[tdf-discuss] Re: New "LibreOffice Reader" Eliminates Need for "PDF Reader"

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.



--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 5.0
Thunderbird 3.1.11
LibreOffice 3.3.2

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted