Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LibreOffice 6.3 Released With Better Performance, UI Enhancements

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by kpedersen View Post

    Once we can reliably run OpenGL 3.x+ in a VM, entirely software based or remotely then perhaps, but until then we are simply too far behind Microsoft's RemoteFx / RDP for GPU reliance to be acceptable in the enterprise. We would be shooting ourselves in the foot.

    It would even cause issues for Linux in the hobbiest market; I don't think things like the Raspberry Pi can run OpenGL 3.3 (OpenGLES 3.2 I think is the very latest for the Pi 4).

    Basically it will reduce the number of FOSS users even lower than there already is. Especially for poorer households (where FOSS was originally a large benefit to). Whilst we sit on our fat gamer PCs, we should show some restraint and not "want it all!". Especially for such a pointless thing like slightly smoother scrolling in a spreadsheet
    That's a fair point, but it also works both ways. Having flagship applications require certain features creates pressure to fix support for them or implement it where it's missing. Honestly the only reason we have seen dramatic improvement in GPU drivers is Steam and the only reason that kernel support for namespaces has advanced so much is because container systems require them. If LO started requiring say OpenGL 3.3, the platforms where it has usually been used would immediately get to work to support it.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by jacob View Post
      I think there are still a few big missing features. For one, the documentation of LO's internal APIs and, more generally, macro development and customisation, is next to nonexistent. It's also lacking proper PDF import (as a text document) and built-in OCR.
      Are there any other word processors with real built-in OCR? I can't think of any. Second, what would be the point? Handle the OCR in a pdf document package, and then import the result. Third, pdf import, except for fairly simple documents with almost no formatting, usually ends up with a pretty big mess even using the best word processors. I did a simple document on a big, proprietary word processor 2 weeks ago that ended up a huge mess. I won't say the name of the word processor, but it rhymes with "MS Turd". And it was the latest, greatest version.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by andyprough View Post

        Are there any other word processors with real built-in OCR? I can't think of any. Second, what would be the point? Handle the OCR in a pdf document package, and then import the result. Third, pdf import, except for fairly simple documents with almost no formatting, usually ends up with a pretty big mess even using the best word processors. I did a simple document on a big, proprietary word processor 2 weeks ago that ended up a huge mess. I won't say the name of the word processor, but it rhymes with "MS Turd". And it was the latest, greatest version.
        MS Office has an OCR module. I agree that PDF import in Word leaves much to be desired but it's better than no support at all. As a word processor I find LO Writer superior to Word in almost every way (it's the opposite with spreadsheets) but this is one use case where I repeatedly need to revert to MS to import a document, even though I may then do all subsequent work in LO.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by kpedersen View Post

          I like that it has been extremely boring for a while now. This is good.

          For my purposes it is actually feature complete. All we need to do now is maintain it well and wait for Microsoft to stop providing an offline version of MS Office. Finally then I think LibreOffice stands a really good chance of becoming the standard; even once Microsoft brings back an offline version of MS Office because the dated "cloud" architecture doesn't work.

          (Then we wont need to worry about time-sucking tasks like keeping docx support in sync.)

          What I do not want to see is a non-optional dependence on OpenGL 3.3, OpenCL or some other mad shite that FOSS software seems to be going for these days.
          Just curious, what are your computer(s) specs?
          CPU, RAM and GPU. What version of OpenGL does your GPU support?

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by uid313 View Post
            What do you like and dislike with LibreOffice? What do you think could be better and would like to see?
            - The OpenCL acceleration in Calc. OpenCL is workstation-grade, and requires installation of more drivers to work. It would be great if it used something more consumer/business-grade like Vulkan or even OpenGL compute shaders.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by kpedersen View Post

              Once we can reliably run OpenGL 3.x+ in a VM, entirely software based or remotely then perhaps, but until then we are simply too far behind Microsoft's RemoteFx / RDP for GPU reliance to be acceptable in the enterprise. We would be shooting ourselves in the foot.

              It would even cause issues for Linux in the hobbiest market; I don't think things like the Raspberry Pi can run OpenGL 3.3 (OpenGLES 3.2 I think is the very latest for the Pi 4).

              Basically it will reduce the number of FOSS users even lower than there already is. Especially for poorer households (where FOSS was originally a large benefit to). Whilst we sit on our fat gamer PCs, we should show some restraint and not "want it all!". Especially for such a pointless thing like slightly smoother scrolling in a spreadsheet
              MESA should run OpenGL 3.3 in software mode just fine, it's as easy as setting LIBGL_ALWAYS_SOFTWARE when running whatever you need. It only starts getting funny once you need to use more modern versions, where you need to set up more environment variables.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by Mathias View Post
                What I really hate about LibreOffice, the Appimage Download Page doesn't show what version I am downloading. Only "Fresh" and "Still". So I download the fresh version, but that's not yet updated... Thanks.
                Try this page: http://libreoffice.soluzioniopen.com/index.php/stable-2/

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                  What do you like and dislike with LibreOffice? What do you think could be better and would like to see?

                  As for me, I would like to see it come with beautiful templates so that you can focus on content and effortlessly make beautiful presentations and documents. Maybe it needs overall a bit more polish.
                  I like how it's possible to connect to it with Python, and automate lots of stuff.

                  What I miss — and a lot of peoples in scientific community do — is support for LaTeX imports. Right now if you want to convert a LaTeX document to an office format, you have to use pandoc. But pandoc is far from being feature-complete, also I doubt its support for various office formats is anywhere near the LO's one, simply because of man-hours people put into these two apps.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by kneekoo View Post
                    Ok, what version is the standard version? The version numbers are only given for the basic version.
                    http://libreoffice.soluzioniopen.com...86_64.AppImage

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                      What do you like and dislike with LibreOffice? What do you think could be better and would like to see?

                      As for me, I would like to see it come with beautiful templates so that you can focus on content and effortlessly make beautiful presentations and documents. Maybe it needs overall a bit more polish.
                      I like the fact it's not MS Orafice.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X