Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:A ribbon clone? (Score 1) 224

``It's an OPTION. Apparently one of FOUR possible ways to organize your UI. If you don't want it, don't use it.''

Yeah, I get that (though it wasn't mentioned in the original article; you had to follow links in that article to learn that). One would hope that that menu selection is modular in that, by selecting one of those four options, you were only loading the desired interface and eliminating the memory demands for the three unused options. I rather doubt that's the case, though. The somewhat older version of LO I'm using now is a memory pig as it is.

Comment Re:Sure sure but does it still crash? (Score 1) 224

Yeah, it only occasionally crashes. The bad thing about that is that, when Writer goes and crashes, it seems to want to take down the spreadsheet I have opened on a different virtual desktop--or any other LO component I have running. Sure, there's likely some memory savings by having Writer and Calc sharing some code but there's something just wrong about a Writer snafu taking down the whole LO environment.

Comment Re:A ribbon clone? (Score 1) 224

Sorry. I did but I didn't see the words "option" or "optional" anywhere in the article where the ribbon was being mentioned. It was mentioned as optional in a linked page, though. No, I didn't watch the damned video.

If it's optional, then fine. My big feature request would be to reduce the time it takes for Writer to become usable--which takes around ten seconds on my desktop system. I'm hoping that's part of this release and, frankly, I'd rather they work on things like that instead of "features" that were widely reviled by users when introduced by MS--and still are by many. Slavishly mimicking Word's bloat ain't all that interesting.

Comment A ribbon clone? (Score 4, Insightful) 224

Was there serious demand for this? I suspect one of the features that many -- if not most -- users of LibreOffice enjoyed was that it didn't have the damned ribbon.

I do more writing using Emacs/LaTeX than I do with any word processor but when I do need to create a Word-compatible document I do resort to Writer (and save as ".doc"). Thanks guys for bringing the Office ribbon hassles to Writer. I'm sure everyone's tickled pink to now be able to experience Word's ribbon headaches on Linux.

Comment Make sense when you think about it. (Score 1) 47

Without even having read the article yet (looking forward to it though), it makes complete sense for this to be the case. If the brain didn't continue to grow and adapt this way, you'd have a tough time recognizing someone's face after a few years. Who hasn't gone to a reunion or some other social event and recognized someone that you hadn't seen in years, even decades?

Comment Now if only... (Score 1) 192

... there was actually content that actually needed 8K resolution. Is it possible that watching `Two Broke Girls" or `Kevin Can Wait' in 8K will actually make them enjoyable. Maybe having the laugh track accurately positioned in three dimensions will be the must-have feature that makes the new HDMI spec worth the extra money. (Too cynical?)

Comment Yeah, they're slow but... (Score 1) 766

... not all of the blame lies with the browsers. My theory is that there must be some really poor code libraries that have gained a wide acceptance in the web designer community.

In a slightly off-topic vein but related to the browsing "experience": a major pet peeve of mine is web designers' failure to use the image size information to preallocate space on the page. Depending on the site and how busy it is, it can take as long as ten seconds for the page to finally quit re-rendering after every image dribbles in. "Behold our graphics-rich page layout! Isn't it impressive and worthy of an award? Oh, you wanted to read the content? We never took that into account." This is just laziness. The way to avoid this has been around since the Netscape days and is nicely described in O'Reilly's original HTML text.

Comment Once upon a time... (Score 1) 295

... when you order an item that was being shipped to your home, the delivery person rang the bell or knocked on the door. You then signed something that showed that you'd received it, and you took your package inside. Some shippers still do this. In fact, I have signed for two packages in recent weeks. If I'm not home, a note is stuck on my front door telling me that I missed the delivery and that they'll be back tomorrow. Or I can drive over to the depot, sign for the package, and bring it home.

I'm sure someone's now thinking "Oh, that's too inconvenient!" Really? More inconvenient than have the package stolen off your front porch? Live in an apartment? Always opt for he delivery option where someone has to sign for the package. If that's too hard for ya, there's still brick-n-mortar stores.

Comment Re:Um... they already did all that (Score 1) 88

At least one of the major grocery chains around where I live (Chicago) did away with their loyalty cards. I seriously doubt we ever got a 20% discount for using one. They lowered their prices (somewhat) and seem to have a lot more buy-two|three|whatever-get-discount deals.

I'm still not ready to entrust a company to have it's electronic hands on my wallet at an automated checkout line. (Go ahead and call me "old school"... I like it.)

Comment Did Shazam ever stop to consider... (Score 3, Insightful) 126

... the security implications?

``If the mic wasn't left on, it would take the app longer to both initialize the mic and then start buffering audio, and this is more likely to result in a poor user experience where users 'miss out' on a song they were trying to identify.''

What if they'd actually turned off the microphone instead of fooling the end-user into thinking it was off. And, then, if user's complained about missing the first 0.25s (or whatever) of the tune, Shazam responded to the users that there was a slight delay but that it was necessary to protect them from potentially being eavesdropped on? How many users would have found that reasonable and been fine with that? Well, we'll never know because Shazam didn't, apparently, care too much about the end user's privacy. But making sure they could identify an effin' song? Well, that's of paramount importance!

Slashdot Top Deals

Today is the first day of the rest of your lossage.