Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

KOffice 1.1.1 Ships

Posted by timothy on from the actually-you-download-it dept.

Dre writes: "The KOffice team has announced the release of KOffice 1.1.1. It's mainly a performance, printing fixes (particularly in KWord) and stability release, but see the ChangeLog for the full scoop. Lots of binary packages are listed in the announcement this time. The dot is suggesting this might be the last KOffice release before KDE 3.0, which is almost on track for a late-February stable release (the first beta is being released this week)."

154 comments

  1. It's about time! by Egonis · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I sincerely hope that KOffice (and other alternatives) severely push MS-Office from being dominant...

    Compatability with other Office Suites is #1 in my point of view.

    1. Re:It's about time! by Bronster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I sincerely hope that KOffice (and other alternatives) severely push MS-Office from being dominant...

      Compatability with other Office Suites is #1 in my point of view.

      Especially file format (and even bug) compatibility *sigh*.

      I receive far too many documents in M$ Word format for work, and there is no choice but to use Word on Windows if I want to see it as the sender intended. When you're dealing with layouts of forms that have been printed and are in the field, you need to have the exact same form in front of your for data entry system design - and in many other fields it's exactly the same.

      To replace Word and Excel you really need something that can handle 99% of all files from those applications, and a way to deal with the others that doesn't leave people who've stored a lot of things in those formats out in the cold.

    2. Re:It's about time! by iso · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I receive far too many documents in M$ Word format for work, and there is no choice but to use Word on Windows if I want to see it as the sender intended. When you're dealing with layouts of forms that have been printed and are in the field, you need to have the exact same form in front of your for data entry system design - and in many other fields it's exactly the same.

      That's going to be extremely difficult--even Word has problems with exact positioning between versions. The root cause is that the DOC file format was never meant for layout data, and most of the layout is dependant on how Word decides to format the content.

      This is why if layout is important, people need to use a layout-centric file format like PDF. Open source programmers need to decide on a file format for word processing, and if they're not going to use PDF (an open specification, albeit controlled by Adobe), then they should invent an alternative. XML is great for content, but like HTML and SGML there's really no layout data, which can be important for many documents. Perhaps some type of style-sheets over XML? I've been really impressed with PDF v1.3, but are there (more) open alternatives?

      At any rate, the DOC format desperately needs to be replaced. Not only because it's viciously controlled by Microsoft, but also because it's simply an absolute garbage hack of a file format. Either that or DOC should only be used when layout isn't terribly important.

      - j

    3. Re:It's about time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      > This is why if layout is important, people need to
      > use a layout-centric file format like PDF. Open source
      > programmers need to decide on a file format for word
      > processing, and if they're not going to use PDF (an
      > open specification, albeit controlled by Adobe), then
      > they should invent an alternative. XML is great for content,
      > but like HTML and SGML there's really no layout data,
      > which can be important for many documents. Perhaps some
      > type of style-sheets over XML? I've been really impressed
      > with PDF v1.3, but are there (more) open alternatives?

      Yup, XML describes the data, but I would have a look at http://www.w3.org/Style/XSL/. xsl:fo can do a lot of magic ;-)

      /AC

    4. Re:It's about time! by 4im · · Score: 2, Informative

      XML is great for content,

      Perhaps some type of style-sheets over XML?

      You mean something like XSL/XSLT? Why not just get MS to switch to the open file format of OpenOffice?Good luck trying, anyway.

    5. Re:It's about time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      For those wondering, XSL:FO is a simplistic PDF-a-like that is suitable for most tasks. From there you can pass it to an XSL:FO viewer (few exist) or convert it to a PDF (this is the bit I like).

    6. Re:It's about time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XSL consists of XSLT and XSL:FO. XSLT is a translation language that wouldn't help here (aside from moving between XML formats - but that wasn't the question, I think).

    7. Re:It's about time! by Hanno · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I use Microsoft's Word Viewer to view and print the documents coming in, but refuse to use a full-blown Word installation to create them. So far, no problems, although you do do get some funny looks from clients when you tell them that (and why) you don't use Word on your office PC.

      --

      ------------------
      You may like my a cappella music
    8. Re:It's about time! by nrc · · Score: 1
      XML is great for content, but like HTML and SGML there's really no layout data, which can be important for many documents. Perhaps some type of style-sheets over XML?

      The W3C has already has a recommendation for an Extensible Stylesheet Language (XSL) for use with XML. The specification is here.

    9. Re:It's about time! by Niflar · · Score: 1

      I receive far too many documents in M$ Word format for work, and there is no choice but to use Word on Windows if I want to see it as the sender intended.

      Perhaps the best strategy is to sendt the document back to the sender, telling them to save it in the file format of your choice.

      Another (more discrete) strategy to get of the "M$-Office-format-race" is to save document in an older M$-Office format. At least, this way you do not force the receiver of your documents to upgrade.

    10. Re:It's about time! by Bronster · · Score: 2

      That's going to be extremely difficult--even Word has problems with exact positioning between versions. The root cause is that the DOC file format was never meant for layout data, and most of the layout is dependant on how Word decides to format the content.

      Oh, I absolutely agree - but it has to be close enough to the current version that KWord users can read files from M$Word in a way that covers most of the not-too-complex things, and write files in a format that M$Word can understand (doesn't have to be Doc - MSHTML would be fine too, so long as it's transparent to the Microsoftie).

      Also, Excel (including graphs) needs to be supported, and Powerpoint presentations for the suits - luckily I don't have to deal with too much Powerpoint at the moment.

      This is why if layout is important, people need to use a layout-centric file format like PDF...

      Sure, that would be nice - it doesn't alter the fact that at the moment, most people are using M$Word, and any program that can't talk to M$Word in most cases I deal with isn't worth the effort - I have a job to get done, and I can't spend the time wandering up to the lone Windows NT server in the machine room (running some custom VB App which talks to a voice-phone-program of some sort - I ignore it except to restart it when the VB program crashes - it's not very well written unfortunately, but we don't have time to fix/replace it).

      As I was saying - I don't have time to spend 20 minutes converting a file every time someone sends me something in a Microsoft format. Until KOffice can fill that gap, I have no choice but to continue working in with .doc (at least we have Spreadsheet::WriteExcel for non-graph reporting!)

    11. Re:It's about time! by Bronster · · Score: 2

      Perhaps the best strategy is to sendt the document back to the sender, telling them to save it in the file format of your choice.

      Perhaps the best solution is to live in the real world for a bit. Business involves compromises, and one of these is that you deal with the shit that paying customers dump on you (to a degree) or you don't get paid - file formats is only a part of this (ever dealt with changing specs, badly designed schemas and last minute reporting changes. I can tell you that telling your customers to f**k off until they fix their requirements is a great way to get fired by a company that doesn't want to go out of business because of Prima Donna numero Uno.)

    12. Re:It's about time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The obvious alternative to PDF/Postscript for a common layout format is dit, the format used as the intermediate step inside troff. (Since it became device independent sometime around the time mammoths went extinct.)

      A thoroughly debugged converter from dit to postscript exists already, and an rtf one ought not to be _too_ hard, and it would get things away from Adobe.

    13. Re:It's about time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Perhaps the best solution is to live in the real world for a bit." - That's not a solution, that's bending over.

    14. Re:It's about time! by Niflar · · Score: 1

      Business involves compromises, and one of these is that you deal with the shit that paying customers dump on you

      Agree. But it is not only paying customers who dump you shit. And hopefully you do not have to compromise with everybody everytime?

      I can tell you that telling your customers to f**k off until they fix their requirements

      What a luck I am not working with sales. :-)

  2. Imagine by rks404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It would be nice if KOffice and StarOffice and all the other free Office platforms had some standard document formats that were interoperable. Maybe if they got more popular, we would see something strange like the latest version of MicroSoft Office trumpeting "Compatible with StarOffice and KOffice" as their latest marketing bullet-point.

    1. Re:Imagine by rwest1001 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Oh God I hope that never happens...that would start me into a laughing fit sure to lead straight to a coronary.

    2. Re:Imagine by -brazil- · · Score: 1
      Compatiility is a question of a stable, clearly specified and open file format. It has nothing whatsover to do with "document functionality", advanced or not.


      BTW, what is Office, if not a fancy editor with formatting and spell checking gradually slapped on?

      --

      The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
      --Henry Kissinger

    3. Re:Imagine by lelitsch · · Score: 1

      You mean like .doc, .ppt., .xls? Sorry, I couldn't resist.

      On a less flippant note, this is exactly what XML and it's applications are designed to do. It has some shortcomings, for example the limitation on three nested Schema and the very long winded syntax, but for computers and computer programs talking to each other, it is actually pretty good. One especially neat thing would be that support for new graphics formats and database connectivity would be pretty easy to add once the basics are in place.

    4. Re:Imagine by spitzak · · Score: 2
      Sad but true, it appears that saving and loading MSWord format is the only interoperability these things have!

      On a serious note, this may be an undesirable but necessary result. It is hundreds of times more important that these programs read/write MSWord than that they read/write some "standard" that MicroSoft is going to ignore. And they get interoperabilty for free as a side effect, reducing the need for this standard format to nearly zero.

      A standard format's real use would be to make it easy to write small stand-alone programs that generate or manipulate text. That would be extremely nice but I don't think it is going to happen while MicroSoft controls everything.

  3. unified desktop by trance9 · · Score: 1, Redundant


    And people used to say opensource software was for servers only... bit by bit all the pieces of the puzzle are falling into place.

    It's a sad day for monopolists.

  4. and might i add... by doooras · · Score: 0

    w00t!!

  5. Powerpoint files? by MiTEG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is great, but will the new version be able to open Powerpoint 2002 files? I don't think so. People are using Powerpoint 2000/02 files now, which are not compatible with Powerpoint 97. So you'll still have to fork over a bundle of money if you work on presentations with people who use M$ products. Current price for Powerpoint 2002: $93.95. Good deal!

    --
    The future isn't what it used to be.
    1. Re:Powerpoint files? by gregfortune · · Score: 2, Informative

      They couldn't save their documents in Powerpoint 97, could they? I'm pretty sure Powerpoint 2000 will save in the 97 compatible format if you don't use any features requiring the 2000 format... I know Word and Excel both function in this manner.

    2. Re:Powerpoint files? by Kruemelmo · · Score: 1
      You miss the point: Telling "the user" to save the file in a certain way is not the way open source software will spread. Instread, it should open as many formats as possible.

      A user should have the experience of "oh this program just opens my files without complaints and they still look right" and not "if I want to use this program with files people send me, I must tell them to save them in this or that way and they will not remember this and each time I have to get back to them and ask to send them again and they are set up and it is all quite messy".

      This also concerns Word and Excel etc. KWord will be measured by the way it opens MSWord documents. Users expect all the pictures to be at the right place, the bullets appear at least similar and the tables' cell background be the same color and so on. And they are right, those users!

    3. Re:Powerpoint files? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Historical guff: MS Excel killed Lotus 123 because it could open and save all versions of 123. 123 couldn't open Excel though - so it was a one way trip to MSville. Aww yeah.

      While we're at it. I agree with you about how KWord will be judged regardless of the terms it sets for itself. #2718820 is also kinda ambiguous. It's not that if you don't use the latest features it will save as Powerpoint '97 - microsoft don't have their users in mind.

    4. Re:Powerpoint files? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when did people buy power point?, Ask any market manager. It's just preinstalled with their machine. It's a piss poor presentation tool. With the most boring output, That put's us all to sleep. ZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.......

    5. Re:Powerpoint files? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's simple. Tell people who send you these files to either send a version that is compatible with the software you use or a check to purchase Powerpoint 2002. Point out to them that you otherwise have absolutely no business justification to change your software as it provides no benefits to your company and potentially incurs a great expense as there may be hardware expenditures required to use the new software effectively.

    6. Re:Powerpoint files? by ichimunki · · Score: 1

      Telling "the user" to save the file in a certain way is not the way open source software will spread. Instread, it should open as many formats as possible.

      Yeah, because no one will ever ask that user to please save files so that the huge majority of users on older versions of Windows can open it as well. Early adopters who forge ahead breaking standards willy-nilly deserve to be stuck with the inconvenience of making sure they're the ones who bend over backwards if they want the rest of us to read their files. While I agree that it would be nice for various free software projects to be able to accurately import MS files, if there are version back-compatibilities with other Windows installs, it's not like us zealots are the only ones being impacted.

      The whole tactic of breaking back-compatibility for document formats is something that Microsoft could have anticipated and planned for a decade ago with little real effort, but making new documents at least partially operable on older installs would provide less inducement for me to upgrade.

      And why does this only work one way? I'm just a user... why if I create a document in KWord or KPresenter do I not have the right to expect MS users to just be able to open my documents? If MS users come whining about that will you be telling *them* to take it to Microsoft and defending *me*?

      --
      I do not have a signature
  6. My experiences with KWord by Eloquence · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I have tested the previous version of KWord and was quite impressed. Some have argued that KOffice merely duplicates Microsoft's efforts, but that is not true: Unlike MS Word, KWord uses a very simple and efficient frame concept, which makes it quite easy to create complex layouts. For example I was able to create a letter layout with two columns in a couple of minutes with no prior knowledge of the program.

    You just draw frames where you want to have text and type in them (if you use frames, you can also use KWord without them like a normal word processor). You can connect frames so that text flows between them, and they are automatically extended to subsequent pages.

    Things I haven't yet tested are data connectivity (which is essential for business stuff) and very large documents. But general writing functionality was quite impressive already. The biggest problem I had was printing: I didn't get the result to look like the preview. Reading the summary, I doubt this is fixed, but I'll be pleased to find out I'm wrong. Generally, KWord is on the right track.

    1. Re:My experiences with KWord by iso · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You just draw frames where you want to have text and type in them (if you use frames, you can also use KWord without them like a normal word processor). You can connect frames so that text flows between them, and they are automatically extended to subsequent pages.

      This is how any good page layout program does things; Quark Express, InDesign, FrameMaker. After using any decent layout application I find it an absolute chore to do anything besides memos in Word. It's really unfortunate that most people don't realize that there are vastly superior alternatives.

      I always knew Word was bad at anything but the absolute basics, but it was made blatantly obvious to me when I did my my latest resume in InDesign. When it comes to layout, Word is quite possibly the worst program for the job, but only a handful of companies will accept my resume in .PDF format. This is despite the fact that I have yet to find one single reason why .DOC would be a better choice than .PDF.

      Oh well, that's nothing new. The world is full of frustrating inefficiencies because of the Microsoft monopoly.

      - j

    2. Re:My experiences with KWord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ah, yes, and clicking the "column" button on ms word is rocket science, huh?

    3. Re:My experiences with KWord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, but it gets messy real quick, once you have more than a simple header/columns/footer layout. with frames things like that are really easy. try it, you won't want to go back.

    4. Re:My experiences with KWord by rutledjw · · Score: 1

      I think that's one of the biggedt downfalls of Word. It tries to "think" for you...

      No, no, no, you want the tabs over here .

      BAH! My project team for a grad school project spent almost as much time during crunch undoing Word's brilliant formatting decisions as we did proofreading. That's the biggest draw (IMHO) of both KWord and StarOffice...

      --

      Computer Science is Applied Philosophy
    5. Re:My experiences with KWord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Things I haven't yet tested are data connectivity (which is essential for business stuff) and very large documents

      Yesterday I opened a large word document (more than 100 pages full of tables and tri-lingual sript(greek, spanish, english) in KWord. It crawled, it ate up almost all of my cache but it did open the darn thing, plus it rendered everything correctly. And this was a super-unstable KDE3 CVS version compiled last Friday, which probably explains the enormous memory consumption.

    6. Re:My experiences with KWord by tolan's+my+name · · Score: 1

      An obvious reason is that they have and can use Word. If not they've at least got the viewer that came with Windows.

      They may or may not have acrobat reader, they may or may not be allowed to install it etc etc.

      Yes .PDF is in some ways better, but that, my boy, is life.

    7. Re:My experiences with KWord by Boiner · · Score: 1
      I always knew Word was bad at anything but the absolute basics, but it was made blatantly obvious to me when I did my my latest resume in InDesign. When it comes to layout, Word is quite possibly the worst program for the job, but only a handful of companies will accept my resume in .PDF format. This is despite the fact that I have yet to find one single reason why .DOC would be a better choice than .PDF.

      Bit of advice... If you feel that strongly, (and I can see why you should), then don't work for a company that can't handle .PDF! Back around, '95 or '96 was the last time I looked for an employer. Well, I decided that my resume was going to be on the web, and if anyone wanted to read it, they could navigate themselves right on over. No paper. No Word. No floppies. No fax. Ended up, I got a *sweet* development job. When I told my interviewer how I felt about modern communication and why my standards were what they were, his jaw dropped. Stick to your guns. Companies are dying for good people. (Always have been, always will be.)

    8. Re:My experiences with KWord by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 1

      Well, .doc s are really easy to index in windows. That would be one reason.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    9. Re:My experiences with KWord by the_olo · · Score: 1

      >Some have argued that KOffice merely duplicates
      >Microsoft's efforts, but that is not true: Unlike
      >MS Word, KWord uses a very simple and efficient
      >frame concept, which makes it quite easy to
      >create complex layouts. For example I was able to
      >create a letter layout with two columns in a
      >couple of minutes with no prior knowledge of the
      >program.
      >
      >You just draw frames where you want to have text
      >and type in them (if you use frames, you can also
      >use KWord without them like a normal word
      >processor). You can connect frames so that text
      >flows between them, and they are automatically
      >extended to subsequent pages.

      That's a great innovation on the side of KWord, It's much more efficient, because in Word you have to cope with drawing text fields where you want to have text and then type in them. Word also confuses you with ability to connect those text fields so that text flows between then.

    10. Re:My experiences with KWord by sandler · · Score: 2

      Does .rtf count as Word format for such requests (since I think by default Windows will open it in either Word or Wordpad)? All the free offices (AFAIK) can save as rtf, which is a nice, open, format.

    11. Re:My experiences with KWord by NumberSyx · · Score: 2

      There is an easy solution, although it may not be perfect. I write all my documents in StarOffice and save them as HTML files, I then change the extension from .html to .doc and send it away. MSWord will open it just as if it was a true MS .doc file. There are a couple downsides, first you are limited to formating, styles and fonts allowed by HTML and second, if the recieving person makes changes and saves the file in the latest Office XP file format and sends it back to you, you will not be able to read it.

      --

      "Our products just aren't engineered for security,"
      -Brian Valentine,VP in charge of MS Windows Development

    12. Re:My experiences with KWord by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1
      You just draw frames where you want to have text and type in them

      Sounds like we have an interleaf fan. Personally I like word processors, Word, StarOffice, Final Writer. But I have enough trouble getting what I want actually typed up without having to worry about layout specifics before I start working.

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    13. Re:My experiences with KWord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Rename an .rtf to .doc and they'll be none the wiser.

      RTF is a closed Microsoft format and can be thought of as the plain-text version of Doc (which is, IMO, why it's so well documented by 3rd parties). It's a bloated format and you'll notice that MS Office 2002 now expands RTF files to several megs when you insert an image (unlike previous versions).

      If basing it arond a page is necessary RTF is probably the best - otherwise I'd stick with XHTML+CSS.

    14. Re:My experiences with KWord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've just downloaded 1.1.1 and yes it is nice.

      *BUT* there is no Word *output* filter, which unfortunately makes it almost totally useless to me.

      I note from the Help that they are working on an output filter but it is still not available.

    15. Re:My experiences with KWord by Chris+L.+Mason · · Score: 1

      I wrote the following last year when I was job hunting to explain to people why I could not send my resume in Word (.DOC) format:

      http://www.unixzone.com/why_no_word.html

  7. I WANT TO SET YOUR PENIS ON FIRE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    "I want to set your broken-off penis on fire this holiday season."

    -The Guy Who Wants To Set Things On Fire

  8. KWord can be a good rival to Framemaker /Publisher by deadmantalking · · Score: 5, Informative

    I may be talking off my head here, but the last time i saw KWord, it looked like it was inspored by Framemaker. As a technical Writer, Framemaker is the word processor of choice to use, Word does not even come close. Abiword and the word processor shipped with StarOffice are also aimed at the general user, not someone who creates long complex documents for a living.
    KWord was a pleasant surprise, then. With KOffice 1.0, it was not ready for primetime use, but the direction it was headed showed that it will sooner or later make it easy for people like me to switch from the pain of FM (yes, it may be the best in the world for tech editing, but it still sucks royally) to something better.

    --
    A crank is a little thing that makes revolutions
  9. A4 paper? by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I must be missing something here.

    I want to set Kword to default to "US letter" size paper, and it doesn't "take". Every time it comes up as A4 size.

    Does anyone know how in the world one can change the default paper size?

    --
    If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    1. Re:A4 paper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Does anyone know how in the world one can change the default paper size?

      Move to Europe.

    2. Re:A4 paper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, ask on an appropriate forum, like a users group for KDE, a help line for a kde-friendly distro (like SuSE), etc.

      Asking on /. is like asking someone to kick you.

    3. Re:A4 paper? by sheimers · · Score: 1

      Dont start it up with an empty page, select the US-Letter Template! (works here)

    4. Re:A4 paper? by zander · · Score: 1

      Click on the "US Letter" icon before hitting "OK"

    5. Re:A4 paper? by Asic+Eng · · Score: 2
      I haven't tried it yet, but it's possible that this is still not fixed. Don't know why, it should be simple to make that configurable.

      Apparently one workaround would be to create a page in the format you like, then save it as a template. Now when you start koffice it should fgive you the option to choose that template.

    6. Re:A4 paper? by dfaure · · Score: 1

      Open the "Letter" template, and then do "File / Create Template" from document, and overwrite the
      "Plain Text" template.
      That's the template that is used when starting kword with the "empty document" radiobutton.

    7. Re:A4 paper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HA! Perhaps people could force all those companies that write operating systems / applciations / devices that constantly whine and whine and whine about letter paper (which I gather is some sort of American equivalent to A4)to use this and maybe they'll mend their ways. I really really hate those guys, why have they got it in for the rest of us?

    8. Re:A4 paper? by koekepeer · · Score: 1

      Does any other European (like myself) find this very amusing?

      The major annoyance of any "US-english" based piece of software for me has been the default US-letter settings.

      It's a *good thing* that there's now an European software project that does the reverse ;-).

      KOffice: The emancipation of European Software!

      hehe

      meneer de koekepeer

    9. Re:A4 paper? by Whumpsnatz · · Score: 1

      I don't know about Europeans, but this American got a good chuckle out of the "Move to Europe" comment.

      .... Redneck in Jax ....

    10. Re:A4 paper? by d_i_r_t_y · · Score: 1

      that was my first thought as well... god knows how many times i've had to install ms office and have forgotten to change the damn paper format to A4.

      so, australians (me!) use A4, europeans use A4, brits use A4, what's the deal with the US using letter? is this like the metric system? (what *is* the deal with still using the imperial system???)

  10. Considering switching by loraksus · · Score: 2

    My windows on my zoomin' fast 700mhz box crapped and I'm sitting here with a copy of windows 2k, xp, rh 7.1, caldera 2.3.. Interesting dilemma.
    (writing this on my 486 laptop running win95 WOOT!)
    So... What should I go to? I got a better box for games, and I really don't like playing around with linux on a 200mhz 64mb ram machine with a 2 mb vid card.
    From those who have - how is koffice compared to the standard MS suite?
    What about file compatibility problems (can I take stuff to school?)
    Speed - how is star offices speed - I'm assuming x is a lot faster on this box than on the 200, but are there any issues?
    Any "major psycotic hatreds"?
    Any comments / advice from people who have done the switch?
    Thanks.

    (website down because 2k is down)

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    1. Re:Considering switching by Cardinal+Biggles · · Score: 2

      KOffice is getting (a lot) better, but I still use StarOffice more because:

      1. It doesn't crash. KWord/KSpread do sometimes.
      2. It's a lot better at dealing with M$Office document formats.

      As to performance, StarOffice was unusable on my ancient box (a P166, 32Mb RAM), usable on my old laptop (PII-400, 128Mb RAM) although it takes some time to start, and fine on my new laptop (PIII-1000, 384Mb RAM, yum).

      StarOffice, though not free software, is the application that has enabled me to ditch Windows altogether because it can handle the Office formats pretty well. KOffice can't yet - I've just been opening some .DOCs with the new 1.1.1 and it's better but not good enough yet.

  11. Re:KWord can be a good rival to Framemaker /Publis by NightWhistler · · Score: 3, Informative

    Personally I still prefer LyX for large technical documents... I'm nearing the end of my internship now, and I've written all my reports in it. I'll be using it for my end paper as well...

    OK, it absolutely took some getting used to, but once I got the hang of it I was suprised at how easy it was to create good looking documents... Most free Office utilities try to mimic the behaviour of commercial applications, while in my opinion the strong point of Linux is the fact that it takes a different approach... on that works...

    Same thing goes for document formatting... LyX with LaTex as it's backend may be different from commerical apps, it works like a charm, and I'm definately never going back to the pain of WYSIWYG word processors...

    I have spoken! ;-)

    --
    PageTurner Reader: open-source e-reader for Android with cloudsync. http://pageturner-reader.org
  12. kde 3.0 by global_diffusion · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I am consistently impressed by the proffesionality of the kde team. Way to go! (Now if only they taught Mozilla to release on time...)

    1. Re:kde 3.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      exactly how was the parent comment flamebait? If I had mod points, I'd fix this, but I don't...

  13. more interesting... by pnatural · · Score: 1

    might be to know how many people download KOffice, vs. how many people use KOffice on a daily basis.

    I'm not trolling, but i am curious. Anyone care to guess? My wild-ass guess would be maybe 500k downloads, maybe a tenth that as daily users.

    1. Re:more interesting... by radja · · Score: 3

      for comparison, you'd also need the same numbers for Office.. I have KOffice, but use it only very very rarely... just like I only typed 1 or 2 letters in Word. Also computers often come bundled with WinXP and Office. How many of those users actually use it?

      My guess is that daily usage/download will actually be lower than 10%

      //rdj

      --

      No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
      --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
    2. Re:more interesting... by spitzak · · Score: 2
      My guess is that for MicroSoft Word the usage/(purchase+pirated) ratio is less than 10%.

      I think for KOffice it is going to be way way lower, like 1%.

  14. I know at least one reason.... by Wee · · Score: 1, Flamebait
    Word is quite possibly the worst program for the job, but only a handful of companies will accept my resume in .PDF format. This is despite the fact that I have yet to find one single reason why .DOC would be a better choice than .PDF.

    I can think of one reason: Because they are the people who are hiring and they get to say what they want to accept from applicants?

    Start your own company (or get really important in an already established organization) and then refuse to accept any resumes but those in PDF format. Much better than trying to buck the system before you're even being considered for a position...

    -B

    --

    Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

    1. Re:I know at least one reason.... by Rentar · · Score: 1
      Start your own company (or get really important in an already established organization) and then refuse to accept any resumes but those in PDF format.

      So your company will only employ professional layouters and some geeks who are willing to pipe tex into dvi2ps into ps2pdf. Maybe thats what you want, but maybe not. At least I'd suggest accepting text/html and text/plain as well.

    2. Re:I know at least one reason.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I would never work for a company that expected my resume in electronic format ONLY.
      EVER.

      Every job I have ever landed, has been landed with a professionally laid out resume, on high quality paper.

      There are resume services that will take your resume, in electronic format, and then put it onto paper. I have received several complements from employers on my resume, and heard comments about how very rarely others take their resume as serious.

      My resume is ALWAYS handed to the employer in a nice folder. The only goal with your resume is to differentiate you from the other applicants. If you were not qualified, you should have never even gotten inside the door.

      Yes, I am talking about employment that requires pre-screening... not some job off of www.monster.com where you send your resume via their 'click here to apply' link, and pray for the best.

      Those types of services are excellent for actually finding the job, but do NOT ever apply with that route.

      Employers want people who are willing to go out of their way, take the extra step, etc... Remember that, and you will succeed.

      I hope the 'resume futility count' guy actually reads this... Maybe the reason he hasn't been hired is that employers aren't impressed with a 'plain text format' resume.

      Yours Truly,

      David Fishinghawk
      CCIE #1076
      Boston, Mass.

    3. Re:I know at least one reason.... by 4im · · Score: 1

      I can think of one reason: Because they are the people who are hiring and they get to say what they want to accept from applicants?

      Maybe so, but if they're too stupid to accept standard formats and expect something proprietary instead, I know I don't want to work there.

      Good computer scientists are hard to come by, and if they think they should deliberately narrow their options, well tough luck for them.

      I am looking for another job right now, one of my conditions is that _I_ get to choose my tools.And yes, _I_ get to set my conditions, because the market is still tight.

      I've had to use crappy tools, deal with lacking or incorrect documentation, non-working software for longer than I care for - it's time for sth. decent.

    4. Re:I know at least one reason.... by Wee · · Score: 2
      Look, all I'm saying is that if I run a company and I say "submit a resume in Word format", then you either submit a Word resume or move on. For the record, I personally agree with you and the three posts below this one. But the fact is that you can't expect to bend a prospective employer to your will.

      A resume is supposed to get your foot in the door. Someone hopes to do that by sending them a resume in a format they either can't or won't read. It does make a point, but while that point is being made, some fellow who bodged a resume together on his girlfriend's Word-laden PC is in talking to HR, not you.

      Unless you're a complete superstar, you don't get to say what their HR dept will read. "You want to hire me? Then here's my CV. Oh, really... can't open it? Well, you can download and install a PDF reader for free. PDF is a standard and much better than Word, you know..." It won't fly unless you're a big shot. And if so, then more power to you. Maybe the next guy will get a shot because you already primed the PDF pump...

      -B

      --

      Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

    5. Re:I know at least one reason.... by gazbo · · Score: 1

      I have received several complements
      What, people invert you after reading your CV?

      take their resume as serious.
      Nuff said.

      not some job off of www.monster.com
      Pet hate of mine.

      professionally laid out resume, on high quality paper.....My resume is ALWAYS handed to the employer in a nice folder.....
      When we take on people, we accept paper or electronic CVs. Doesn't matter to us as long as the person is qualified (although CVs over 2-3 pages are likely to get thrown. It's your job to highlight your achievements, not write an autobiography and let us sift through it.)

      Sure, make your CV presentable, as messy hard to read ones make the reader's life more difficult and get thrown. Equally, don't send in a coffee stained paper copy (or virus infected email copy ;-) as they make you look unprofessional.

      But when it comes down to it, it should be 95% experience/qualifications that get you an interview, and *then* we decide who's got the edge.

      <flame>
      But that is for people applying for skilled, techical jobs. Judging by what you wrote, you seem to be going for very low grade jobs. I for one would not be happy to take on somebody with such a low command over the English language.

      There certainly are *some* types of job out there when a nicely printed CV in a colored folder with a picture on the front may be an advantage, but it sure ain't in my industry.
      </flame>

      Oh, I'd better make an exception for applications to the typesetting industry...

    6. Re:I know at least one reason.... by hawk · · Score: 2
      >Sure, make your CV presentable, as messy hard to
      >read ones make the reader's life more
      >difficult and get thrown. Equally, don't send in
      >a coffee stained paper copy (or virus infected
      >email copy ;-) as they make you look
      >unprofessional.


      Many years ago, at 18, I had been hired by a startup to write software. We needed changes in some firmware, and I told them that my change to part time for the school year would prevent me from doing that *and* keeping up with the MIS system.


      I'd been hired on the spot when I showed up. I didn't know better than simply to appear with my resume in hand, rather than mailing it in. I was abe to show them something they desparately wanted, and they realized they could have me full time for less than a part time consultant.


      Anyway,they handed me the folders of resumes collected when they had advertised, and told *me* to find someone.


      I was shocked by some of them. I'd always heard about the importance of appearance, etc., but I just wasn't prepared.


      The one that I can still picture had been printed on a crummy (even for the time) dot matrix printer--the kind swhere the dots were distinct with space between them. It had then been copied on a crummy photocopier, and was quite grey. To top it off (really, I'm not making this up) the cover letter was written on *graph paper* in pencil . . .


      hawk

    7. Re:I know at least one reason.... by iso · · Score: 1

      Uhm, I know that. I never said I was trying to convince anybody! If they ask for Word, I'll send Word, but that still doesn't change the fact that DOC is an atrocious format for a resume.

      - j

    8. Re:I know at least one reason.... by linuxlover · · Score: 2

      I personally prefer electronic format. Much easy to sort & grep. Did any one worked on IBM SP2, quick
      grep -il SP2 resumes/*.txt resumes/*.html
      is all I need.

      Paper is easy on eyes, but a nightmare to quickly find the infor you need (specially when you have 200 resumes for a job opening).

      I have a .txt & .html resumes off mine. When at a job interview the only thing I had was a
      a2ps resume.txt
      output of mine, and the interviewers _loved_ it. I was told it is the quality of the work you did that matter, not how pretty you can format your resume.

      If I get a resume in a folder printed on colored paoper, I'd be suspicious about it. We all know how we look for jobs. WE apply to about 50 jobs a day. If yoru resume is a close match, then you 'stand-out' in your interview. That is what they are there for. I never judge how serious some one about a job just b/c they handed me a laminated resume. I wait till I talk to the guy.

      And hell yes, when I ask please only send txt/html resumes, everything else is tossed out (another reason why I love electronic format :-). That is the first sign, that you can not follow instructions.

  15. OT: Word Alternative for Mac by saihung · · Score: 1

    I've played with KOffice, and was generally impressed - it was certainly a lot faster than StarOffice on the same machine. I'm a Mac user, though, and KOffice really isn't an alternative for me. I've rediscovered AppleWorks, however, and it seems that Apple has finally gotten its act together with this package. 6.0.4 was something of a mess, but I'm using 6.2.2 now, and I haven't opened Word in quite some time. Apple used DataViz's excellent file-conversion tools to attain Word and Excel compatibility. What did DataViz do to get it right?

  16. Solution to the eternal document-format-problem by claes · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is maybe offtopic, but anyways...

    We never will get rid of complaints that the newest free office suite can not read the newest MS Office file formats. This is quite natural, but what can be done about it?

    I was thinking that maybe it is possible to write a Windows application that automates the task of converting documents by using Word itself. I don't know VB or VB for applications, but is this possible? Is it not true that scriptability is one of the major features of MS Office applications?

    If this is technically possible, and Office licensing allows it, then companies could dedicate a server with this program and an Office installation to become a document-transformer. Lets say it reads .doc-files in a directory on the network and converts it do .rtf and writes it to another directory.

    Then no MS Office installation is neccessary on the workstations, but converting documents to Koffice/StarOffice/whatever is still easy.

    1. Re:Solution to the eternal document-format-problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Yes, quite possible.

      The company I work for has a service whereby you upload an MSWord document and we run it through Office 2002 > XML > HTML. Due to the overheard of word this takes about 8 seconds but we spit out perfect XHTML with ALT tags and internal links - big w00ps indeed.

      I suspect that Microsoft have realised this though. As the only other format that can replicate the same exact same features as Word is RTF and Office 2002 will bloat RTF (as I said in another post, above).

      The difficulty is telling users that other formats won't look exactly the same. All formats aren't completely compatible (there is a large overlapping feature set in most). Accepting that it's only going to be pretty close is where the problem is (and deciding another format to put it to).

      Openoffice can open any MS Word document that I've seen to a relative degree of accuracy.

  17. Switch - you'll like it by Wee · · Score: 3, Insightful
    My windows

    So you paid for Windows and now you feel like they're all yours and nobody else's, eh? :-)

    on my zoomin' fast 700mhz box crapped and I'm sitting here with a copy of windows 2k, xp, rh 7.1, caldera 2.3.. Interesting dilemma.

    Well, I can tell you what I would do. But you already know what I would do. This is Slashdot, after all. Answer: Install Debian.

    Seriously, I think you'd get a lot more out of RH 7.1 than 2K or XP. Why? I've used Linux as a desktop OS for years now, and I made the complete switch last May. I haven't been to Fry's once. So I've saved lots of money. My machine has been up continuously since then, BTW. And I play Tribes2 and RtCW quite a bit. (But I also use Star Office a lot). Now, I've had to ssh into it from another machine in my office to kill -9 a game or whatever, but I never reboot.

    As far as the Caldera - RH argument, it's a matter of choice really. RH might be more "dynamic" maybe. It's certainly being updated more. Quite a few RPMs out there too. Go with what you know. Of course, real men use a Linux with apt-get, yada yada yada... (They make you say good things about Debian on /. regardless of the fact that it's all Linux and all good. :-)

    (writing this on my 486 laptop running win95 WOOT!)

    Ugh. Maybe Linux there as well? RH 5.0 runs fine on my P100 laptop. XMMS streams to the stereo. I tried WinAMP and Win95 on it and it wouldn't even run.

    So... What should I go to? I got a better box for games, and I really don't like playing around with linux on a 200mhz 64mb ram machine with a 2 mb vid card.

    Oddly enough, you have a machine which is almost perfect for Linux. It's not powerful enough to run the latest MS (or other) apps, yet you could run a minimal Linux install and get added life out of that box as a word processor. Since the box is old, there should be very little wrestling with drivers. As far as GUIs bringing you down, try Blackbox. It's very minimal (yet very full-featured) and should serve you well.

    From those who have - how is koffice compared to the standard MS suite?

    Well, I use Star Office 6 even at work now. Guy says he wants "powerpoint", I give him slides. Need to look at Excel sheets, I open scalc. As far as KOffice, I don't know. I've had more than once experience where KWord just quit on me. Vanished. No core file, no syslog error, nothing. Just gone. I save a lot when using either it or KWrite (which is worse; KWrite goes down more than a White House intern). I'm using older versions, sure, but I was not too impressed with the stability. Now Kate... wow. There's an editor. Sure, it's plain text, but it's a real good example of a stable app. At least in my experience these last few months. Does syntax highlighting fo0r Perl, C and SQL, too, so that's a big plus. Of course, I've turned in memos/meeting notes, whatever printed two-to-a-sheet with enscript or with line numbers before, so...

    What about file compatibility problems (can I take stuff to school?)

    You should be able to move files between home and school. Make sure to save in native format (Star Office will ask what format you want to save it in). I've exchanged Word 2000 docs with Star Office 6 and back again. Every once in a while I get a document that saves to like 8MB (when it should be like 400K). A resave helps sometimes.

    I haven't been able to get simple Word or Excel macros running. I haven't tried, though. I don't want to run macros if I can help it.

    Speed - how is star offices speed - I'm assuming x is a lot faster on this box than on the 200, but are there any issues?

    Star Office 5 is about as fast as a wounded prawn. It will literally suck the life force out through your face. One should be paid to use it. The Star Office Beta 6, however, rocks. Worlds better. It has warts, sure, but it's beta. (Do you really think any software -- which had a ship date -- that came out of either Redmond or Mountain View had anything like the QA it should have had?) I've been using beta 6 since it came out and haven't noticed anything overly weird (except a deep-seated and possibly misguided reliance on Java). Me and a few other gus use it for work, so it's good enough I guess.

    Any "major psycotic hatreds"?

    Visio. I hate Visio. And sometimes I hate project managers, too.

    Any comments / advice from people who have done the switch?

    I've been using nothing but Linux for months now -- like I said -- and I wouldn't go back. Hell, I couldn't. Deal with XP and it's sugary GUI and nasty licensing/copy "protection"? Not a chance. Pay for Apple hardware? I'll save for my kids college funds instead and run Linux on older hardware. And why not? Linux runs great for me. I love being able to right-click on the desktop and get an xterm where I can write a shell script that goes into cron. Networking works, I have every compiler I'd ever want, a choice of GUIs, lots of customizing, I use ssh tunnels, scp is fine, samba keeps me and the wife in sync, games are fine and I just don't spend any more time or money on the upgrade mill. And BTW, check out Opera for Linux. I've paid for the Win32 and Linux versions of Opera. Everyone who's taken time to look at Opera has loved it, at least in my experience (which is predominantly IE users).

    -B

    --

    Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

  18. Ween the world off MSO by MADCOWbeserk · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Personally I ask all my clients to avoid Microsoft Apps. I either send simple documents in simple formats (ie. RTF, word 95) or print to a PDF file.

    As for powerpoint. I send a reply, stating I don't like powerpoint presentatations, please send me plain text and annotated images. Funny when you ask for that, most people skip the stupid clip art they love to put in PP.

    KOffice is perfect for me, but them I refuse mst MSO documents. Nonetheless judged on it merits it works great and does everything I ask of it.

    1. Re:Ween the world off MSO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By "clients", I assume you mean your sixth-grade classmates? Anyone else would just fire your ass for being so uncooperative.

    2. Re:Ween the world off MSO by MADCOWbeserk · · Score: 0

      Yeah I aM an asshole to clients. But after dealing with a client for a few weeks, they cower in fear. Seriously it isn't that hard to get people to do this, I just ask nicely. The trick, "hey can you do me a favor" or "you might want to try outputting to PDF, everything you send out will look just the way you intend it and it can be encrypted" Most of the PPT is from sales-people and they will generally do whatever I ask.

      This is doable.

  19. ...and I know another. (Hint: recruiters) by Lucky · · Score: 0

    This is despite the fact that I have yet to find one single reason why .DOC would be a better choice than .PDF.
    A reason for a recuiting agency not not accept PDFs would be that they want to change you resume, both to add their brand to it, and to remove your contact info. That way, the interested company can't go around the middle-man.
    Unless there's a way to crop PDFs. But the point was to keep them static.

  20. Open File Formats by dunstan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, given the discussion about KWord's use of frames, I can't see that it will be that simple to import KWord into a non frame aware package.

    Where things should be better is where there's a closer overlap in functionality between different packages. The first step - where we are now - is to have office packages working on *published* file formats. Following on, a degree of component sharing would make sense (as with the Gecko engine).

    At this point the benefit of using free software kicks in with a vengeance, as interoperability issues are of interest to *both* parties rather than a cat and mouse game based around reverse engineering. Extending Bob Young's analogy, you would then find Ford helping BMW to transplant in their engine, rather than suing them for cutting through the welds which hold the bonnet (hood) shut.

    Right now Microsoft's most valuable asset is probably the huge and growing base of documents in proprietary file formats, a pernicious form of enslavement. Our blow for freedom must be the use of open formats such as plain text and comma separated lists.

    Dunstan

    --
    The last scintilla of doubt just rode out of town
    1. Re:Open File Formats by zander · · Score: 1
      The first step - where we are now - is to have office packages working on *published* file formats.
      Allready there

      Following on, a degree of component sharing would make sense
      That would seem quite impossible since the base is different; KWord can't use Windows hooks and OpenOffice can't use QT hooks etc.

      Our blow for freedom must be the use of open formats such as plain text and comma separated lists.
      Ehm, make that utf8 texts and XML with open DTDs, and I agree :)

    2. Re:Open File Formats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That would seem quite impossible since the base is different; KWord can't use Windows hooks and OpenOffice can't use QT hooks etc.
      If they could share an intermediate format then they could share components.

      (then again, I do everything in Docbook)

  21. Re:KWord can be a good rival to Framemaker /Publis by zander · · Score: 2, Interesting
    It is certainly true that the frames concept of KWord is based on FM, but after working with it for quite a bit longer (even the newest version) I was thinking that FM sucks so bad I (as one of the autors of KWord) wanted to understand the nice things of FM and reimplement them the way I think they should work.

    In the end this will mean a slower progress and probably a rewrite here and there (tables are being redone for the 1.2 release). Maybe you guys can post good bug reports about the little stuff that make an application look 'finished'. Not stuff like "I need this and that". But more like "Hee, this feature could also be done via drag and drop there and there" . You know; the small things we develoipers tend to overlook..

  22. Re:Windows/Office XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    XP isn't as stable as Linux yet. It's stable enough for people to blame it on the user (a la Linux) but uptimes and insurance costs speak for themselves.

  23. Kword & Kspread by nusuth · · Score: 1
    These two are the only programs in KOffice I tried. Older versions just sucked,I don't know about the newest release. Both had a tendency to crash without any reason, both had problems printing. Kspread had serious importing problems, while kword didn't even reliably open files it has just created.

    But that shouldn't deter you from using linux, openoffice 638c is very good, so is gnumeric. They should suit your needs. Considering how rest of kde evolved, I'm pretty sure that most koffice problems with stability will be solved soon, too.

    --

    Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!

  24. KWord - slow on docs 15 pages... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just tried making a new doc and typed in "Test test test", and copied and pasted that a lot of times to a total of 16 pages. Now KWord becomes unusable slow. Anyone else experience this?

    --
    Andreas

  25. Who here is using KOffice as your primary suite? by sandler · · Score: 3

    My only experiences with KWord (admittedly limited) have been bad. I've opened a few Word docs in KWord and found them to be a disaster (whereas StarOffice did a 99% good job).

    Also, the one time I typed a homework in KOffice and saved as HTML, as soon as I opened the HTML file in vi, I found that it contained nothing but "<html>". If I can't assume that pressing "Save" will save my file, then it's really not so useful to me.

  26. huge documents and lyx by hawk · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Most folks in my department used word for theses and dissertations. It typically took at least a week, full time, to browbeat the document into compliance with the graduate office rules.


    I used lyx, and found an existing isu.sty program. My time? Less than 10 minutes . . .


    hawk

  27. Re:Powerpoint files? - Automated conversion? by jsveiga · · Score: 1

    We currently use Office 2k.

    Because some partners and clients who are still using Office 95/97 (and even 2k itself) sometimes couldn't open our Office files, we now only send stuff in pdf (automatic conversion through a linux virtual shared printer and ps2pdf).

    Then the only thing that forces us to have Office is that sometimes we RECEIVE stuff in those formats.

    I'm thinking about this:
    - Have one single license of Office 2k (or XP, for that matters) on a windows server on the network,
    - setup VB/VBA programs/macros to automagically open any file it sees in such and such directories (shares) and both print them to the "pdf" printer (saving the original formatting) and saving them to a KOffice / StarOffice compatible Office older version (allowing edits).

    Has anyone already done this? Would it be LEGAL? (I was about to setup Acrobat Writer in the windows server to create the pdfs, when I found out it was not legal, so I switched to gs)

    I believe "printing" to pdf would be straightforward and easy from VB. What about saving? How would I open a file (disallowing its own - untrusty - macros to run) and then run a pre-defined macro which is not in the file itself?

    Note: We amavis filter our emails, so conversion could even be activated upon email attachment arrival.

  28. Re:what for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gee a post that tells the truth gets a -1 how surprising.
    Until linux office suites can read/write MS office file formate they are worthless.

  29. Re:what for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah, that's because staroffice has existed for about 10 years now. it's currently better at replicating msoffice than koffice is. however, I think koffice has more potential. kword, itself, I think, could potentially replace ms-publisher and Adobe FrameMaker, something starwriter could not do because of it's document methodlogy compared to kword's frame methodlogy. also, a sql based tool in koffice would be nice and compete very well with ms access.

  30. Opensource has the problem? by festers · · Score: 1

    I have to use Office97 at work and it's common that someone sends me a PPT 2000/02 file. What do I do? I tell them to resave it in a PPT 97 format and try again. If MS software forces me to do this, why should I have different expectations with a free alternative? Save it to the lowest common demoninator, regardless of whether you're using OSS or MS.

    --


    -------
    "Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
  31. Re:Powerpoint files? - Automated conversion? by tzanger · · Score: 2

    Because some partners and clients who are still using Office 95/97 (and even 2k itself) sometimes couldn't open our Office files, we now only send stuff in pdf (automatic conversion through a linux virtual shared printer and ps2pdf).

    Know of anything that will work for AutoCAD 14 .dwg files and AutoDesk Inventor files? (either to DXF or to .pdf) -- I'd love to be able to provide that same functionality to people who use our drawings. Yeah you can save to .dxf but that's a pain for the draftsmen who have a zillion drawings around WITHOUT having dupes in .dxf format.

  32. Re:Powerpoint files? - Automated conversion? by jsveiga · · Score: 1

    Hi,

    The way it's setup here, it works with anything that can print. We do use AutoCAD LT 98 with it too. It's quite transparent for the users, and for the application.

    If you want details on how to implement it, email me (same slashdot username, @rf.com.br)

    Another option for sharing the DWGs and other AutoDesk formats is asking people to download the free DWG viewer from AutoDesk at:
    their site
    or
    their ftp

    Joao

  33. Folders. by saintlupus · · Score: 2

    My resume is ALWAYS handed to the employer in a nice folder.

    Let me guess, you were that nimrod in high school who always padded the shit out of his papers but put them in a nice plastic dust jacket, weren't you?

    --saint

  34. Pronounciation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really, I gotta know, how is this stuff pronounced? I mean, I've picked up the hard "g" in guh-nu and guh-nome, but do I say "kwerd" and "cough-iss" or what?

    Of course, Killustrator, before its trademark difficulties was obviously pronounced "KILL-ulstrator" for the best of reasons, it sounded so damn cool.

    -AC/

  35. Re:Powerpoint files? - Automated conversion? by tzanger · · Score: 2

    The way it's setup here, it works with anything that can print. We do use AutoCAD LT 98 with it too. It's quite transparent for the users, and for the application.

    nonono... this is for an automated system in our intranet. i.e. customer wants to see/play with drawing without downloading the entire thing. Yeah I know Acrobat creator can print to pdf; that's not quite what we need (unless it is perhaps possible to script it out from a network connection...)

    The problem with the readers (voloview et al) is that they only work for Windows; there's no decent dwg viewer for Linux that I have been able to find, so I'm trying to find a good convertor. :-)

  36. I Confuse Your Brain by philovivero · · Score: 1

    I use GNOME. I've used GNOME for more than a year. I never use KDE.

    KDE rocks. KDE is wonderful. KDE is great.

    This is not sarcasm. I will explain no further.

    --
    fifth sigma, inc.
  37. Re:KWord can be a good rival to Framemaker /Publis by KevinDumpsCore · · Score: 1

    > Personally I still prefer LyX for large technical documents...

    > Same thing goes for document formatting... LyX with LaTex as it's backend may be different from commerical apps, it works like a charm

    In my experience, LaTeX sucks with large documents! I have been struggling with a 600+ page user's manual. Whenever I exceed 620 pages, it dumps mad core. I keep getting the cryptic error messages like "max strings exceeded".

    Changing my texmf.cnf is useless. The limits are hard-coded into TeX. So much for TeX being bug-free!

    So now I am faced with having to hack a big convoluted mess of code that isn't even written in a normal programming language! It's "literate programming" or something... Whatever.

    LaTeX definitely doesn't work like a charm for large documents!

  38. Re:KWord can be a good rival to Framemaker /Publis by _Quinn · · Score: 1

    Hey, stupid question time: is there a 'I'm a doofus' LyX-equivalent for making style files? Something that would, e.g., work like FrameMaker except without any content tools, so one talented designer could take care of formatting automagically?

    -_Quinn

    --
    Reality Maintenance Group, Silver City Construction Co., Ltd.
  39. File Format Middleware by wrinkledshirt · · Score: 1
    Conceivably, yeah. You could produce a sort of MS Office plug-in that would have a Save As XML file or a Import XML file, and use VBA (or VB with the various MS Office objects) to handle the conversions for you.

    Problems:
    1. I can't imagine it would be very quick.
    2. The different MS Office objects can be a real pain in the ass to navigate, even in stupid-proof languages like VB, and techniques that you'd think would be similar between the different Objects (Word, Excel, Outlook, etc.) really aren't at all.
    3. Implementation of such a plug-in would be a pain. Do-able, but managing MS Office applications in this way is really frustrating (look no further than Word's template system, blech).
    4. Conversion policies. In the end, it would take a long time and a lot of research to not only figure out how it would be done, but determine what sort of end-product you wanted to end up with. Converting to and from a common and open file format would be the best, but designing that file format would be a pain.
    5. VBA. Unless you've got something on the other end that has identical scripting to Word's, importing and exporting macros would be a pain. And it doesn't take long for someone to discover how helpful macros can be and lock them into MS Office for life.
    6. Microsoft itself. All they have to do is tweak the file format a little, or leave out a few goodies in its API, or decide not to document everything about its core objects, or service pack their latest releases, and all of a sudden we're back at square one. Well, maybe not square one, but can you think of any company out there who's going to dedicate their entire existence to keeping us up to date on this sort of stuff? Not when there's the (unfortunately) more practical choice to just keep everything MS Office...
    7. OLE. I can't imagine that there's going to be any easy way to have a Word office with an Excel spreadsheet embedded in it and convert it to a KWord document with a KSpread object embedded in it.

    I remember thinking this would be a great idea if people could embrace an XML based office-software-based data file format. But then again, it would also be great if there were no war, no starvation, free beer, etc. etc.
    --

    --------
    Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...

  40. I Fuck Your Brain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use KDE. I've used KDE for more than a year. I never use GNOME.

    KDE rocks. KDE is wonderful. KDE is great.

    This is not sarcasm. I will explain no further.

  41. Games? by krmt · · Score: 2

    On the subject of gaming, how is it you're going about playing windows games? I'd like to make the final switch, and now that I've finally used SO 6 (which rocks my world, aside from needing to disable the damned help system) I don't really need Windows for much besides games.

    So, are you using transmeta, wine, or something I'm not aware of? I'd love to get some advice on this one. The more I move to Linux, the happier I am.

    --

    "I may not have morals, but I have standards."

    1. Re:Games? by Wee · · Score: 2
      On the subject of gaming, how is it you're going about playing windows games?

      I mostly play native ports. I buy just about every game Loki releases. I'm a sucker. I even bought SiN even thoiugh it won't work with NVidia cards. I also use Transgaming's WineX. It supports quite a few Win32-only games (like Age of Empires). It won't work with DirectX8 games, however, but support is coming.

      I used my PC for games about 60% of the time I was in front of it when it had Windows and Linux on it. Now that Windows is gone, I find myself reading Perlmonks or looking at freshmeat stuff more often than I used to. I'm happy I switched.

      -B

      --

      Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

  42. Re:KWord can be a good rival to Framemaker /Publis by NightWhistler · · Score: 1

    I must admit, I've never written anything that large... I wonder what would happen if you tried to load that big succer into Word... ;-)
    *Crash & Burn baby!*

    --
    PageTurner Reader: open-source e-reader for Android with cloudsync. http://pageturner-reader.org
  43. Re:Powerpoint files? - Automated conversion? by Seanasy · · Score: 2

    I don't anything about AutoCad, dwg or dxf but I noticed this on apps.kde.com the other day:

    Linux Drawing Viewer
  44. CSS Paged Media by yerricde · · Score: 1

    If basing it arond a page is necessary RTF is probably the best - otherwise I'd stick with XHTML+CSS.

    What about XHTML+CSS Paged Media?

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  45. KWord's Word output filter by yerricde · · Score: 1

    *BUT* there is no Word *output* filter, which unfortunately makes it almost totally useless to me.

    To output a Word document from KWord:
    1. Save your document as RTF.
    2. Append the .doc extension.
    3. Open it in Word.

    It works.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  46. Re:Powerpoint files? - Automated conversion? by jsveiga · · Score: 1

    Yeah I know Acrobat creator can print to pdf

    I'm not using Acrobat creator, but ghostscript's ps2pdf on a linux box. A virtual smb shared printer (a perl program) processes the files with ps2pdf.

    customer wants to see/play with drawing

    The conversion keeps the DWG "vectoriness" so the person seeing it (with pdf reader on any platform) can see/zoom quite a lot. No layer playing though.

    without downloading the entire thing

    You want the user to be able to download just a piece of a drawing, containing the area he wants to view? No way AFAIK. How would (s)he know what's the desired area without first downloading it all to have a "bird's eye view" of the whole?

    ..can print to pdf; that's not quite what we need (unless it is perhaps possible to script it out from a network connection...)

    If with "scripting out" you mean making the conversion on demand according to a web interface selection, then I guess you'll need the help of a windows box to open and print (convert) the files, if the available linux CAD program which can read DWG aren't compatible enough for your files. But you can also have all DWGs converted to PDF first, and just "refresh" them from time to time, which would be faster.

    ...I'm trying to find a good convertor. :-)

    If pdf is not quite what you need, what other cross-platform, free-viewer, open, established format do you want to convert the DWGs to? If pdf IS quite what you need, then ps2pdf is a good converter (not as good as Acrobat IMHO, but that's a matter of time, I guess).

  47. Return to Format Hell by fm6 · · Score: 2
    Not off topic at all. Most people who consider KOffice are going to ask "What do I do with all my MS Office files?" Though it would have aided continuity if you'd raised this question here.

    Anyway, scriptability is kind of beside the point. Yes, you can use VB (or any other COM-aware language) to access the data in MS-office files. But that doesn't really solve any major problems. There are any number of ways to access this data. Sometimes COM scripting is the easiest way, but it's never the only way.

    So if getting the data out of the files isn't a problem, what is? The problem is that the data is extremely complex. There's all kinds of information embedded in the file -- font names, paragraph parameters, widow-orphan control, stylesheet definitions... You can get a taste of how complex Office documents are by looking at the specification for Rich Text Format, which attempts (not always successfully) to represent a Microsoft Word file in plain text. It's also instructive to dump a Word document to HTML. Use Word 2K or XP -- earlier versions didn't preserve as much formatting detail.

    To have a reliable two-way exchange between two word processors, you have to define and implement a mapping between every possible combination of text and formatting in one WP to the some combination in the other WP. And that mapping has to be one to one! Otherwise people can't trade their documents without losing stuff.

    It can't be done. It requires that the two WPs have roughly equivalent feature sets, which is unheard of. And even if you can somehow force your users to stick to a common feature subset, implementing the mapping is mind-bogglingly complex.

    The basic problem is documents that intermingle content and formatting. Once you separate content and formatting (using, for example, XML for content and XSL or CSS for formatting) you've drastically simplified the problem, and you can start talking about application-independent documents.

  48. Re:Windows/Office XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what the fuck would you know about it, shitface?