[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openoffice-users
Subject:    Re: [users] Re: modularized openoffice.org
From:       Robert Steinmetz <rob () steinmetznet ! com>
Date:       2003-02-03 21:06:24
Message-ID: 3E3ED9D0.3B7ACBDD () steinmetznet ! com
[Download RAW message or body]



Andrew Gray wrote:

> Anthony Valentine <amv@sbsalaska.com> wrote in
> news:1044292612.7572.1245.camel@mis3.sbsalaska.com:
>
> > Hello.
> >
> > I've been thinking of bloated software recently, and I came to the
> > conclusion that people want lots of features.  Unfortunately,
> > different people want different features, so to keep people happy, all
> > these features get added.  Before you know it, your program is bloated
> > and slow.
> >
> > This begs the question, can OpenOffice.org be modularized, like the
> > Linux kernel is?  That is to say, can I compile in certain features
> > that I want, leave others out that I'll never use and make other
> > features as modules that can be loaded when needed?
>
> MS Office allows you to uncheck modules during install.  Don't need
> Power Point?  Uncheck it, and reduce the installation size. However,
> while the phrase "can OpenOffice.org be modularized, like the Linux
> kernel ...[to] compile in certain features..." might seem like a neat
> idea to you, believe me it strikes cold terror into the hearts of many
> "mainstream" Windows users. :-)
>
> I've read several postings recently about people who didn't uncheck the
> 'associate MS Office files with OO' switch during a plain install and
> now can't figure out why Word doesn't open their .doc files.  People
> need the package to remain simple, not grow more complex.
>

Isn't that mostly a matter of the installation and setup program? With a few
simple options like Compact, Standard, Complete and Custom.

--
Robert Steinmetz AIA
Principal
Steinmetz & Associates



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]