What Icons will be used in OOo 3.0? Galaxy?

[pitonyak]

Online, I find statements about new icons in OOo. Images of icons from
say the Galaxy icons are shown. For example:

http://www.oooninja.com/2008/04/galaxy-icon-set-theme-look.html
http://ui.openoffice.org/VisualDesign/OOo_galaxy.html

Clearly, different icons are used in the current developer builds and
the beta builds.

What icons will be used in OOo 3.0 final?

--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
My Book: http://www.hentzenwerke.com/catalog/oome.htm
Info:  http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
See Also: http://documentation.openoffice.org/HOW_TO/index.html


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[Hagar de l'Est]

Strange, I see those Galaxy icons in Beta 2 and also in Beta 1 IIRC.
Is the icon theme set to Galaxy (default)?

Hagar


Le 25.07.2008 06:56, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak a écrit :

>
> Online, I find statements about new icons in OOo. Images of icons from
> say the Galaxy icons are shown. For example:
>
> http://www.oooninja.com/2008/04/galaxy-icon-set-theme-look.html
> http://ui.openoffice.org/VisualDesign/OOo_galaxy.html
>
> Clearly, different icons are used in the current developer builds and
> the beta builds.
>
> What icons will be used in OOo 3.0 final?
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[pitonyak]

I am not certain, because I am not seeing these icons when I download
the developer build on my Linux computer.

The fact that you see these icons is help for me to know...

Hagar de l'Est wrote:

> Strange, I see those Galaxy icons in Beta 2 and also in Beta 1 IIRC.
> Is the icon theme set to Galaxy (default)?
>
> Hagar
>
>
> Le 25.07.2008 06:56, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak a écrit :
>
>>
>> Online, I find statements about new icons in OOo. Images of icons
>> from say the Galaxy icons are shown. For example:
>>
>> http://www.oooninja.com/2008/04/galaxy-icon-set-theme-look.html
>> http://ui.openoffice.org/VisualDesign/OOo_galaxy.html
>>
>> Clearly, different icons are used in the current developer builds and
>> the beta builds.
>>
>> What icons will be used in OOo 3.0 final?

--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
My Book: http://www.hentzenwerke.com/catalog/oome.htm
Info:  http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
See Also: http://documentation.openoffice.org/HOW_TO/index.html


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[John Boyle-2]

Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote:

> I am not certain, because I am not seeing these icons when I download
> the developer build on my Linux computer.
>
> The fact that you see these icons is help for me to know...
>
> Hagar de l'Est wrote:
>> Strange, I see those Galaxy icons in Beta 2 and also in Beta 1 IIRC.
>> Is the icon theme set to Galaxy (default)?
>>
>> Hagar
>>
>>
>> Le 25.07.2008 06:56, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak a écrit :
>>
>>>
>>> Online, I find statements about new icons in OOo. Images of icons
>>> from say the Galaxy icons are shown. For example:
>>>
>>> http://www.oooninja.com/2008/04/galaxy-icon-set-theme-look.html
>>> http://ui.openoffice.org/VisualDesign/OOo_galaxy.html
>>>
>>> Clearly, different icons are used in the current developer builds
>>> and the beta builds.
>>>
>>> What icons will be used in OOo 3.0 final?
>

To whomever cares: Why should anyone care about OOo vers. 3.0, when it
will not be stable for at least 2 to 3 years?  I say stick with OOo
2.4.1 until ALL  the bugs are worked out and it works flawlesly!
Otherwise it is a waste of time and energy and even money, because
despite what people in Linux say, Linux COST REAL MONEY to just keep up
with it, the same as WINDOWS,  IT IS ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENT NO MATTER
WHAT PEOPLE HAVE THE GALL TO SAY! >:o

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[Ganesha Bhaskara]

John Boyle wrote:

> Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote:
>> I am not certain, because I am not seeing these icons when I download
>> the developer build on my Linux computer.
>>
>> The fact that you see these icons is help for me to know...
>>
>> Hagar de l'Est wrote:
>>> Strange, I see those Galaxy icons in Beta 2 and also in Beta 1 IIRC.
>>> Is the icon theme set to Galaxy (default)?
>>>
>>> Hagar
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 25.07.2008 06:56, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak a écrit :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Online, I find statements about new icons in OOo. Images of icons
>>>> from say the Galaxy icons are shown. For example:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.oooninja.com/2008/04/galaxy-icon-set-theme-look.html
>>>> http://ui.openoffice.org/VisualDesign/OOo_galaxy.html
>>>>
>>>> Clearly, different icons are used in the current developer builds
>>>> and the beta builds.
>>>>
>>>> What icons will be used in OOo 3.0 final?
>>
> To whomever cares: Why should anyone care about OOo vers. 3.0, when it
> will not be stable for at least 2 to 3 years?  I say stick with OOo
> 2.4.1 until ALL  the bugs are worked out and it works flawlesly!

The reason it is stable is because many early adopters used the
developer version as well as 2.4 and filed bug reports. It did not
magically become stable.

> Otherwise it is a waste of time and energy and even money,

Everything comes at a cost .... you are getting it free because other
people have been kind enough to volunteer THEIR time for developing and
testing the office suite. A little gratitude would be appreciated.

> because
> despite what people in Linux say, Linux COST REAL MONEY to just keep up
> with it, the same as WINDOWS,  IT IS ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENT NO MATTER
> WHAT PEOPLE HAVE THE GALL TO SAY! >:o

Microsoft Office locks in my data in their proprietary format.
Openoffice.org doesn't.  See the difference ?

>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[Brad Rogers]

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:22:18 -0700
John Boyle <oldsarge@...> wrote:

Hello John,

> 2.4.1 until ALL  the bugs are worked out and it works flawlesly!

It is not possible to know, without an infinite amount of time and
infinite resources, whether or not a product is bug free.  The only way
for the OOo dev team to find bugs is for them to release alpha/beta
versions for willing individuals to test.  It's not required that we
all do so.

--
 Regards  _
         / )           "The blindingly obvious is
        / _)rad        never immediately apparent"

It's your life so go your own way
Questions And Answers - Sham 69

[Phil Hibbs]

John Boyle:
> To whomever cares: Why should anyone care about OOo vers. 3.0, when it will
> not be stable for at least 2 to 3 years?  I say stick with OOo 2.4.1 until
> ALL  the bugs are worked out and it works flawlesly!

By that logic you'd never use any software at all.

Phil Hibbs.
--
Don't you just hate self-referential sigs?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[John Boyle]

Brad Rogers wrote:

> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:22:18 -0700
> John Boyle <oldsarge@...> wrote:
>
> Hello John,
>
>  
>> 2.4.1 until ALL  the bugs are worked out and it works flawlesly!
>>    
>
> It is not possible to know, without an infinite amount of time and
> infinite resources, whether or not a product is bug free.  The only way
> for the OOo dev team to find bugs is for them to release alpha/beta
> versions for willing individuals to test.  It's not required that we
> all do so.
>
>  

To Brad Rogers, et al: My point is that until a product is used, fully,
in all its functions and if someone is satisfied with that product, WHY
upgrade again and again and again? Which is what goes on presently, and
for no really good reason! I do appreciate all the effort and energy
that the development team puts into what they do, but as a user, who
just does NOT need all the bells and whistles as it is, it is a waste of
time and can be very frustrating, especially when coupled with all the
changes that Linux goes through as an OS! This message is being prepared
on my Windows computer, but I do have a Linux computer, also. Secondly,
at least in Windows I can use voice dictation and save my finger joints
as much as possible! :-) :-(

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[John Boyle]

Phil Hibbs wrote:

> John Boyle:
>  
>> To whomever cares: Why should anyone care about OOo vers. 3.0, when it will
>> not be stable for at least 2 to 3 years?  I say stick with OOo 2.4.1 until
>> ALL  the bugs are worked out and it works flawlesly!
>>    
>
> By that logic you'd never use any software at all.
>
> Phil Hibbs.
>  

To Phil Hibbs: On the contrary, I would be able to concentrate on
learning what programs I have more thoroughly! I have absolutely NO
intention of wasting my time and energy(high blood pressure and
hypertension are my health concerns), on something that really will NOT
benefit my computer use, whatsoever! :-) :-(

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[Jim Allan-2]

John Boyle wrote:

> To Brad Rogers, et al: My point is that until a product is used, fully,
> in all its functions and if someone is satisfied with that product, WHY
> upgrade again and again and again? Which is what goes on presently, and
> for no really good reason!

Because new versions are generally better, fixing bugs that are in the
older versions and providing easier ways to do things. That seems to me
to be a “really good” reason to upgrade. I expect less people are fully
“satisfied” with OpenOffice.org than you believe, and the same goes for
other products.

As with most products, there are parts of OpenOffice.org that I
personally never use. But if I suddenly had to use some of them, I would
like to use the most up-to-date version which usually will also be the
most convenient to use.

> I do appreciate all the effort and energy
> that the development team puts into what they do, but as a user, who
> just does NOT need all the bells and whistles as it is,

If you personally don’t want to upgrade, don’t. But I note again and
again that people come here with problems that are apparently fixed or
are clearly fixed simply by downloading an upgrade.

Attempting to convince people that they don’t “need” all the bells an
whistles is fruitless. Yes, if I had to, I could get by at home with my
Microsoft Office 95 (the last version I purchased). Therefore I don’t
“need” anything better. I agree with you that I don’t “need” anything
better. That doesn't mean that I don’t “want” something better.
Otherwise I would never have switched to OpenOffice.org.

You probably don’t “need” anything better than OpenOffice.org 1.6. But
you have upgraded. If you found yourself in a situation where you had to
use OpenOffice.org 1.6 or earlier, you would probably find ways to cope.
Therefore you don’t “need” the upgrades you have.

 > ... it is a waste of
 > time and can be very frustrating, especially when coupled with all the
 > changes that Linux goes through as an OS!

So don’t upgrade so often on Linux, if this bothers you.

Of course upgrades of OpenOffice generally come as part of the distro
when you upgrade Linux. And then they sometimes don’t work until you
upgrade again from the OpenOffice.org website. But that is a Linux
problem, not an OpenOffice.org problem.

Jim Allan





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[Rob Clement-3]

John Boyle wrote:

> Phil Hibbs wrote:
>> John Boyle:
>>  
>>> To whomever cares: Why should anyone care about OOo vers. 3.0, when
>>> it will
>>> not be stable for at least 2 to 3 years?  I say stick with OOo 2.4.1
>>> until
>>> ALL  the bugs are worked out and it works flawlesly!
>>>    
>>
>> By that logic you'd never use any software at all.
>>
>> Phil Hibbs.
>>  
> To Phil Hibbs: On the contrary, I would be able to concentrate on
> learning what programs I have more thoroughly! I have absolutely NO
> intention of wasting my time and energy(high blood pressure and
> hypertension are my health concerns), on something that really will NOT
> benefit my computer use, whatsoever! :-) :-(
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
>
>

Please keep this one in perspective.

The release of OOo 2.4.1 was to cure a security issue with all OOo
version 2's. I think you need to think carefully about the security of
your windows pc as well as the changes. If necessary choose to upgrade
only when the new version has an update or there is an announcement that
there will be no update.

Thanks

Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[Phil Hibbs]

John Boyle:
> To Phil Hibbs: On the contrary, I would be able to concentrate on learning
> what programs I have more thoroughly! I have absolutely NO intention of
> wasting my time and energy(high blood pressure and hypertension are my
> health concerns), on something that really will NOT benefit my computer use,
> whatsoever! :-) :-(

Who exactly are you angry with? Even if there are people on this list
who are actively involved in the development and release process, it's
hardly fair to get angry with anyone for producing something for free
and giving you the option of using it if you so choose.

Phil Hibbs.
--
Don't you just hate self-referential sigs?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[John Boyle]

Phil Hibbs wrote:

> John Boyle:
>  
>> To Phil Hibbs: On the contrary, I would be able to concentrate on learning
>> what programs I have more thoroughly! I have absolutely NO intention of
>> wasting my time and energy(high blood pressure and hypertension are my
>> health concerns), on something that really will NOT benefit my computer use,
>> whatsoever! :-) :-(
>>    
>
> Who exactly are you angry with? Even if there are people on this list
> who are actively involved in the development and release process, it's
> hardly fair to get angry with anyone for producing something for free
> and giving you the option of using it if you so choose.
>
> Phil Hibbs.
>  

To Phil Hibbs: Who says I am angry? Did I put whole sentences in capital
letters? NO! I am deeply discouraged and cannot understand why this
constant cycle of upgrade SEEMS to be mandatory  and I am tired of it!  
It is bad enough in the Windows side of the house ,but it is even worse
in the Linux side of the house!  I now know, of course, that there are
Linux distros that are longer between cycles than Fedora is, and when my
Linux SIG reconvenes in September I will get some help in changing to
one of them or even possibly making my Linux computer a dual-boot with
another distro added, not removing my Fedora since I did pay for it
despite all the gas about Linux being free!  As I stated in my last
message to you, I do have certain health problems that preclude me from
indulging in stupid leading edge experiments which is what I was trying
to tell you in the first place, as well as all the other people I have
been trying to communicate with! :-(

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[Ganesha Bhaskara]

John Boyle wrote:

> Phil Hibbs wrote:
>> John Boyle:
>>  
>>> To Phil Hibbs: On the contrary, I would be able to concentrate on
>>> learning
>>> what programs I have more thoroughly! I have absolutely NO intention of
>>> wasting my time and energy(high blood pressure and hypertension are my
>>> health concerns), on something that really will NOT benefit my
>>> computer use,
>>> whatsoever! :-) :-(
>>>    
>>
>> Who exactly are you angry with? Even if there are people on this list
>> who are actively involved in the development and release process, it's
>> hardly fair to get angry with anyone for producing something for free
>> and giving you the option of using it if you so choose.
>>
>> Phil Hibbs.
>>  
> To Phil Hibbs: Who says I am angry? Did I put whole sentences in capital
> letters? NO! I am deeply discouraged and cannot understand why this
> constant cycle of upgrade SEEMS to be mandatory

This is the life blood of open source projects. Catching problems (bugs,
design flaws as well as lacking features) early allows the developers to
  take the appropriate measures before other features get built on top
of it. With frequent releases, this feedback loop is much tighter.

  and I am tired of it!

Beta software is not mandatory. If frequent releases aggravate you,
please consider using the stable versions and upgrading only when
absolutely required.

> It is bad enough in the Windows side of the house ,but it is even worse
> in the Linux side of the house!  I now know, of course, that there are
> Linux distros that are longer between cycles than Fedora is, and when my
> Linux SIG reconvenes in September I will get some help in changing to
> one of them or even possibly making my Linux computer a dual-boot with
> another distro added, not removing my Fedora since I did pay for it
> despite all the gas about Linux being free!  As I stated in my last
> message to you, I do have certain health problems that preclude me from
> indulging in stupid leading edge experiments which is what I was trying
> to tell you in the first place, as well as all the other people I have
> been trying to communicate with! :-(

There are many people on the list who experiment with beta versions of
software. Since nobody is being forced to try beta software, I don't see
a problem here. It is your choice.

>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

[Jonathon Blake]

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 2:30 AM, John Boyle  wrote:

> letters? NO! I am deeply discouraged and cannot understand why this constant cycle of upgrade SEEMS to be mandatory  and I am tired of it!

It isn't mandatory.   If you don't want to upgrade your Linux box you
don't have to.

The only person pressuring you to upgrade is you.

If you like the way your Linux box is, keep it as is.

If you like the version of OOo you are currently using, don't upgrade
to the next version.

For the record, my preferred version of OOo, is OOo 1.1.5.  ( I  can
do things with that version, that can't be done with the more recent
releases.  )

xan

jonathon

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...