Open Office installation report?

[omega]

Greetings, George. Thank you for providing the answer.

I have tracked an installation of the previous stable version with
InCtrl5, but not the latest one. However, I will attempt an answer as
this is the kind of question I have before installing many a program.
For an office suite, I find it admirably restrained. There is a
single .ini file in <Application Data>, a directory called
<Windows\ShellNew> and that's pretty much all I can discern.

The ShellNew is fine with me. Windows lets you put that anywhere, and add
or delete what you want. (Even when the stubborn MSOffice is involved).

The "application data" directory usage by a program is major peeve for me.
Mozilla is one of the big sinners. Even when you direct profiles elsewhere,
it roots a few files there, in concrete. (In contrast, its nephew, KMeleon,
is clean in this regard.) At least, from your report, 00's dropping there
are limited to a single ini.

And, the essence. No libraries snuck into the system directory. And no
messy constructs shoved over in the "common files" directory. Good news.

This, I suspect, depends heavily upon the choice of file association
one has during the install process. Yes, a lot of keys are added,
mainly in the HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT hierarchy, if you bind it with all the
types it can handle. But that's inevitable, isn't it? Other than
that, use of the registry is sparse.

I plan to give it no associations. I'd do it this way regardless; but
further, at the site, I think they were saying that the application does
not know how to toggle its control of associations - that once it takes
them, it won't return them.

Take the above with a grain of salt. It is possible that they were
remnants of the previous version and do not apply to the latest one.

I don't think they'd change from reasonable, to uncivil (file spew), as part
of new version. So I take your report as valid for my comfort and assurance.
I much appreciate it.

The OO installation issue, it sounds better than I anticipated.

 

[omega]

Ditto...

My sentiments, as well. I will not recommend it.

 

[Bob Adkins]

I don't think they'd change from reasonable, to uncivil (file spew), as part
of new version. So I take your report as valid for my comfort and assurance.
I much appreciate it.

Ever try AbiWord? What a nice program!

It's 10mb and 163 files, installed. OOo is 2066 files and 144mb!

I wish Abi would fill out their suite with a spread sheet, a vector drawing
app, and a WYSIWYG Web development app. I bet it could be done with a very
un Linux-like 300 files of 50 MB or less.

Bob

 

[Onno Tasler]

Ever try AbiWord? What a nice program! It's 10mb and 163 files,
installed. OOo is 2066 files and 144mb!

Oh well, comparing AbiWord and OpenOffice.org is almost like comparing
a Fiat Uno to a Mercedes-Benz. .

AbiWord is a basic writing program; OOo is a complete Office Suite.
The first is good for small, quick or occasional texts, it misses many
features you need for office and university work. The latter can do much
more, has all these features, but those make it bigger, as well.

They do not compete, they complement each other.

bye,

Onno

 

[Cousin Stanley]

| ....
| The "application data" directory usage by a program is major peeve for me.
| Mozilla is one of the big sinners. Even when you direct profiles elsewhere,
| it roots a few files there, in concrete.
| ....

Karen ....

I've successfully moved the Mozilla application directory
from the default installation location to a different drive/partition
using a version of COA2 from PC Mag. that was available
before they started charging $$$$ for downloads ....

Someone probably has a link to the last freeware version ....

No problems at all with Mozilla 1.5 since the move ....

 

[Bob Adkins]

They do not compete, they complement each other.

Well, you totally missed my point.

OK, let me put it another way:

If OOo were as well written and compact as AbiWord, it would be 1/4 the size
and file count.

Bob

 

[omega]

| The "application data" directory usage by a program is major peeve for me.
| Mozilla is one of the big sinners. Even when you direct profiles elsewhere,
| it roots a few files there, in concrete.

Karen ....

I've successfully moved the Mozilla application directory
from the default installation location to a different drive/partition
using a version of COA2 from PC Mag. that was available
before they started charging $$$$ for downloads ....

Someone probably has a link to the last freeware version ....

No problems at all with Mozilla 1.5 since the move ....

The two files that I have there:

\Mozilla\pluginreg.dat
\Mozilla\registry.dat

I have COA2. I think I'll wait until I've finished my plan to upgrade to
Moz 1.6, then next - I'll see if I can indeed get your success in moving
those two stubborn files out of there.

.. . .

Now, I'll leave you with one that I view as totally impossible. The Mozilla
ActiveX Control. Roots itself hard in the "application data" directory.

\MozillaControl\profiles\MozillaControl\*.slt\*

Are you using any progs that have had you register this control? And if so,
have you ever tried to move that subtree to a preferred location? I admit
I haven't even attempted. That Moz seemed hard-rooted about things, it made
this other seem even more forbidding.

 

[Bebop & Rocksteady]

Well, you totally missed my point.

OK, let me put it another way:

If OOo were as well written and compact as AbiWord, it would be 1/4 the
size and file count.

Hmm lets see... take away HTML Editor, Vector Draw, Spreedsheet, presentation
app, takeaway some of the advanced functions in the word processor... and
what would you be left with about 9Mb and 150 file (or even less...)



--
----------------------------------------
Quantum Illusions: http://quantum.2ya.com
FORT Freeware: http://freeware.quantum.2ya.com
Pegasus Mail Support Site: http://pegasus.quantum.2ya.com
DATA Solutions: http://datasolutions.quantum.2ya.com

If you truly want to contact me click the link
http://quantum.2ya.com/email.htm

 

[Bob Adkins]

Hmm lets see... take away HTML Editor, Vector Draw, Spreedsheet, presentation
app, takeaway some of the advanced functions in the word processor... and
what would you be left with about 9Mb and 150 file (or even less...)

I bet the other apps don't add that much size to the main OOo engine. I
think they're like plugins.

I just browsed the OOo files and there's a jillion that look unnecessary. I
bet they could be seriously thinned out without losing any real function.

Bob

 

[Susan Bugher]

Now that you mention it.........<G>

There was an item I'd been interested in: further completion of the author
column on the PL. Only, I'd planned to provide some data for some of the
empty spots, before bringing it up. That which means expending a bit of my
own time first, before handing you the next todo list. Hmm. Er.

More author info would be nice. It's like books, the author's name is
often a good clue as to whether or not you'll like the creation (book/
software).

Glad to see you posting again - were you out driving around the
countryside in that car you won?

Lucky you - I came in second and didn't win anything.

Well, how about this as first agenda: an extension on the R & R time.

Susan

 

[Burp]

My sentiments, as well. I will not recommend it.

Pardon me if I missed a reply..... but, I am rather curious why the pros
hereabouts do not recommend JV 16.

 

[Bob Adkins]

Pardon me if I missed a reply..... but, I am rather curious why the pros
hereabouts do not recommend JV 16.

It's no longer Freeware.

Bob

 

[George Skandalidis]

I plan to give it no associations.

I don't really know if this is possible. You can choose not to
associate it with Microsoft formats, but that won't save you all the
CLASSES_ROOT entries. It will still be associated with a lot of file
types (its own) and register its context menus. I think it's a small
price to pay.

I'd do it this way regardless; but
further, at the site, I think they were saying that the application does
not know how to toggle its control of associations - that once it takes
them, it won't return them.

Hmmm, I'm not sure. That's what I had originally thought or read.
Then, someone suggested running the setup.exe again, this time from
the installed directory. I haven't tried this. Anyway, even if it
works, it only applies to Microsoft formats and default HTML editor
IIRC.

The OO installation issue, it sounds better than I anticipated.

Indeed. If you decide to install it eventually, do report back.

 

[JanC]

The "application data" directory usage by a program is major peeve for
me. Mozilla is one of the big sinners. Even when you direct profiles
elsewhere, it roots a few files there, in concrete.

Mozilla does what every program *should* do according to the Windows
application programming specifications. You can't blame someone for
following the rules, especially if these rules have a good reason...

(AFAIK, you can move the "application data" directory to another place, if
you really want that, but you have to change a registry key so that it
points to the new location then.)

 

[Burp]

It's no longer Freeware.

Bob

I understand that aspect of the program. But, how about the earlier freeware
versions? Are there some bugs I am not aware of?

 

[DC]

I understand that aspect of the program. But, how about the earlier freeware
versions? Are there some bugs I am not aware of?

The last freeware version decided to expire on us, without a warning of
any kind. Kinda put us off, you know? I resent being a free beta
tester -- unless I go willingly.

 

[omega]

Mozilla does what every program *should* do according to the Windows
application programming specifications.

I have 2-3 thousand installed programs. Not counting Microsoft and not
counting Mozilla, only 3 of those thousands of programs are using the
"application data" directory. FORTUNATELY.

You can't blame someone for following the rules,

I have read some of the "rules," at MSDN. Some I agree with, and wish all
programs followed (for instance about the specific registry key locations,
where I witness some programs screw up).

And some of those rules I do not agree with. For instance, MSFT tells
developers it is imperative they never use a local ini for user settings.
This is one where I'm very glad so many developers ignore MSFT.

especially if these rules have a good reason...

Without even looking, I know I can believe you that MSDN has some
documents sitting out there instructing to use the "application data"
directory. Good reason is another matter. It is /highly inconvenient/
for me not to have a program's data in its directory. It further gives
my whole directory structure a completely unnatural bump and knot, without
justice.

If the matter of multiple user profiles is the believed justification,
witness that there are other means. Best case in point here is KM; it
keeps profiles - without going outside and writing to that weird directory.

(If, as I suspect, the design has some vague idea that it would make things
easier for system administrators, dealing with roaming profiles, and user
data backups, and etc - well, even if think the subject for half a moment,
you realize that they will always have to deal with settings coming from
an inevitable variety of locations on disk and registry, thus no convenience
at all is added that I can see when a program uses that directory.)

(AFAIK, you can move the "application data" directory to another place, if
you really want that, but you have to change a registry key so that it
points to the new location then.)

Yes, I've never kept it on C. That doesn't help the fact that the program is
orphaned off from some of its files, those which it has shoved yonder in the
application data dir.

Again, luckily it is just a few programs, out of thousands, which exhibit
this problem. And there was a report recently in this thread that Mozilla
can be coaxed completely out of that location.

 

[omega]

I don't really know if this is possible. You can choose not to
associate it with Microsoft formats, but that won't save you all the
CLASSES_ROOT entries. It will still be associated with a lot of file
types (its own) and register its context menus. I think it's a small
price to pay.

I'd only done a superficial read of the setup FAQs. Good point: The
associations thing I brought up is limited to the matter of giving OO
control of MSOffice file formats (and other pre-existings) - and not
to do with OO's own filetypes.

Hmmm, I'm not sure. That's what I had originally thought or read.
Then, someone suggested running the setup.exe again, this time from
the installed directory. I haven't tried this. Anyway, even if it
works, it only applies to Microsoft formats and default HTML editor
IIRC.

Based on my quick read, it sounded like the standard advice was to make
sure, during setup process, to tell OO not to take over the MSOffice file
formats. (Assuming that one is keeping MS Office, co-existent, on their
system.)

I'll look for the tip about a rerun of setup.exe. Although for my case,
I use independent means to keep control of the registry. You know how
unreliable it is as a general patter to rely on trusting in individual
programs to "catch and release" your associations.

About the rest of whatever will occur, upon install, on CLASSES_ROOT,
I'm hoping it's not too wild. What I've noticed is that the big difference
in how much stuff gets bombed into there, particularly as far as CLSIDs,
TYPELIBs, et al, it often has most to do with whether the application has
incorporated a lot of ActiveX controls, OCXs. I shouldn't imagine that
OO would have been built this way....

Indeed. If you decide to install it eventually, do report back.

My download completed! I thought it would take weeks, but it did not. So
I'll be proceeding with the install in the very near term. (The actual
learning how to use the application, well, I think I'll give myself a year
or two timeline for that part.)

Thank you again for the info.

 

[omega]

Glad to see you posting again - were you out driving around the
countryside in that car you won?

You mean the '74 Ford Pinto? <G>

I tell you, it was amazing how dszady knew what style car I drive.
Despite all my precautions. I mean, I never leave the house without
banding on my 70's-style mirrored sunglasses. And always slouch low
in the seat when I pass one of the downtown webcams. Still, the infobahn
found me out!

Must be dszady also tracked a story that my own Fo' had gone impounded;
the case of incorrigible disrepair beyond redemption. And then knew what
it was my heart was left yearning for, more than anything in the world.
A snappy '74 Pinto to putter me about.

Lucky you - I came in second and didn't win anything.

Ouch. But are you sure? I thought that second place awards a really -neato-
leftover moped...

 

[dszady]

You mean the '74 Ford Pinto? <G>

Ahhh... Ya, that's the ticket.

I tell you, it was amazing how dszady knew what style car I drive.
Despite all my precautions. I mean, I never leave the house without
banding on my 70's-style mirrored sunglasses. And always slouch low
in the seat when I pass one of the downtown webcams. Still, the infobahn
found me out!

My sister had a '74 Pinto. I am surprised she isn't dead. It could only be
driven with a beer between the legs.

Must be dszady also tracked a story that my own Fo' had gone impounded;
the case of incorrigible disrepair beyond redemption. And then knew what
it was my heart was left yearning for, more than anything in the world.
A snappy '74 Pinto to putter me about.

They were snappy weren't they?

Second must merit something. Humm... mud flaps, perhaps.

Ouch. But are you sure? I thought that second place awards a really -neato-
leftover moped...

Up here we would call that a scoota'. And wouldn't that be more of a
first-place prize?