Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 21st Dec 2005 21:44 UTC, submitted by Witek Wasilewski
Features, Office "Eight weeks after 2.0, our first update remedies minor bugs and brings new features. For example, it is now possible to disable and hide particular application settings, which comes in handy for central administration in networks. Plus, a new keyboard shortcut permits the user to return to a saved cursor position. The bullets and numbering feature has been expanded, and a new mail merge feature is available." Here are the release notes, downloads can be found here.
Order by: Score:
Just curious ...
by WorknMan on Wed 21st Dec 2005 22:15 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

If they've made the database app a little more stable this time around?

Reply Score: 1

64-bit?
by Anonymous. on Wed 21st Dec 2005 22:17 UTC
Anonymous.
Member since:
2005-12-04

does it run on amd64 yet?

Reply Score: 1

RE: 64-bit?
by gilboa on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 06:11 UTC in reply to "64-bit?"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

AFAIK they are still far from having a stable x86_46 build.
Seems that the base legacy StarOffice code, was hard-coded to 32bit.

I doubt that we will see a stable 2.x 64bit build within 2006.

Hopefully I'm wrong, though.

Reply Score: 1

Hmm...
by DevL on Wed 21st Dec 2005 22:25 UTC
DevL
Member since:
2005-07-06

With 2.01 out, I wonder if they'll bring their non-English versions up from 2.0-RC3 status...

Reply Score: 1

RE: 64-bit?
by DrillSgt on Wed 21st Dec 2005 22:50 UTC
DrillSgt
Member since:
2005-12-02

"does it run on amd64 yet?"

Why wouldn't it?? OO 2 runs fine on x86-64. Been using it with Suse 10.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: 64-bit?
by Anonymous. on Wed 21st Dec 2005 22:54 UTC in reply to "RE: 64-bit?"
Anonymous. Member since:
2005-12-04

> Why wouldn't it??

$ grep ONLY_FOR_ARCHS /usr/ports/editors/openoffice.org-2.0/Makefile
ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386
$

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: 64-bit?
by smitty on Wed 21st Dec 2005 23:02 UTC in reply to "RE: 64-bit?"
smitty Member since:
2005-10-13

32bit binaries will run fine on x86-64. That was the entire point of making the architecture backwards compatible. But OO.o is still not compiled as 64bit code and won't be for a long time.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: 64-bit?
by Anonymous. on Wed 21st Dec 2005 23:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 64-bit?"
Anonymous. Member since:
2005-12-04

> 32bit binaries will run fine on x86-64.
only if you have the necessary 32-bit libraries installed... OO.o is bloated enough already...

> But OO.o is still not compiled as 64bit code and won't be for a long time.
that's what i thought... i guess i'll just stick with koffice for now...

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: 64-bit?
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 04:38 UTC in reply to "RE: 64-bit?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Agree I am also using it on a Gateway MX7515 with AMD64 running Suse Linux 10 X86_64

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: 64-bit?
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 04:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 64-bit?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

You're running it because your AMD64 can also run x86 code, OO.org is still not compiled as x86_64.

Reply Score: 0

Great!
by 1c3d0g on Wed 21st Dec 2005 23:01 UTC
1c3d0g
Member since:
2005-07-06

This is good news. I'm happy to see some of the most persisent bugs get squashed in this release. Credit has to be given where credit is due, and managing such a complex project like OOo is no small feat. Keep up the good work!

Reply Score: 1

Good upgrade
by Anonymous on Wed 21st Dec 2005 23:01 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

----If they've made the database app a little more stable this time around?

Seems that way. There is also support for using e-mail in mail merge now and Oo recognizes thunderbird address books if you want it too.

Some improvements to bulleting also and the whole app just feels a bit snappier/more stable.

I do recommend completely unistalling (even the app data) you old copy before installing the new one.

Reply Score: 0

...
by suryad on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 00:10 UTC
suryad
Member since:
2005-07-09

The sites have not refreshed yet. I thought I was grabbing the 2.0.1 version but instead it is till at 2.0 and I am think since 2.0.2 is supposed to be out end of February I might as well just hold out.

Reply Score: 1

The speed hack
by kiddo on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 01:07 UTC
kiddo
Member since:
2005-07-23

I am curious, anyone know if THIS was included?
http://www.nat.org/2005/november/#OpenOffice-startup-time

Reply Score: 1

RE: The speed hack
by GhePeU on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 01:44 UTC in reply to "The speed hack"
GhePeU Member since:
2005-07-06

That "hack" requires modifications to glibc, binutils and the recompilation of many parts of the system; there is a bug-report in Gentoo bugzilla, open by Michael Meeks to gain some attention to his proposed patches: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114008

Reply Score: 2

Question
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 02:19 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Does anyone know of plans for features in the next major release yet? I have been searching but haven't found any information on the internet. I am particularly interested to know if 2.1/3.0 will include changes to the GUI in response to MS Office 12.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Question
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 17:26 UTC in reply to "Question"
Anonymous Member since:
---

I am particularly interested to know if 2.1/3.0 will include changes to the GUI in response to MS Office 12.

I for one would hope *NOT*

I did have a look at the developer site and there is some thougt to provide a "MS project" type tool ...

Reply Score: 0

"change case" into the 20th century yet?
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 04:43 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Gee... it would be nice if the OO.O Writer Format "Change Case" function did a little more than change the case of text from upper to lower case. How about "sentance" and "title" cases? like the competitor has been doing since at least 1997?

Reply Score: 0

Good
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 05:49 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

The initial OO.o 2.0 release had numerous small (and yet annoying) glitches. I think it'll take several of these bugfix point releases before OO.o 2.0 becomes as smooth and reliable as OO.o 1.1 was (OO.o 1.0 was also quite buggy when it first came out). But it's good to see that they're working on it. :-)

Reply Score: 0

FreeBSD
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 07:20 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

will this release will be able to run on FreeBSD amd64 version?

Reply Score: 0

RE: FreeBSD
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 07:35 UTC in reply to "FreeBSD"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Err.. it's a point release.. >> *.0.1 -- which fixes minor things. So if 2.0 runs, 2.0.1 runs.

Reply Score: 0

Update from 2.0 to 2.0.1
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 09:00 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Does anybody know if there is an easy way to update from 2.0 to 2.0.1 without deinstalling 2.0 and installing 2.0.1?

I don't want to loose all my settings. Besides, I do find that it is an annoying way to update if you have to deinstall and install.

Cheers

Reply Score: 0

RE: Update from 2.0 to 2.0.1
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 21:27 UTC in reply to "Update from 2.0 to 2.0.1"
Anonymous Member since:
---

For my Windows machine, I just installed to the previous install's install directory. In Linux, everything is an RPM, so you just -Uvh and you're good to go. Any changes you made to the soffice script will have to be redone though, but all your user settings will stay intact.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: 64-bit?
by Anonymous on Thu 22nd Dec 2005 16:07 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Does it really matter. Is 64 bit support going to make you type faster? Its not like a browser which has to interface to plugins.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: 64-bit?
by Anonymous on Fri 23rd Dec 2005 10:53 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: 64-bit?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Why would you want to compile an office suite as a 64bit app?

If your spreadsheet or "base" requires more memory than that can be addressed with 32 bits (that is 4GB), then you should be looking for a different solution (e.g. an SQL server).

The same goes for serious 64bit+ number crunching, where performance may matter (yes, a 32bit app can do 64bit+ math).

Thus, unless an app needs to address more than 4GB of memory at _once_ or does lots of 64bit+ math, it should be compiled as a 32bit (not 64bit) excutable, as it will potentially run faster due to being able to pack more into each word - not wasting the remaining 32bits.

Reply Score: 0