Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On 6/23/11 3:40 PM, Marc Paré wrote:
> This thread is really about proposing, to the devs, the possibility of
> creating a "LibreOffice Reader" similar to the "Adobe .pdf Reader".

I'm just an LO user, not a programmer, beta tester, proof reader, I just want a reliable set of programs.

I'm not trying to "rain on anyone's parade", but I have to ask... Wouldn't a project like this be simply "reinventing the wheel"? (I see I'm not the only one with this viewpoint.)

I've just read the entire thread up to this point, and have these observations:

1. Why? As another poster noted, there are already free readers for PDF out there as alternatives to Adobe Reader. As you can tell from my signature, I use a Mac. OS X gives me the ability to read PDF files within the OS files, right out of the box. Of what use would I need another reader for? Plus, OS X gives me the option to create a PDF file as part of the print dialogue.

2. Creating another program from LO means another program that needs support. I'd rather see LO's resources be applied to adding new features, fixing bugs, and streamlining the code to make it run faster. Docx file handling and Base apparently have numerous problems, at least that's my impression from the User mailing list. As soon as Adobe or whomever changes the PDF specifications, LO would have to spend time and resources to fix the code in any LO reader. (And not the first to think of fixing bugs. :-) )

3. MS has a reason to produce a viewer for MS Office. A lot of people don't have the product. If you send an Office file to someone who does not have Office, they would have to buy it. :-) But, LO is free, why have a reader that just reads PDF and/or open document files, when you can download the entire product, and then edit and make changes? Maybe it would be a decent idea to allow users to simply download the portion of LO they actually need and will use, rather than the whole package. (I see I'm not the first one to think of this. :-) ) There are some alternative office packages for Windows that allow this. Crystal Office is one, and I suspect there are others. Papyrus and Ashampoo Office contain only the most used portions of a full office suite.

4. Someone mentioned X number of LO users. And I would say.... So? That's no guarantee they will use the viewer. Why would they? They have the suite. I would think the most likely group of users to need/use any LO reader would be users who do *not* have LO installed.

5. LO is not the only office suite out there, especially for the Windows platform, that are simpler than MS Office, and cheaper. Many of them read/write some version of MS Office files.

6. If exchanging files for editing is the goal, and the files are basic word processor files, there's always RTF.

Just this user's perspective on the idea of a reader from LO.

Size of the Adobe install has been mentioned. On my Mac, Reader 10, approaches 300 MB.

Personally, if the document is important to me, I find reading the printed version to be easier than on screen. And I can sit in my favorite chair, instead of in front of a computer. FYI, I hate laptops. :-D

This is a late reply, my apologies. But, it appears the Gmane interface is not working for me when I want to post. There seems to be no issue with receiving.


Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 5.0
Thunderbird 3.1.11
LibreOffice 3.3.2

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.