From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QOJCF-0001Wq-MF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 23 May 2011 00:40:36 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 289581C04F; Mon, 23 May 2011 00:39:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C03171C04F for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 00:39:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyi11 with SMTP id 11so4984574wyi.40 for ; Sun, 22 May 2011 17:39:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references :in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :message-id; bh=zGgqPRUanmia31neTIMWbG6RlxIJrLhGDoWOlwaQ9KQ=; b=cQ6G5ngoX0Dto+NqUOJKCTTERUuM4rtXaEtTzXbAN7GDN8yxiuTkY9NlSK6k2d2jDP PAiK5xPz+5TA4haQQSxsbeAGZhvJslnLct0Wg5xFX0tVoKtnQ6FzeDPAQvvdGBFiM3Cd d5HecsYHdK/e1lOmDsIhJVGwn5LZyIRGlBmAk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=X+sf048nqq4WrFuuhbVoNEwjxGBW9tYmgLENpcH6CEEuJDwfO1KdPwiJ/tWmfffM3x YNqQk4HiClkbabiPLTgOnPX7b+woVpd3gpyyJ8SIPz1KuZOJCRJUkc/57z5IzgqoRYzR Z5BMtAvGCLlDoiyEhKhJXuuBY9nztmMe3DsEk= Received: by 10.216.240.12 with SMTP id d12mr1682153wer.8.1306111148977; Sun, 22 May 2011 17:39:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nazgul.localnet (196-215-114-244.dynamic.isadsl.co.za [196.215.114.244]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k76sm2997784wej.43.2011.05.22.17.39.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 22 May 2011 17:39:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5 Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 02:38:18 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.38-ck-r1; KDE/4.6.3; x86_64; ; ) References: <201105221941.51115.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <1306109876.32072.13.camel@troll> In-Reply-To: <1306109876.32072.13.camel@troll> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201105230238.19094.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 6a9b4fc55c2d86a9917b77bfa1790a9a Apparently, though unproven, at 02:17 on Monday 23 May 2011, Bill Kenworthy did opine thusly: > Do any of them actually work acceptably in terms of compatibility with > MSword though? - having a good, lite suit available for the "quick" jobs > would be nice. Well, my usual initial retort to MS suers on that is "MS Office isn't even compatible with itself across versions!" It doesn't help much but makes me feel better :-) koffice does a reasonable job overall as long as you restrict it to simple docs. In general, the more complex the source doc, the greater the chances of failure. This isn't anything to do with Office vs LibreOffice vs KOffice per se, it's just that office suites are complex beasts and 100% compatibility between them is unlikely to happen. It was like that in the days in WordPerfect and not much has changed. Some problems are just unsolveable. Consider how MS Word lays out pages and paragraphs on the page - it is fundamentally incompatible with the model OOo uses internally. Same with anchored images. > The OO/LibreOffice suits are almost compatible, the others barely if at > all. Even simple documents fox abiword for instance, and anything > complex is hopeless. Your average user creates simple docs (regardless of length) without any style sheeting. Headings are big text bold, emphasis is bold or italics and by far the most common font change is to Comic Sans. Most folk avoid bullet/numbered lists like the plaque (mostly because they can't get it to work and have given up on having lists randomly re-number themselves). Spreadsheets for your average user are one big table with columns and rows. For these documents, KOffice manages fine. Corporate users are another story. Any corporate has a go-to team of PowerPoint experts, usually backed up with endless lists of stylesheets and templates. Good luck with compatibility with those, as you have observed. > And unfortunately, working in an MS centric organisation means close to > 100% compatibility is demanded by the other end, especially on documents > being passed back and forward. Yup, the only thing that works in an MS shop is Office. It would be the same in reverse - an Office user would be just as stymied in an OOo/Libre-centric setting. Some battles can be fought and won. Sometimes it's easier to install VirtualBox. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com