
suspect they probably have the same attitude today towards MS Office as toward
the operating system.
I've used LibreOffice or Open Office for over 3 years now as a 100%
replacement for MS Office. I was motivated by two things: (a) I had lost my
job and resolved to pay for software only if I could not find a comparable,
Free Open-Source Software (FOSS) alternative. (b) I saw no need to pay
Microsoft for forcing me to learn where they hid all the controls on their new
version. Since then, I've had some compatibility problems with LO import and
export of MS Word documents, and I still cannot control LO Impress as good as
I could MS PowerPoint. On the other hand, I've started using the LO
"Synchronize Labels" feature, and I never used a comparable feature in MS
Word; it may be there, but I never used it.
p.s. I'm the President of a start-up. We have not hired anyone new but if
and when we do, I plan to ask them to try LO before I pay for MS Office. My
Chief Engineer still has MS Office and has not seen a need to try LO -- and
the incompatibility problems have not been sufficient for me to push him to
use LO. I'm not sure, but I think my Chief Financial Officer uses LO.
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org
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
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy