Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2013 Archives by date, by thread · List index 

Amit
Your knowledge of the document standards is limited by your reply here. This issue of the document standards and naming convention was covered by a world body of multinationals and the preservation of all things in human digital text etc. This was to allow anyone, alien or earthly, thousands of years from now, to decode and read and modify the history in the digital world of mankind. So the open document standards were born and ratified and accpeted by the majority of the world that counts. MS did not agree and tried to introduce their own so-called opens standard with the .xml base, i.e.x docx, xlsx, and so forth.
But it has not been accepted by the world bodies, even though the MS document standard does survive. As you will now notice MSO 2007 (partially), MSO 2010 and 2013 all can reads and write in the ODS standard used by OOo, AOO and LO. MS had no choice but to fit in and follow suit, so it's not the other way around that we and all other s outside of the use of MSO, must fit in. The ODS standard is here to stayt and will dominate over time, no matter what the masses say and want. It's about education that we all have choices and many efficient and useful alternatives in the digital world. 

Regards

Andrew Brown

On 27/07/2013 12:46 PM, Amit Choudhary wrote:

If we have to beat Microsoft then we need to focus only on what Microsoft
provides and not on .odt format, etc. We cannot beat Microsoft by
introducing a new format and expecting customers to use new formats (I use
Microsoft formats only and whatever other formats is suported by Microsoft).

We need to beat Microsoft at its own game by doing what they are doing in
office suite. A new format is not going to change the game but being
totally compatible and stable with the formats that Micorosoft supports
(xls, xlsx, doc, docx, save as pdf, text, etc.) is going to change the game.

Amit

On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Amit Choudhary <
contact.amit.choudhary.india@gmail.com> wrote:


Hi Tom,

I have been programming since 1987. I have all my degrees in computer
science/networking. I have worked for companies like Cisco systems, Juniper
networks and have turned down offers from companies like Google and
Microsoft for one reason or other.

This whole software industry is going in the wrong direction. Actually, by
now we should have been done by all the software (all the necessary
software developed and installed and used, no bugs, etc.

We need to beat Microsoft because we do not want to pay for Office suite.

The best way of doing this is to release stable versions only and this can
be done by increasing the QA cycle period.

I do not release buggy software unless it has been approved by management.
And I have not released any software that's gonna hurt the customer even if
I have to get into discussions with managers, directors, etc.

This whole idea of releasing software frequently is a scam, because work
doesn't get done properly in a small time window. No one gets any time for
innovation and everyone is just interested in the release. And in the end,
the software dies down because the frequent release does not fix things
properly and introduces new bugs and over time all these quickfixes kill
the product.

THERE IS NO DEMAND FROM CUSTOMERS FOR FREQUENT RELEASES. THE DEMAND IS
FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SOFTWARE ANALYSTS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING TO DO AND
HENCE THEY WANT FREQUENT RELEASES. IT IS A BIG SCAM.

I use around 5-6 external softwares and if everyone is releasing something
every month then it becomes a headache to me.

RELEASING ONLY TWICE A YEAR IS VERY FOOD.

THE BIGGEST RISK OF RELEASING FREQUENTLY IS THAT ORIGINAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT
SOLVED PROPERLY AND QUICKFIXES MAKE MANAGING THE SOFTWARE COMPLICATED AND
IN THE END THE DEVELOPERS GIVE UP AND THE PRODUCT IS SHELVED.

AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITH PAID SOFTWARE TOO.

Amit

On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Tom Davies <tomdavies04@yahoo.co.uk>wrote:


Hi :)
I think with Base it's better to stay with older branches.  The 3.6.7
might be better.  if the 4.0.3 works for you then stick with that.

Sadly there are still not many devs working on Base.  It's not flashy
enough!
Regards from
Tom :)






________________________________
From: "la10497@iperbole.bologna.it" <la10497@iperbole.bologna.it>
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 10:31
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3


Unfortunately, the "3rd digit rule" doesn't work as goog as expected...
    I use report builder in base, 4.0.3.3 version. Download 4.0.4 and
report builder no more works (crash in opening).

    thanks anyway for developers work, I remember this is a free sw, at

the

end....

    Federico Quadri

    Tom Davies <tomdavies04@yahoo.co.uk> ha scritto:

Hi :)
   That 3rd digit is roughly the equivalent of "Service pack".  So
usually the higher it is the more stable it is.  Of course even just
bug-patches and fixes can sometimes introduce unexpected problems
that might not get caught by QA.

   The best answer, imo, is to keep a very stable version that you
are happy enough with on all the machines you look after especially
ones that have limited access or that you can't reach easily.  Then
on 1 machine find some way of being able to test-drive an occasional
beta-test versions before it gets released.  Preferably do about 1
per branch.  The problem is that things you might care about deeply
might not even be getting used by other people at all.  So it's only
you that might notice.  So if you didn't test-drive then the problem
might never be found.  Also it's better to do your testing on a beta
release rather than a full release because it's during the early
beta stage that the most devs are the most focussed on the 1 single
version and trying to solve the most problems quickly.  Also it's
when the fewest other people are making bug-reports.

   There are various ways you could make sure you have access to 1
version for use for work that has a dead-line and another version
that you can just use to try things out and make sure it all works.

   Regards from
   Tom :)





________________________________
    From: Amit Choudhary <contact.amit.choudhary.india@gmail.com>
    To: "users@global.libreoffice.org" <Users@global.libreoffice.org>
    Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 3:35
    Subject: [libreoffice-users] 4.0.3


    Hi,

    I was using 4.0.2 and then I downloaded 4.0.3 but 4.0.3 is not
as stable as
    4.0.2. So, now I am downloading 4.0.4.

    I am more interested in stable and feature rich (optional)
software rather
    than frequently released software.

    Stablility is very important because a non-stable software /

software

    having many bugs results in loss of time and frustartion.

    Amit





--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@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




--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@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





--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@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

Context

Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: 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.