What’s in a Feature? Wordcount in LibreOffice 3.6

Here’s a feature that M$ has had since 2007, a word-count on the status-bar as you type… That may not be important to many of us but it is to some. I occasionally write stuff with a limit on word-count so a “live” counter will be helpful. It may be trivial to implement as well. One wonders why it did not happen years ago with OpenOffice.org…

A “live” word-count is just one of many nifty features in the next release of LibreOffice, 3.6, in testing now and likely to be released in a month or so.

Another thing that has annoyed me about OpenOffice.org was speed of scrolling in large documents. In the beginning, it would overshoot or get me lost. Now it is too slow sometimes. LibreOffice 3.6 has great improvements in speed of importation of various files and scrolling.

It looks as if the efforts LibreOffice has invested to clean up the code has made it much easier to provide improvements in performance and to add features we want. It’s all good.

see Release Notes 3.6 – The Document Foundation Wiki.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to What’s in a Feature? Wordcount in LibreOffice 3.6

  1. kozmcrae says:

    Viktor wrote:

    “It did succeed because it was/is backed by multi-billion dollar corporations.”

    Viktor is beginning to understand FLOSS.

  2. oiaohm says:

    Phenom most of the existing LibreOffice developers are paid full time somewhere. Same with the existing Apache OpenOffice.

    Mostly for large companies its cheaper to pay developers than pay the licensing cost Microsoft wants.

    So the work is paid for Phenom. Neither project is a free ride.

    Difference now the companies giving code are not looking at there code not being merged upstream and being forced to pay to get access to a copy with it merged.

    First 10 year history of OpenOffice is a sad one where sharing of resources between companies was disrupted by greed of a few. So effectively cutting the project off from funded developers.

    Phenom the issue is not as straight forwards as you are attempting to go.

    A company will not fund you to add a feature to a open-source project if there is a risk they will have to end up paying on going licensing to another company who did not do the work. The is the reality that caused OpenOffice to be in such a bad state.

    There are rules to how FOSS operates. A project breaking any of them either dies or does not progress as expected.

    I missed this.
    Viktor wrote, ” FLOSS developers tend to be egotistical pricks who only like to do what’s useful to them or seems useful to them.”

    Lot of cases they appear egotistical pricks because they obey there pay masters. If you are not funding there wages they don’t have to listen to you since it will not see a wage in there pocket.

    This is the big problem FOSS is drive by money as much as any other software development sometimes even worse.

  3. Phenom says:

    Why would I spend time and effort on something I don’t use when I have dozens of projects on the go at any time doing things that are higher priority.

    Exactly, Pog! That is why people pay for software, to achieve efficiency which they will not have otherwise.

  4. Viktor wrote, ” FLOSS developers tend to be egotistical pricks who only like to do what’s useful to them or seems useful to them.”

    There’s an over-generalization if there ever was one. I know some FLOSS developers who are teachers making the world a better place for young children to learn. FLOSS is a cooperative project of the world to make good software. All are welcome to participate in the project.

  5. Phenom wrote, of OpenOffice.org/LibreOffice, “You have the source. Yet, you didn’t do it.”

    As I wrote, word-count is rarely something I care about. Why would I spend time and effort on something I don’t use when I have dozens of projects on the go at any time doing things that are higher priority. Yesterday, for instance, I spent blogging, shopping and pruning tall trees. I rose at 0500 yesterday and slept at 0130 today. I don’t have the time often to do many desirable things. Today, I have an opportunity to catch up with my weeds.

  6. Phenom says:

    Pogson wrote: Obviously it was not critical to every one of the hundred million users. There was a word-count but it took a click or two.

    Ignoring the myth of hundreds of millions invisible and untangible souls, obviously it was important to you. You always claim you know how to program, and that you’ve written scientific software and stuff. You have the source. Yet, you didn’t do it.

  7. oiaohm says:

    Ivan
    “You claim Sun wouldn’t allow a feature into Open Office even though the same feature would have been used to improve Star Office.”

    The worst case was rejected from include in openoffice then found shipped in StarOffice. Still using the patch to improve StarOffice. Copyright assignment Sun used allowed this.

    Ivan I did not say they were preventing the feature going into StarOffice. Just because a feature has been blocked from being included in Openoffice did not mean they would not pull it into StarOffice. Doing this causes friction and makes developers not give the project code.

    That is exactly what happened many times. If a feature was going to be added to OpenOffice that would have taken away StarOffice advantage resistance came up. Yes there was a list of features that was basically off limits.

    You don’t place limits on what developed can provide.

    Remember added features can lay the foundations for the next set of features. Oracle is still doing the same kind of thing with some of the projects they still manage and yes this is why most of them are forked today.

    Victor Apache OpenOffice is still better management than what Sun and Oracle management of OpenOffice was.

    Today Apache OpenOffice core is going in the direction Lotus Symphony. That also contained a list of patches that was not merged upstream.

    Basically the breakaway from Sun and Oracle management to Apache and the Document foundation was required. Really should have happened years earlier.

    Viktor
    “It did succeed because it was/is backed by multi-billion dollar corporations.”
    Also there were 12 attempts before android. Some BSD some Linux. All backed by Multi-billion dollar corporations and most you cannot find any evidence of existing.

    You need backing of multi-billion dollar corporations. You also need those multi-billion dollar companies working with each other not attempting to back stab each other.

    Copyright assignment done in a way that Sun did that allowed them even to use rejected patches in there commercial version of the program is not what you call good business prac worse is then using some of those rejected patches. Result is complete distrust.

    Yes some of the attempts before android for mobile phones had copyright assignment like Sun had on OpenOffice same result distrust and failure of the attempt.

    There are ways to manage a Open-source project. Apache is good at it. Open Document foundation is also doing a good job. Oracle and Sun both did a bad job running them.

    One key rule of managing a open source project don’t try drawing lines in sand to say this is my commercial program and this is the open source program. If the open source world is providing the same features and you were providing commercially its time to find new features to provide.

    Yes the idea of the billion dollar company support required got in way of putting the needs of the project first. Sun and orcale rich we have to stay with them to have funding. Not a good move.

    So good management with the interest of the project at hart + funding equals progress. One without the other is worthless this is the lesson of Sun and OpenOffice funding is not enough.

    Really Apache OpenOffice and Libreoffice have made more progress in there short existence than what Sun and Oracle did for OpenOffice over there complete 10 years.

    “intention of building an open-source development”

    Basically sun looked at the open-source world as free labour. Does not turn out well. You have to look when dealing with the open-source world as partnership with those developers so you have to live with what they want as much as what you want. Otherwise the relationship is not fruitful. We know why OpenOffice failed to progress.

    Basically OpenOffice had not been a health project for over 10 years. In the first 12 months ie 2000-2001 the project was show issues between open source coders submitting code and the sun management.

    Google with Android visits all the hardware makers found out what they wanted. Also careful on accepting patches. Android success is not just that there is a billion dollar company behind it. The management of the company behind it did listen to there customers and have been careful where able not to stomp on developers.

  8. Viktor says:

    One wonders why it did not happen years ago with OpenOffice.org…

    Because FLOSS developers tend to be egotistical pricks who only like to do what’s useful to them or seems useful to them. Didn’t you get Linus Torvalds’ memo?

    That’s not to say that Torvalds isn’t wrong. Because Android didn’t succeed thanks to an army of egotistical basement developers. It did succeed because it was/is backed by multi-billion dollar corporations.

    And LibreOffice sucks. If I have to use one of the abominations, I use Apache OpenOffice. Not least for ideological reasons. Everything without the GPL seal is good.

  9. Ivan says:

    Pete, stop STFWing for just a moment and think about what you’ve just said.

    You claim Sun wouldn’t allow a feature into Open Office even though the same feature would have been used to improve Star Office.

    Would you care to rethink your response?

  10. oiaohm says:

    Ivan Sun ruled what could go into OpenOffice with a iron fist then cloned features they saw as good for Star Office so resulting in some of the best coders not working on it. Yes best example of this is the 2 implementations of svg in OpenOffice source base. The open source third party was written first and turns out to be better quality.

    Oracle when they took over Sun was going to keep the same process up.

    The first 10 years of history of OpenOffice is an example of how not to run a Open Source project.

    Ivan
    “Obviously it wasn’t critical to make Star Office suck less.”
    You have this wrong. Sun had the idea that it was Critical that Star Office suxed less than OpenOffice so they could sell it at all costs.

    Phenom two years under new management and LibreOffice has added more of the missing features than Openoffice did under 10 years Sun and Oracle management.

    Each failure there is lessons. LibreOffice was formed out of failure of management of Star-Office and OpenOffice todo what was required to add new features and improve performance.

    Also the word count feature on status bar was not 100 percent missing for that complete time if you installed the extension writers tools it added it in 2002. Yes 5 years before Microsoft added it.

    Its this failure for features like this to get mainline has held OpenOffice back a lot.

    Phenom so claim no one paid attention is false. The claim that Sun and Oracle management of the project was incompetent cannot be question.

    Phenom as normal you have gone off without doing your full homework.

    The code base of Libreoffice is still being cleaned.

    The features are not only minor things they are going after either. http://fridrich.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/libreoffice-ms-publisher-import-filter.html

    Yes MS Publisher import is under-way, Visio is already in.

    The means to open more and more MS Office formats is coming all the time. This is what new management can do. With the freedom to go after these features.

  11. Ivan says:

    Uh, stop being a pedant:

    “On 19 July 2000, Sun Microsystems announced that it would make the source code of StarOffice available for download with the intention of building an open-source development community around the software and providing a free and open alternative to Microsoft Office.”

    Obviously it wasn’t critical to make Star Office suck less. 😉

  12. Uh, do the maths. 2012-2007 = 5 years.

    Obviously it was not critical to every one of the hundred million users. There was a word-count but it took a click or two.

  13. kozmcrae says:

    Phenom wrote:

    “1. A simple usability feature as word-count in the status bar took some 12 years to catch-up with the competition.”

    You want to compare features with Linux and Windows? Power shell vs Bash? First off Power shell didn’t exist for, how long? You want to fill in the blanks on the rest?

    Microsoft makes a point of hiding things from the user. Linux make a point of not hiding anything.

  14. Phenom says:

    Here’s a feature that M$ has had since 2007, a word-count on the status-bar as you type

    One wonders why it did not happen years ago with OpenOffice.org

    Thank you, Pogson! That’s the best laugh I had today.

    There are too many points worth mentioning here. I will just start and leave it to the others.

    1. A simple usability feature as word-count in the status bar took some 12 years to catch-up with the competition.

    2. This simple usability feature was obviously required, but no one paid attention to users for 12 years.

    3. The so called “army of developers” was not there to implement it for 12 years.

Leave a Reply