Notes re Open office & Linux/Win data

[Craig White]

On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 12:24 -0700, Mark Jarvis wrote:
> OOo-2 is ->IMMENSELY<- better than OOo-1. Since I used OOo-2, trying to 
> use OOo-1 drives me up the wall! Awareness of problems or MSOffice vs OO 
> obviously varies with what one does. I frequently create a document 
> having outline numbering intermixed with non-numbered example lines. I 
> usually have to fight with MSWord to get what I want. Not too 
> unexpectedly, I have a similar fight with OO, but the kicks & tweaks are 
> a little different. Assuming that you use fonts that are available on 
> both sides, however, plain vanilla documents and presentations transfer 
> very well.
> 
> My experience is that documents saved from OO (i.e. OOo-2) as .doc files 
> pull up just fine in MSWord, but that documents saved from MSWord will 
> more often need tweaking when pulled up in OO.
> 
> Because of the many available design templates readily available in 
> PowerPoint, I tend to start presentations in PP, then move to OO. (I'm 
> sure that there's an equally good source for OO design templates, but 
> haven't taken the time to look for it.) Once again OO --> PP seems to be 
> better than PP --> OO. One caveat: many PP design templates involved 
> objects which rendered v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y in OOo-1, making them 
> effectively unusable. I haven't tested this thoroughly with OOo-2, but 
> the problem seems to be almost, if not entirely, eliminated.
> 
----
if the default set of templates isn't enough for you, there are many
more at OOo's web site for all the various applications

Craig