Slashdot Mirror

There isn't really a good alternative to Visio of the same quality of open office. I believe Visio is the only missing piece for me to switch completely to Linux, because there are a lot of Word docs with embedded Visio diagrams that cannot be correctly rendered by Open Office. I wish Open Office had a Visio replacement. Perhaps the OOo Chart project will grow up to be that missing component.

Another minor quip is that there is no PDF export from Open Office that correctly renders document links and references as PDF links the way Adobe PDFMaker does it. Maybe it will come in some future OOo versions, however it doesn't seem very likely to happen soon. The announced PDF export feature seems to be just another link to printing to PDF via ghostscript.

There are also some attempts related to the KDE project worth evaluating.

• Kivio - for all types of diagrams
• Umbrello - for UML

There isn't really a good alternative to Visio of the same quality of open office. I believe Visio is the only missing piece for me to switch completely to Linux, because there are a lot of Word docs with embedded Visio diagrams that cannot be correctly rendered by Open Office. I wish Open Office had a Visio replacement. Perhaps the OOo Chart project will grow up to be that missing component.

Another minor quip is that there is no PDF export from Open Office that correctly renders document links and references as PDF links the way Adobe PDFMaker does it. Maybe it will come in some future OOo versions, however it doesn't seem very likely to happen soon. The announced PDF export feature seems to be just another link to printing to PDF via ghostscript.

There are also some attempts related to the KDE project worth evaluating.

• Kivio - for all types of diagrams
• Umbrello - for UML

If MS is not allowed to depend on new features in a new OS, it would hardly be worthwile to create new features, would it?

Mandrake
Redhad
OpenOffice
Apache
StarOffice

How about these fine competing products for basic Microsoft desktop/server software? Ones that work approximately as well as Microsoft's.

If they continue to allow trade secrets like this to leak out, who knows what could happen. I mean, if the world knows that MS Office uses XML-based file formats, that could be a huge disaster! If MS doesn't act quickly to stifle this leak, cross-platform software developers might copy this innovation and take away their competitive advantage!

If they continue to allow trade secrets like this to leak out, who knows what could happen. I mean, if the world knows that MS Office uses XML-based file formats, that could be a huge disaster! If MS doesn't act quickly to stifle this leak, cross-platform software developers might copy this innovation and take away their competitive advantage!

The OpenOffice.org XML project contains support for and implementation of the XML based file format.

Mission
Our mission is to create an open and ubiquitous XML-based file format for office documents and to provide an open reference implementation for this format.

Core Requirements (these items are absolutely required)

• The file format must be capable of being used as an office program's native file format. The format must be "non-lossy" and must support (at least) the full capability of a StarOffice/OpenOffice document. The format is likely to be used for document interchange but that use alone is not enough.
• Structured content should make use of XML's structuring capabilities and be represented in terms of XML elements and attributes.
• The file format must be fully documented and have no "secret" features.
• OpenOffice must be the reference implementation for this file format.

Core Goals (these items are highly desired)

• The file format should be developed in such a way that it will be accepted by the community and can be placed under community control for future development and format evolution.
• The file formats should be suitable for all office types: text processing, spreadsheet, presentation, drawing, charting, and math.
• The file formats should reuse portions of each other as much as possible (so for example a spreadsheet table definition can work also as a text processing table definition).

Standardization and Inter-Office Cooperation
There is a office_standards mailing lists hosted on this site, intended to foster cooperation between the various office suites. At this early state no results have been achieved, but we are certainly excited about the prospects. For details, look at http://xml.openoffice.org/standardisation/ .

Of course, this will never happen. Instead, MS will continue to push their own "open" XML based file formats. Microsoft Kerberos, anyone?

Use OpenOffice instead. Copes with word documents ( including this one ) just fine.
Yes, yes, I know they shouldnt be using word documents in the first place, but they are, and given that they are a monolithic government department thats not likely to get changed in a hurry. By all means mail them, but dont expect any sense out of them.
I wonder who Kathleen Fyffe is......

I believe you're missing the point.

There is no source available for your windowing system.

Further, its RAM usage rivals if not exceeds that of X, not to mention the CPU horsepower required to generate the visual effects we all know and love. X is a lightweight, a true performer compared to Aqua.

Also, I don't use Microsoft Office on any platform at all. I like to considerviable alternatives.

No shit. I think you were trying to accomplish this Click here to try OpenOffice also try using the preview next time.

And for everyone complaining about the porting approach, I recommend reading that timeline's Aqua section which includes half a year for redesigning the interface to adhere to the Apple Human Interface Guidelines and will deviate from OpenOffice.org on other platforms.

No, simply using Aqua buttons does not a Mac application make. But what's the sense of having a Mac-like UI if it is drawing Windoze buttons, toolbars, and menus?

--
Simon

This is something we need ... yesterday. An XML (or whatever SGML they choose) office format standard. I know there is work in progress from the Open Office Project, but I would rather have this work merged in a standard dictated by the Free Standards group. That alone would represent a HUGE step forward. Let's hope.

http://porting.openoffice.org/mac/

They are doing the port incrementally.

hmm...interesting subtext: openoffice.org is released under the LGPL and SISSL which allow for closed source extensions to the source base and commercialization. According to the next to last NeoOffice FAQ entry the prototype is under the full GPL license and Sun employees know they can't use its source code directly.

Is this the first salvo in a free source vs. open source war?

hmm...interesting subtext: openoffice.org is released under the LGPL and SISSL which allow for closed source extensions to the source base and commercialization. According to the next to last NeoOffice FAQ entry the prototype is under the full GPL license and Sun employees know they can't use its source code directly.

Is this the first salvo in a free source vs. open source war?

Here's the annoucement from the OpenOffice.org mailing list, alebit with poor formatting.

i followed the link.....it's not omniweb.....very strange....ive never seen that before either

Klez did this as well. Also, Melissa turned off Word's security protection.

Yikes! Having evaluated Google along with many other search vendors and open source search tools for the enterprise, I can say that this would be a bad idea long term. The Google search appliance:

• is closed
  
• requires an ongoing fee for no new functionality
  
• has a hard limit to the number of indexable docs
  
• can't really do anything that open source tools do

Half the CD? It's only 50 MB :).

OpenOffice is working on a OS X port. It's currently a developer version using XFree86.

OpenOffice Mac

Chimera is an open OS X mozilla web browser in development.

Chimera

These are just a couple of quick examples, but the ability is there to continue OSS work on a very capable platform - it's already begun. I was amazed I was able to compile and install my favorite tools and utilities, right out of the box.

And for those who can spare a few pennies for a distro, there is always CheapBytes.

But the author does have an interesting point. Kind of like the question: Why did someone pay me $1010 USD for the Eaglehorn bow a week after the Diablo II xpack was released? ;)

This is all just proof positive that the real wealth resides in the human mind, not in a few flipping bits.

I eagerly await the day when i can include GoBe Productive on this list, it is really 'suite' (if you will forgive the pun).

OpenOffice

FreeeCiv
OpenOffice
and WinGimp
I would love to hear more from everyone else.

I don't know the answer to this one, but you might want to check out OpenOffice.org's IssueZilla, where you can search their bug tracking system for answers.

Also, would you care to point out where the SISSL is incompatible with the GPL?

From the License List at GNU.org:

The Sun Industry Standards Source License 1.0. This is a free software license, not a strong copyleft, which is incompatible with the GNU GPL because of details rather than any major policy.

A popular free office suite is licensed under SISSL and Lesser GPL, similar to the way Mozilla is licensed (MPL/LGPL/GPL). Unlike the OpenOffice.org suite, this Liberty implementation doesn't seem to also be under a GNU license.

Also, would you care to point out where the SISSL is incompatible with the GPL?

From the License List at GNU.org:

The Sun Industry Standards Source License 1.0. This is a free software license, not a strong copyleft, which is incompatible with the GNU GPL because of details rather than any major policy.

A popular free office suite is licensed under SISSL and Lesser GPL, similar to the way Mozilla is licensed (MPL/LGPL/GPL). Unlike the OpenOffice.org suite, this Liberty implementation doesn't seem to also be under a GNU license.

the truth is if GCC was supported and was a functional on windows as it is on Unix

MinGW, a port of GCC to Windows, can compile just about any non-MFC app that MS Visual C++ can.

The graphics race is a little harder, but gain if there were versions of gimp, imagemagick, and Blender that worked as well in windows as in Unix there might be more of a horse race there too...

Blender works on Windows. So does GIMP, at least at the level of Paint Shop Pro. So does ImageMagick. (However, last time I tried IM, it claimed to read XCF but could not read its alpha channels.) So does a free (LGPL) office suite.

I'm assuming when you say you are a Microsoft user you mean that you have only ever used Microsoft products. At this stage, any Unix-based operating system, be it a Linux distribution, Lindows (I do not personally count Lindows as a true Linux distribution), FreeBSD, or whatever, will be like jumping into a cold swimming pool. That is to say, it will be a shock at first, but if you are reasonably intelligent and you have picked a newbie distribution (Mandrake, Lycoris, Lindows, ELX), you should be able to adjust.

Some things to keep in mind:

1. You will not have perfect compatibility with Windows apps like MSOffice. You can use OpenOffice and most of your docs will look fine, but some will have visible display glitches (although I have never seen one that was unreadable). You can also download browser plugins for Mozilla (the best Linux web browser) which give it virtually all the worthwhile functionality of IE. Ximian Evolution is an excellent replacement for Outlook. OpenOffice, Mozilla, and Evolution all come with most new Linux distributions today. Another solution is Codeweavers Crossover Office and Crossover Plugin, which let you use Windows office apps and browser plugins. However, this option requires a subscription fee.

2. Many/most Windows games will not work at all, or without a good deal of tinkering. If you are a hardcore gamer, check out Transgaming WineX which can let you play some of the most popular Windows games with a minimum of glitches. This option also requires a subscription fee.

3. A Linux installation needs either its own hard drive, a free partition of space on a Windows drive (at least a few gigabytes) or its own machine. If you have only one machine with one partition on one hard drive, and that is for Windows, then you *might* damage your Windows installation installing Linux. Your best bet if you don't know what I am talking about is to ask a friend who knows more for some help in the installation.

4. While most hardware I have ever purchased is supported, some things just don't have support yet. One example is the "winmodem". Most modems sold today are sneakily designed to work only with Microsoft Windows. Yes, this is a conspiracy between Microsoft and the manufacturers of those modems. If your modem doesnt work, you will probably have to buy a new modem which specifically says it is a "hardware modem". As someone in [your local computer/electronics store] for help.

**Aside from all that, a tonne of things are different in the actual underlying operating system, but if you aren't a developer, you proably won't be intersted in those details. (Feel free to continue this thread if you are, I will be happy to answer more questions.)

With all this, I was trying to provide full disclosure of pitfalls to migrating, not to discourage you. I definately think the switch to Linux is worthwhile in the long term.

If as you implied you have only ever used Microsoft products, the best path you could take is to switch to OpenOffice and Mozilla running on Windows, then if you are comfortable with them, try to dual-boot with a newbie distribution like the ones mentioned above.

where can I find software like PhotoShop, but free/open source for Windows?

Where did you find Windows?

Anyway, GIMP (equivalent to Paint Shop Pro or to Photoshop Elements) works on Windows.

Where can I find Nero?

Bundled with your CD burner. CD burners are hardware, and hardware can't be duplicated easily with current technology.

Where can I find Adobe Premiere?

VirtualDub isn't as powerful, but it should fulfill basic video editing needs.

Instead of Microsoft Office, try this.

CrossOver Office is capable of running a range of Windows software, but CodeWeavers will support the following applications:

* Microsoft Office 97 and 2000
o Microsoft Word
o Microsoft Excel
o Microsoft Powerpoint
o Microsoft Outlook
o Microsoft Internet Explorer
* Microsoft Visio
* Lotus Notes
* Quicken

Shrug, keep sending your .doc format. You're missing out on the input of hundreds of very, very talented SUN and other UNIX software engineers.

If only those very talented Sun engineers had access to some product that could enable them to read MS Word. The other Unix engineers would still be out of luck, unless they too had access to some kind of product that could do the same.

Alas, I fear this will never come to pass... ;-)

hmm, granted I'm no power user at this point, but I'm pretty sure all that is possible. You might want to ask on the OpenOffice users list... seriously...

I agree that the documentation leaves a bit to be desired, but they ARE working on it.

For one thing, there's a new Software Development Kit with info on how to write plugins.

Here's a link to thew new developer documentation draft.

The free upgrades that you seek can be downloaded here. Just don't go telling everyone because people will take advantage of their generosity.

However, note that it isn't a volunteer project; Germany contracted a company to deliver the product by the end of the year

I bet they will, the tools are there as you said. Can you imagine 1993 for GNU/Linux ?

• OpenOffice 1.* / StarOffice 6.*
• Mozilla 1.* / Netscape 7.*
• Stable GCC/C++ ABI for a long time (we hope :-)
• Stable KDE API for a long time (3.*)
• Stable GNOME API for a long time (2.*)
• Groupware solution (kroupware)
• Apache and the usual server stuff
• Lots of commercial software already ported (Kylix, Oracle, Games, etc)

Ah, fuck Joe Blow from General Motors. He should use OpenOffice.org and stop being a bitch about it.

You might as well join G. W. Bush's search for Ben Ledin, laugh a bit and return to the good stuff

hooray,


--
spot the coward

I do all the time (or did, before installing OpenOffice.org), and I'm not a lawyer. I'd much rather have a word processor where I can see the "source" (through the "reveal codes" feature) than one where I have to struggle against the black box (e.g., Word), which forces the user to either agree with invalid assumptions about what the user wants to do, or go through grotesque convolutions to work around those assumptions. Word is a terrible mess of counter-intuitive design; WordPerfect empowers the user. Unfortunately, the fatal-error bugginess prevents me from calling WP "superior" to Word, because stability is a mighty important "feature." (That's a lesson that Opera still needs to learn, IMHO, but I digress...)

...Quattro oh yuck...

Heh, no argument there!

So when they need to learn Word and Excel because they need to know them to get a job in the real world they will have to by MS Office.

Why? Because "they" are such cretins that they can't learn one word processor and apply the same general concepts to another? I learned on WP, and I work at a place that requires Word. Did I do what your assumption implies, and go out and buy Word? Nope, I still use WP. Somebody who can't take the basics from one word processor to another has bigger problems to face in getting a job than learning the "wrong" word processor!

Save yourself a few more buck and use OpenOffice on OSX.

Although I stubornly refuse to work with RedHat after another one of their famous progressive actions, I think this one is from a different nature.
Unfortunately, I just admit, John Doe wants a simular look and feel for all the machines he is working on. Just try to explain the concept of Window Managers, and the layered structure (OS/X/WM).
Most ppl work with a "computer" and start a browser and some office program, they really do not care what it is running (but the sysadmins do). With Mozilla and OpenOffice.org, GNU/Linux finally seems to have mature solutions for this (FS/OS). For the first time in years (ever since the demise of WP), a user has again a choice what software to use for his/her "productivity" tasks with these mature solutions.
The only confusing thing is the desktop which has so many looks and feels. Imagine a secretary, used to work with KDE, working on a replacement machine and needs to start Mozilla in windowmaker
We should not see this as an attack on KDE of Gnome, but as a move to a common interface, at least for the non expert users. For the rest of us, we will keep starting several X servers with multiple window managers and compiling and packaging them from CVS.
I guess it's a corporate geek reflex that we do not like meddling with our software, but is general and widespread use (albeit eclectic with the best of the best) not the best recognition?

Check out OpenOffice.org's groupware project. In the early development stages right now, it just got promoted to an "incubator" project. In addition, they just announced a deal with OEone to work together on improving the Mozilla Calendar project (as part of the overall OOo groupware effort).

You laugh at Microsoft because they have to fix security in their software all the time.

Well, I'm laughing at Linux because your line of supported applications and games is comparable to the Mac section in any general computer store on Earth.

YMMV.

The recent CNET debacle over will-Apple-or-won't-apple-help-w/OS-X has apparently driven a lot of Mac developers to the site. I've been following the porting mailing list activity a bit (as you can see here, there have been nearly twice as many posts this month as last month), people really seem to be interested in getting this thing working on OS X.

So it looks like there are more than the original two developers on this thing now.

I can't wait...I was thinking for a while that Abiword would have an OS X port first, but now it looks like OO.o has the momentum.

W

Yes and no. Here is the link and a screenshot. As you can tell by the color and style of the Windows is that gui aqua support is lacking and needs work. Unfortunately this and other things like the scripting engine need alot of work and may be more then a year or 2 away from a release. I believe even FreeBSD is not fully ported yet either so this means alot of work needs to be accomplished. I read your posts on macosX and assume your a user. The openoffice team had only 2 developers the last time I looked which were working on the Xdarwin/macosX port. If you know how to code or want to beta test it then you can help out.

Yes and no. Here is the link and a screenshot. As you can tell by the color and style of the Windows is that gui aqua support is lacking and needs work. Unfortunately this and other things like the scripting engine need alot of work and may be more then a year or 2 away from a release. I believe even FreeBSD is not fully ported yet either so this means alot of work needs to be accomplished. I read your posts on macosX and assume your a user. The openoffice team had only 2 developers the last time I looked which were working on the Xdarwin/macosX port. If you know how to code or want to beta test it then you can help out.

Yes and no. Here is the link and a screenshot. As you can tell by the color and style of the Windows is that gui aqua support is lacking and needs work. Unfortunately this and other things like the scripting engine need alot of work and may be more then a year or 2 away from a release. I believe even FreeBSD is not fully ported yet either so this means alot of work needs to be accomplished. I read your posts on macosX and assume your a user. The openoffice team had only 2 developers the last time I looked which were working on the Xdarwin/macosX port. If you know how to code or want to beta test it then you can help out.