Re: [school-discuss] FW: OpenOffice in education

[ian <ian.lynch2@ntlworld.com>]

On Sun, 2004-03-14 at 15:40, Tom Adelstein wrote:
> 
> ian.lynch2@ntlworld.com wrote:
> > <snip> 
> > > Ian, you don't have to convince me :-) 
> > >     
> > I'm not trying to, I'm genuinely curious because AFAIK. Apart from some
> > proprietary filters such as for WP, some clip art and templates, OO.o
> > 1.1 and SO7 are identical code subject to the same QA procedures. It is
> > possible that releases have some different defaults eg I found some
> > problems with 3D rendering due to the OpenGL defaults that might or
> > might not have happened with different default settings.I'll ask and
> > find out as I would be interested to know if there are fundamental QA
> > differences. In fact OO.o 1.1.1 is being released and this probably
> > fixes bugs that will not be fixed in SO 7.0 
> > 
> >   
> I'm very surprised at this response.  A world of difference exists
> between Star Office 7 and OOo and it's very obvious.  I see no reason
> to complain about OOo in any way.

I'm only interested in accuracy. I have asked the question on a
discussion list that will know. In principle Sun could do separate
development work on SO and not on OO.o but all the information I have
had to this point suggests that is not how things are currently done,
but I have never asked the specific question. So let's know the facts
from the people that manage the project.

>   However, given the choice, users in my office will run SO7 from an X
> server over native installs of OOo on their workstations. Why is
> that?  From what I can see it's the finishing touches especially
> overall screen rendering. OOo comes off fuzzy enough to notice and SO7
> comes off clear as a bell, bright and finished. 

That's strange because I have OO.o 1.1 running here on Linux and Windows
XP and neither appear fuzzy to me. When you say fuzzy do you mean font
rendering, graphics or something else?

-- 
ian <ian.lynch2@ntlworld.com>