Slashdot Mirror

...than either AOO and LO. Much more optimized for OS X. And its engineering team of two is supported by their user base, not by IBM or Oracle or whosever, so that they can work full-time on improvements. Still open source, of course (GPL). It's a real success story. See http://www.neooffice.org./

Just a suggestion but have you tried NeoOffice ( http://www.neooffice.org/ ) ? It tends to feel a lot smoother than OO/LO on a mac since Mac is its home platform.

Apple products are somewhat ok if you don't test the boundaries or use them too creatively. Otherwise all bets are off.

I haven't found anything I could do in Windows or in Ubuntu I can't do on a Mac. Hell I can install both Windows and Ubuntu, or other Linux distros, on my Mac. I've been doing prep work planning to install Lucid Lynx (Ubuntu 10.04) on my internal HDD and Oneiric Ocelot (11.10) on an external drive. Tomorrow I plan to actually do the installations.

Now tell me what you can do with MS Windows and or Linux you can't do with a Mac. That is what task not what specific application. For an office suite I was using NeoOffice but now I use LibreOffice. For those who need it MS has MS Office for Macs. For development I have can use Xcode, Eclipse and Bluefish. Databases? I have choices there too. Graphic arts and photo editing? Many firms only use Macs for those. I have Photoshop Elements 10 installed on my Mac but I'm hoping to upgrade to Photoshop CS5.

Falcon

I wanted to use OpenOffice, I think that's pretty reasonable.

The reason people started NeoOffice was to have OpenOffice on the mac with a real native UI back before OpenOffice finally got it together and released a version with a native interface (a couple of years ago now.) I used NeoOffice for a time back when, it was adequate which is also pretty much how I'd describe OpenOffice.

Interestingly, LO crashes randomly when saving a document while OO does not. Maybe it's a fluke on my system, but that's how it is. Drove me crazy until I decided to try OO, not believing that it would actually help. Using OS X SL.

No wonder, if you're using it in OSX you're really using X Windows. I use the native Mac port of OO, NeoOffice, and the only problem I've had with it is that I think it takes too long to launch. That may change after I increase my RAM from 2GB to 4GB but I don't think so, it was slow when I got my Mac more than 3 years ago.

As for OSX SL, I'm still using Leopard as my primary OS. I installed SL on an external drive to test it, once testing is done I'll install it on the internal drive. Actually I plan on replacing the HDD with a larger one like the 500GB Seagate Momentus XT 500 GB 7200RPM SATA 3Gb/s 32 MB Cache 2.5 Inch Solid State Hybrid Drive . I'd rather get a bigger drive but having a Solid State Hybrid Drive may be faster.

Falcon Falcon

Try NeoOffice.

Arguably it shouldn't need to exist - Mozilla seem to be able to write an app which runs just fine on OS X without feeling like an X application that's running under OS X under protest - but there you go...

Also, because OpenOffice does not come in a native Mac version I use the NeoOffice fork.

Actually, there is a native Mac version, and it's a lot better in my experience than NeoOffice.

http://porting.openoffice.org/mac/download/aqua-Intel.html

Also, because OpenOffice does not come in a native Mac version I use the NeoOffice fork.

You know they have Office and iWork that run Natively on the Mac.

I hope they find good and fulfilling work with a company that values them more highly. I'm scared they're going to start messing up VirtualBox next!

I wanted to use VirtualBox on my Mac, dual-booting Snow Leopard and Lucid Lynx, so I could run one OS in a VM while booted into the other. After spending a lot of tyme researching it though I decided I'd rather pay for VMWare Fusion.

Also, because OpenOffice does not come in a native Mac version I use the NeoOffice fork.

Falcon

The NeoOffice UI layer is written in Java, and according to the developers, would have been difficult to implement natively. The Vuze (Azureus) BitTorrent client and InterMapper Remote are also implemented in Java. In fact, Java applications on the Mac can look just like native ones, so it's often not obvious when Java is being used.

Apple has and always will be a company that prioritizes looks and simplicity over function.

I got my MacBook Pro because of functionality and price not because it looks better. Hell, other than the Apple logo on the cover it looks the same as laptops from other companies. And yes I included "price" above. Before I bought my MBP I compared the prices of a few laptops from different companies at the price of the MBP was only $50 higher than the cheapest laptop but much lower than other prices.

It's the same reason their products have almost no user options.

What user options? Like the option to run X11 and apps for it? Like the option of installing .rpm and apt-get or .deb packages? Like running MS Windows? Though I currently only run Leopard on my Mac when I install Snow Leopard I also plan to install Ubuntu and dualboot. If I wanted to I could install MS Windows as well. BUT I DO NOT!!! And guess what else... I'm typing this in a Firefox tab, I run Thunderbird as my email client, for my office suite I have NeoOiffce, the native Mac port of OpenOffice.org. And while I have XCode installed I also use Eclipse for development.

Falcon

And if you want to settle upon a single standard, consider something free (as in speech and beer), open (files will still work in 10 years) and multiplatform (runs on any computer), like *gasp* OpenOffice.

Why require a computer at all? For more than 12 years I turned in work written by hand, with pen and paper. I even got a math teacher upset because I used a pen and not pencil.

As for OpenOffice, I used that when I had a Windows or Linux PC but now that I use a Mac I use NeoOffice, the native Mac port of OpenOffice. Using it I've only had one problem opening a document created in MS Office, I couldn't open one .docx file but it was suggested I update Open Office. After I did the file opened up fine. Oh there is another problem but I haven't had it yet, Open Office doesn't work with MS Office macros.

Falcon

So you want to teach kids computer skills on a non/standard operating system, and allow them to turn in papers with dozens of different incompatible file types.

One, I'd rather have people taught computer skills instead of the dominating OS. Two, paper does not have incompatible file types. Paper is paper and can be read by anyone able to see. Now if you meant electronic document file types, I can think of two, three, problems with proprietary file types. The first is as you say incompatibility. I can not open a .docx created with MS Office 2010 with my copy of MS Office 97. But I can and have opened .docx files from 2008 with NeoOffice. Not only that but I'm not locked into the endless and expensive MS Office upgrade path.

Windows may have the majority of the market, but it is good.

HAHA!!! NOT!!! I and others have switched from Windows because it's a piece of crap. When it got to the point where I had to replace my desktop PC, because I was tired of constantly having to reinstall Windows after getting many, many, Blue Screen of Deaths I replaced it with a Linux desktop. Then when I got a new laptop I bought a MacBook Pro. I have had it almost 3 years and in that tyme I've had less problems with it than I had with Windows PCs in their first year.

Plus, at least microsoft only has a monopoly on the OS, which can be customized and adapted to fit a large variety of needs, unlike Mac, and it runs more programs better than Mac or Linux.

Another lie. A Windows PC can only run Windows software. My Linux PC can run Linux and Windows software. And my Mac can run Linux, Windows, and Mac software. If I wanted to I could install Windows itself on both my Linux PC and my Mac. I can install, and plan on doing so, Linux on my Mac.

Apple uses its OS to create a monopoly on the culture of its users

What monopoly? As I state above I can install Windows/Windows programs and Linux on my Mac. If I felt inclined I could install Windows or Linux and never use OS X on my Mac. Of course, where would I? Leopard simply works for me.

regulating how and where they get their programs (at least for the iPhone, iPad, and iPods)

Ah, there's something we agree with, while I can install many things on my Mac that Apple has no control over that's not true for iPads, iPhones, and iPods. That is one reason, but not the only one, I do not own and have no interest in buying any of them. Actually as I've said elsewhere I have no interest in getting an iPad, because it runs a crippled OS. Before it's release I was looking forward to seeing the iPad, but I was expecting something more like the Modbook Pro, a modified MacBook Pro.

As for functionality per dollar? Windows is the best value for the dollar.

Again wrong!!! For general purposes Linux is the best value for the dollar. For specific purposes Macs may be better. For instance Photoshop does not have a version for Linux, while GIMP is fine for many people on the web it can not do what some pro print artists need or want. Heck, Windows beats Linux there because at least Photoshop runs on Windows.

Plus, windows is often illegal, so the OS itself can be free sometimes.

Free does not make something better, legal or illegal.

Sadly, your wonderful little reality is very impractical, the compatibility is just not there.

Sadly you fail to look beyond your small sphere of knowledge.

Falcon

everything that is useful in business except for graphic design and web design is run on a PC using Windows XP or Windows 7.

Really? There is no Microsoft Office for Macs? Nor any other office suite? Then I must of been mistaken when I got my Mac and saw a 30 day trial of MS Office installed on it, and I don''t have NeoOffice or Eclipse on it now.

Falcon

but I didn't think Apple had a monopoly at all. They still have competition from RIM, WinMo, and growing competition from the Android phones.

The iPhone has some competition but it has the largest market share. Another version of the iPhone / Android market share figures has some statistics on the market share of the competition. In May the iPhone market share increased 2.5% from 30.3% to 32.8% while the Androids, with more than one company making handsets, increased from 5.3% to 6.2%. Even though iPhones have leads in both being on the market and in market share, it's markets share increased more than 2 tymes as mush as Androids did. But because its market share is so small Android increased the percentage of handsets sold as a total. TFA I link to says of Android, "Its share growing by 17% in May, while the iPhone's share only grew by 8.25%" Think about it, Android handsets are being released pretty frequently whereas it's been months since the last iPhone update came out, so being the latest it should have better uptake figures but it doesn't.

I was talking about MS and their monopoly on desktop OSes and office software when I was talking about monopolies.

I agree MS has a monopoly in desktop OSes and in office suites but there are others. I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro and for my office suite I use NeoOffice, the native Mac port of OpenOffice.org. Under the desk I have 2 tower PCs, an NT4 and a Linux PC. In storage there's more Windows PCs. I have MS Office on one of them and OpenOffice on others.

Yes, patents severely distort the market. They were a good idea at one time, but they've been completely abused and mutated beyond their original intentions. Software patents in particular are a very bad idea.

I agree. Patents may of served a good purpose at one tyme but they've out lived the good and now hinder progress. And I believe software patents are among the worst ideas economically and for progress.

Falcon

Oh, BTW perhaps using "monopoly" is the wrong word describing iPhones market share, it's nothing like MS's market share of OSes and Office suites. It is however dominate. And while I believe in ending patents I'm not sure about ending copyrights. The duplication and copying of art and literature is easy and cheap whereas duplicating hardware can be expensive. I however believe copyright terms need to be shortened, not lengthened like they have been. The original copyright term was 14 years with one 14 year extension possible. I'd make it 7 years at most with no extension.

I think NeoOffice has a slightly better track record -- for me at least. I have had it crash once in the last 1.5 years of using it. Maybe I'm just a weird user or something. I know it's just OO.org, but methinks the use of their custom (java-based) UI frontend somehow helps with things, somehow.

I've tried native OO.org for OS X recently, and it felt like crap in comparison. And yes, it did crash -- twice during one day of testing.

So I hold NeoOffice folks in high esteem. But that's just me.

If you're using Mac, you should try Neooffice. They just (on the 1st) released a new version based on 3.1. Though it's a version behind, the improved mac integration makes it more than worthwhile.

I could find nothing on the DVD, packaging or invoice to indicate that I only had an "upgrade" version, nor was there any indication at the (not Apple, but reputable) store where I bought it.

It's not on my package either but it does say "Use of this product is subject to acceptance of the software license agreement included in this package." I haven't installed it, or opened the package, yet so I don't know what's in it. For all I know there is no agreement. As for any indications as to it being an upgrade at the store, the disks were behind a locked case and there was a sign on the case saying it was an upgrade for Leopard.

My impression was that Apple are not particularly worried about the "upgrade" issue, but just want to encourage pre-10.5 users to upgrade iLife/iWork at the same time.

The Mac Box Set with Snow Leopard, iLife, and iWork all sell for $170, just $40 more than a regular OS X upgrade. If I wanted either or both iLife and iWork I wouldn't mind paying that, however I have never used iLife and I use NeoOffice as my office suite.

Falcon

False dichotomy. If people want OS X but don't want to run it on Apple's hardware, then it's better for Apple to stay in the software business and pull out of the hardware business.

And what of the false dichotomy of giving up hardware for software? That would be an even faster road to bankruptcy, look at BeOS. Microsoft has been pretty successful at killing compeating OSes with the exception of OS X and Linux. I seriously doubt MS would hesitate if Apple were to start selling licenses to OS X to OEMs. Apple would be compeating right on MS's turf. Right now though Apple makes it easy to install and use MS Windows, Apple even sells Windows as well as VMWare. Microsoft even threatened Apple with discontinuing MS Office for Macs, and as much as geeks, hackers, and slashdotters may not like to admit it most people only think of MS Office when it comes to office suites. I know there are alternatives, I use NeoOffice the native Mac port of Open Office. Apple has released it's own office suite, I would be surprised if wasn't because of the threat. IBM still sells Lotus. But how many people know of these?

Falcon

paragraphs would jump from one page to another; three ways to anchor an image, all wrong; table of contents is way too complex and not matching the pagination of the hour. I'm sure there were other issues also. That was pre-2.x OpenOffice, something like 1.4.x,

And early production versions of MS Office worked perfectly? Or are you using a double standard?

But reliability-wise MS Office is probably still better.

The MS product I have used that was the most reliable was Windows NT4 Workstation, which I still have. However because it's installed on a PC with a DEC Alpha CPU I haven't used it much. It is the only version of Windows that has not crashed on me, and that includes XP. Heck the first tyme I used XP the PC froze while booting up.

As for Open Office, well the native Mac version, NeoOffice, I have had only one problem. When I downloaded a Word 2007 document NeoOffice could not open it. I mentioned that to someone else and they said to upgrade it, so I did. After the upgrade I had no problem opening the Word document.

Microsoft continually shoots itself in the foot by completely changing the user interface with each new release of software, resulting in massive productivity losses as everyone has to relearn how to do their job.

This. This is why I ended up on the Mac the last time I was looking at a new laptop (sorry, Linux didn't meet my needs--as much as I wanted it to).

Though not for the same reasons, changes in user interface, like you I switched. I replaced my Windows desktop with a Linux PC and got a MacBook Pro for a laptop.

People have to use MS Office;

Some people may think they need MS Office but I switched to Open Office while I still used Windows. I don't use macros myself so I don't have a problem there but I once had a problem opening a Word document. So someone else recommended I upgrade NeoOffice, the native Mac port of OO.org. Once I did the problem was gone.

Falcon

I don't know if that criticism is still as frequent - or valid - as it was back in ye olde days.

I'm pleased to say it's not. Back in the days when it was StarOffice, and a few years subsequent to that, there were some disgraceful latencies, especially in the glacial start-up time.

That seems to have been pretty much fixed, and responsiveness is at least as good as any MSOffice installation I have seen. I don't have formal benchmarks here, but for instance on this oldish 2.16 GHz Macbook I have a copy of Office 2004 (rarely used but patched up to date) and the current version of NeoOffice. NeoOffice starts up in 1/2 the 18-second time MS Word does. Once running, there is no perceptible lag, so I'm happy enough.

Imagine a fork of Open Office...

Oh, you mean like this one?

The Box Set that you refered to goes for $169. Not bad considering the apps it comes with and an office suite. Thats the one I plan to get along with a bigger HDD for my MacBook Pro. I think its a pretty good deal. :)

I use NeoOffice and see no need for iWorks. And I don't use iLife, in the 2 years I've had my Mac I haven't used it once. I may start using iCal though to set up "to do" lists. I don't think I'll need to upgrade to iLife 2009 for that though.

Now if I wanted iWorks and iLife then yes I'd say $170 was a good deal.

Falcon

Other than itunes, and safari, there is practically no real software.

Again, you didn't read and click links. For Aperture Apple lists 93 downloads, there are 277 audio downloads, and business and finance shows 204. Those are just 3 categories of software Apple offers downloads in, and I doubt 5% of them are Apple software. In open source Apple includes NeoOffice, PHP, Apache, Samba, and more than 80 more downloads.

Microsoft offers windows media player and Internet explorer which offsets those two. And then it offers a shit-ton of utilities, power toys, honest to goodness applications

Apple offers 369 System/Disk Utilities, 453 productivity tools, and 314 imaging and 3D downloads. The first one, most recent download, right now is Autodesk Maya 2010.

My point was that Apple develops and releases this class of features as part of the "OSX upgrade package", whereas Microsoft has been building thme, but making them available separately (and for free).

Most of Apple's downloads are free stuff, or do you think OS X requires Maya?

The service packs and hotfixes are readily available via download. I have an NT4 VM I still occasionally fire up myself. They've been moved around a few times, but I can't recall them ever not being available.

As I said, little more than 3 years after I bought my NT4 PC I had to order, and pay for, the latest updates for NT. And I bought it 1 year after NT4 came out.

ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/bussys/winnt/winnt-public/fixes/usa/nt40/

Thanks for the link, I bookmarked it so I can use it later. The last tyme I ran Windows Update in NT4 the MS website said I had to order the updates on CD, that was in January 2000.

They even have the service packs for 3.5 and 3.51 if you'd like them, including stuff for the mips and alpha chips...

My NT4 PC has an Alpha CPU. Following links in the one you provided I read one readme that said what .exe to download for Alphas. However the last tyme I ran Windows Update a message box popped up telling me I had to order the update on CD. I'd like to upgrade the PC, add more RAM and replace the 2 HDDs with bigger ones. I'd also like to add Firewire and USB as well as Gigabit Ethernet. Now that I know where to look for some updates I just need to find the hardware. The PC is still good and I don't want it to go to waste.

Falcon

The $29 price is for an upgrade from Leopard. It won't install unless you already have Leopard on the system. If you are still using Tiger then you need to buy the 'Mac Box Set' which bundles iWork and iLife in with a full version of Snow Leopard and costs $169.

Yea I saw that. You can buy just the Snow Leopard DVD if you have Tiger though, you don't have to buy the Mac Box Set. Personally because I use NeoOffice I don't see any reason to pay for iWork and I don't use iLife I see no reason to pay for the box set, however because Snow Leopard trims disk space from what Leopard needs and storage is valuable to me I may pay $29 to upgrade.

Falcon

computers that run windows are a lot cheaper than those running os-x!).

2009 calling, Mac prices have been comparable with Windows PC prices for years. Why does this mime continue? Perhaps because people fell for Microsoft's FUD.

They still own the office space by:
1) producing the best office suite

MS Office isn't the best office suite. Few people even realize there are alternatives, and think they need MS Office when the only reason any of them does need it is because of MS's proprietary file formats creates vendor lock-in. Though my Mac came with MS Office I use NeoOffice and I have not had a problem opening a Word document in years.

Falcon

That being said, any serious writing that I do, and certainly any collaborative work, is always done in Word.

And how compatible is your Word docs made in OS X with Office for Windows, and visa versa? I haven't used it, I use NeoOffice, so I don't know but some comments above say they are not that compatible.

Falcon

Yeah, and if they got a PC they wanted with Mac OS installed on it, they would use it. They might even choose it if they had the option to get it instead of Windows or Linux, but PC vendors can't even offer it.

PC OEMs do offer Linux preinstalled but not many people buy them, so just saying people would buy a PC with OS X installed does not work.

What's with this question anyway, did you expect me to lie or just get scared?

You don't really care if Apple were to offer OS X for any PC, you'd just build a hackitosh and pirate OS X.

I don't want to send in my machine because the optical drive stopped working, I want to either go to best buy and buy a new one and put it in the same day, or take one from my old computer and put that one in the same day. Call me old fashioned, but I like to fix my own stuff. Lots of people do.

You are part of a small minority and Apple does not feel like catering to you. If you have a problem with that that is your problem. And no, lots of people don't fix their own computers. I doubt less than 10% do. I've done that, and done the Best Buy/Apple store route as well. I haven't needed to send in my MBP, not even when the graphics went bad. I simply took it to an Apple store where they ran diagnostics and saw the graphics had to be replaced. They didn't have the part in stock so they ordered it. I took my MBP back home and they called a couple of days later when the part came in. An Apple tech fixed it right there. Which was different than when I took my Windows PC to Best Buy. The mobo had failed and Best Buy shipped it to a repair center for repair. With Apple I only had to wait for the part to be shipped to the store, with Best Buy I had to wait for the store to send the PC to a repair facility for repair then have it shipped back to the store. And the PC wasn't any no name brand, it was an HP Pavilion.

Now if every PC vendor offered Mac OS X then Apple would make enough money off of licensing and software sales where it wouldn't matter if customers bought their hardware or not. We know this will work because Microsoft does it.

MS is the 800 pound guerrilla and as such many people depend on MS Office. MS produces a version for Macs. Heck a trialware version comes installed on Macs. It wouldn't take long before MS stopped that if Apple started selling OS X to OEMs. MS threatened to do just that back in the '90s. It doesn't matter if there are viable substitutes for MS Office, many people use it, are comfortable with it, and don't know there are competent alternatives. Such as Open Office, for which until OO 3.0 came out there was no native Mac version. When I got my Mac almost 2 years ago instead of running OO in X I installed and used Neo Office which was a Mac port created outside of OO.org. I'd bet many people as well as businesses that buy Macs now would stop using Macs if MS were to discontinue Office.

don't tell me nearly every PC vendor on the planet wouldn't love to have something to offer other than Vista or Linux.

I admit there are PC OEMs that would love to sell PCs with OS X installed. Micheal Dell said as much himself. Dell sells Linux PCs, online, but how many others sell PCs with Linux? When I bought the HP Pavilion mentioned above, I wanted to get one with Linux installed. The only way to get one though was to call and order it or order it online. Not too long ago Asus sold the eee with Linux in stores, Target used to carry then. My brother-in-law saw one and asked me about it. But how many stores carry them now? More than likely if a store has eees it's got Windows installed. The same applies to other netbooks. So while Apple might survive it'd be difficult, and if I were a stockholder I wouldn't want the company to try.

Now if every PC vendor offered Mac OS X then Apple would make enough money off of licensing and software sales

Unlike Microsoft Apple is not a software company, Apple is a consumer

Microsoft Office for Mac OS X is a joke. It is not 100% compatible and function/feature complete. Connecting to an Exchange 2003 or 2007 server is not well supported with several known problems that have yet to be completely resolved.

True, if I recall right Office for Macs uses Entourage not Exchange. That's Microsoft's fault not Apple's though. Now if you want to use something like Exchange there are alternatives for OS X including open source software. But ah, there is an Apple iCal / Microsoft Exchange fix for Leopard.

There are also alternatives to MS Office. Though Open Office 3.0 runs on Macs natively now I still use NeoOffice. I've been using for almost 2 years and I've only had one problem opening an MS Office document, several months ago I tried to open a document off the web but it wouldn't. After I upgraded my NeoOffice, an old version was installed to begin with, it opened up fine.

Falcon

it has had times where it seemed out of place on either Windows or OSX (particular OSX before it was a native application).

I use NeoOffice on my Mac and see no reason to switch right now.

when I'm using a program and I can tell it wasn't designed for the system I'm running it on, I count that as a problem.

What matters to me is whether it is and how much it's usable. That's one reason I won't switch for now, NeoOffice is quite usable. Then again I hardly use it.

Falcon

Did you try the mac branch off, neooffice?

And this is different from what Sun does with OpenOffice how? The guys over at NeoOffice wanted to start issuing patches to make a mac native version of OO.org but Sun refused to let them do it, preferring to wait five years and then do it themselves. They also rejected an excellent solver-like module in favor of keeping their own half-assed implemention. My point is that even the supposed supporters of open source do what you accuse Apple of doing.

As for the enhancements of webkit that apple is supposedly keeping for themselves, it smells too much like paranoia so I call bullshit: you need to prove that. I do remember some communications problems with Apple contributing code to khtml, but as far as I can tell now, that has been resolved (possibly by the introduction of webkit), and to my mind it was never established that the fault was entirely apple's and not the khtml team.

- if they go with OOo, the licensing is cheaper (free). They also will be offering a solution that absolutely everyone can use : teacher, staff, university computer labs, students at home, on their laptops... all this regardless of the system : Windows, Mac OS

The problem with this is that OpenOffice does not have a native Mac port. To install and use OpenOffice X Windows has to be installed. Now there is a native version office suite for Macs based on OO, NeoOffice, which I use myself.

Falcon

It's based on Go-OOo, with extensive customizations for OS X.

Home Page

While it is wonderful that Sun has put so much work into the Windows, Linux, and Solaris ports over the years (and I have no criticism with that), their behavior in the Mac area has been quite aggressive towards us over that last few years. We've taken Sun's open source license, implemented a huge hole in their code, and made no attempt to proprietarize the code. What did we get in return, lots of very negative pressure from the OOo managers and volunteers. So you are surprised when we view their grand magical Mac port as competition?

For a long time now, Sun has been pulling a bit of a bait and switch. They claim that they are open source friendly, etc. etc., but then they do everything they can to prevent any outside interference. That's they whole reason why NeoOffice exists, the guys who made it got tired of Sun giving them the run-around.

Seriously, as is OpenOffice.org is slick, very usable, I love it.

If those 24 developers can continue to right filters for new file formats (24 of them should be able to handle that), make bug fixes, and make the occasional improvement here and there I say great!

OpenOffice.org does not need a rewrite from the ground up every six months to two years.

Seriously, the guys from Neo Office don't have near the funding or man power of the core OpenOffice.org team, look what they've accomplished on "Macing it" (Macking it?).

Between Neo Office and Go-oo making fixes that the upstream developers don't take, I would say there's some FUD going around and there's more people interested in developing for OpenOffice.org than Sun lets on. I'm thinking this may be the first artificial rublings to justify dumping the project sometime in the near future since it's not profitable and hasn't been a big enough thorn in the MS side.

If they make the online version too feature rich and also free, they will hurt their own sales.

The online MS Office offering will only be available to holders of MS Office licenses. It's an additional offering for purchasers of the next release. People won't have the option of using the online version instead of the new release.

Seth

PS- I also use NeoOffice (Mac OS X version of Open Office codebase) when I need to create more complex spreadsheets. I'm wondering if the stats quoted by Ballmer, et. al. are considering the NeoOffice downloaders....

I thought OOo 3 supported Cocoa natively and no longer requires X11 to be installed for Mac users.

There is always NeoOffice as well. It is an OOo fork aimed at Mac OS X.

http://www.neooffice.org/neojava/en/index.php

I use NeoOffice on the Mac, which is a port of OO to OSX. Works fine. It is a bit behind on the most recent version of OO though.

Thanks for the Micheal Meeks link, that was very informative and in line with what I have observed in following OOo since its 1.0 days -- requirements are too cumbersome, the docs too byzantine, and developers simply can't be bothered to put up with all the extra hurdles that get in the way of contributing. Meeks's analysis shows a decline in the OOo developer community, which seems to be an unfortunate, albeit completely understandable, response to Sun's poor management of the project. I hope at least that some OOo derivative might work out -- perhaps NeoOffice, or IBM's Lotus Symphony.

Cheers,

Novell's Meeks critisised the development process of SUN. Novell forked OO.org.

NeoOffice claims that it speeds up the OO.org 3 series.

So maybe the problem is SUN Microsystems and their red tape.

Btw, the link to the Paris Party

i run OSX, and I'll be sticking with NeoOffice instead.

My reason is the GPL.

But there are also other reasons that might compel you as well.

I know the OS is great for some people, but for those of us who want to get real work done, OSX is NOT the way to go unless the only real work you need to do is video editing or graphic design. Neither of which I do.

I switched from Windows to a Mac because I wanted to get work done. When I owned Windows PCs I've had hardware problems within a few months of buying a PC new. I've also had to reinstall Windows along with all of the software I used a bunch of tymes. On the other hand the first two Macs I bought I bought used and they both lasted years without problems. As for what I can do with it, I can do anything with it I could do with a Windows PC. Name one thing you think a Mac can not do, and I'll look into it. I bet I can find a way to do it.

It's for Mom and Dad and Little Sister who just want to email and view the web as quickly and easily as possible.

I can do much more than just surf the web and send and receive email with my Mac. The biggest uses in business is with office suites, and even Microsoft has a version of Office for Macs. Personally I use NeoOffice and I have no trouble opening, editing, and saving Word documents. I can use my Mac to create websites or program. I can also use CADD on it. There is nothing I could do on my Windows PC that I can not do on my Mac, or with some work, on my Linux PC. Heck, I can run Windows software on it, can you run Mac software on your Windows PC?

Falcon

So you replaced one proprietary system with vendor lock-in with another?

I'm not locked into anything. If I want to I can install Ubuntu, which I was planning on at first, or another Linux distro. I'm typing this in a Firefox tab. My office suite is NeoOffice, the original native Mac port of Open Office. I also have other open source programs installed. Because I installed Fink and MacPorts I can install a lot of software for Linux. I can install Debian packages using .deb or apt-get as well as packages using Redhat's .rpm. And if I need to, though I haven't yet, I can get and install Cross Over for Macs so I can run Windows software.

Fact is is a Mac can run more software than any other OS/hardware combination. And don't try to say Macs are more expensive either. Macs have not been more expensive than Windows PCs in years. Actually before I got mine, I compared it's price to prices of Windows laptops that had similar configurations. Most OEM PC were about the same price, though some cost more. Dell's was about $200 more.

Hardware wise my laptop isn't any more vender lockin than a Windows laptop either. I'm still using the same router I got for my Windows PC, then used with my Linux PC, and am now using with my Mac. My Epson scanner works fine with it as does my Iomega external drives and my Canon printer.

Falcon

I used open source in school along with proprietary software.

Evolution doesn't let you create appointments that follow your class schedule. For example, I have a class on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. Outlook let's you check the appropriate boxes for recurrences but Evolution only lets you do one day a week, so you have to create 3 weekly appointments just for one class.

When I was in school, I didn't need any computer to keep track of my classes. Instead I used a paper planner. All I needed to use it was a pen or pencil though I did use coloured highlighters to colour code the different classes. When I was in therapy after an accident the therapists had us do the same thing, keep a paper based calendar or planner to write all the different therapy sessions and exercises.

I used to like Office because it was familiar, now I like it because it quickly and easily does what I want.

I used to use Office but now I/ve saved money since I've been using NeoOffice.

Falcon

OpenOffice on MacOS X requires you to have X installed.

NeoOffice is a Mac OS X port of OpenOffice to use the native Mac OS X GUI. I have NeoOffice and AppleWorks on my Mac Mini at home. And OpenOffice on my home Linux box. And MS Office on my windows work machine.

If you are thinking of macros, OOo will support them soon.

I hope so, about a week ago I was emailed a lease form and I tried to open it with NeoOffice, the Mac native port of OO.org, and it didn't display properly. After that I checked what version is installed though which is 2.1. The current available version for download is 2.2.3 which I'll try once I install it. Now I don't know if the doc didn't display properly because of macros or what but I hope the upgrade works.

It's come to the stage that commercial competition with microsoft simply isn't viable...

I don't suppose Google or Sony has got the memo? Or Apple, for that matter?

Google had, and still has, a good search engine whereas MS didn't. I recall from years ago how people complained about how they couldn't tell the difference between search results and ads when using MSN, the few tymes I used it myself I didn't find any relevant results. Now, if you look at MS's Live.com it has a clean interface, like Google. Sony was in game consoles before MS so had an advantage there. And Apple has been around as long as MS, MS even writes software for Macs. I'm typing this on a Mac I got less than 10 months ago, after switching from Windows. It came with a trialware version of Office 2004 for Mac. Switching because I don't like it that MS treats it's users like criminals, which is what Activation is about, I was not about to use it. Instead I use NeoOffice the native Mac port of OpenOffice.

I use OpenOffice entirely, whereas the majority of everyone I know insist that they "need" MS Office. So I will try to say to them that for schoolwork/writing letters, OO.o has everything they need, but without the price tag. I will then go on to say that it can save the MSOffice formats, so there won't be any compatibility issues, and that there's barely any difference in the interface, so it's not like they've got to learn a new piece of software. yet somehow, they still end up spending £200 on MSOffice.

Owning a Mac I use NeoOffice the native Mac port of OpenOffice. I've downloaded and read MS Office docs, including Office 2007 .docx files and tables or charts, without trouble, that is until last week. Last week someone emailed me a document that could not be properly viewed, I'm still waiting to hear back from them after writing them about that. However NeoOffice has 2.2.3 out now yet my version is 2.1. So maybe the new version can open it.