Slashdot Mirror


New York Times Plugs OpenOffice Suite

MrNovember writes "The New York Times (registration blah blah) describes a new choice for office suites. The writer seems a bit slanted toward OpenOffice but it's a fair discussion of its pros and cons. The article has identified some interesting compatibility issues to those who aren't using OpenOffice but might. Again we see major media discussing open source as an actual alternative to a longstanding standard. The article concludes amusingly with 'Every now and then, you get what you don't pay for;' just tack on 'Open Source' to the beginning for the perfect sig." We've gotten numerous submissions recently from people whose [company/school/whatever] is switching to OpenOffice.

148 of 411 comments (clear)

  1. perfect sig? by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Interesting

    'Open source every now and then, you get what you don't pay for'

    ;-P

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  2. economics of software by crumbz · · Score: 2

    this reminds me of an article that Nicolas Negroponte wrote back in 1995 in Wired. Once the initial cost of production is re-couped, the cost for another copy of software (or any digital artifact) is near zero. with colloborative software being written and distributed for almost nothing, I wonder how long proprietary software (or closed-source) can truly survive (and make money for the publisher). Open source gaming anyone?

    1. Re:economics of software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I doubt programmers want to really give up the salaries they make now, and additionally, production costs for something like a game are astronomical due to the large corpus of people needed to put it together (artists, designers, etc. Thus, I do not see it likely that these initial production costs being recouped tending towards zero anytime soon.

    2. Re:economics of software by queequeg1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You also have to take into account the possibility of failures and delays (sort of like drug companies). Although on a much lesser scale, how many DaiKraptana's can a game company experience before it has to jack up the cost of its decent games indefinitely. Without extended high game costs, how do you think 3DRealms could support a development schedule for Duke Nukem Forever that will probably provide employment for the current developers' children?

    3. Re:economics of software by Dionysus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Open Source works great for common software. Specialized software will always be propriatery (Thinking of the Unicenter, OpenView of the world).

      How many geeks are going to write software they're not going to use themselves?

      --
      Je ne parle pas francais.
    4. Re:economics of software by markbthomas · · Score: 2

      In fact you could say in these circumstances, free (as in speech) software is where you really do get what you pay for. Consider:

      Proprietary situation: Company X pays Company M $10,000 to write a program for them. What Company X actually get is a licence to use the program Company M wrote, which still belongs to company M. If it goes wrong, or they want it updated, then they have to pay whatever Company A want for it.

      Free situation: Company Y pays Company G $10,000 to write a program for them. They get the source code for the program, and the right to do whatever they want with it (after all, they paid for it). If they want an upgrade, then they can ask company G, H, J, K or L to do it, or they can do it themselves, whichever is cheapest.

      I know what I'd prefer if I were a manager.

    5. Re:economics of software by jandrese · · Score: 2

      While I'm normally an open-source advocate, I have trouble with this line of reasoning. Do you really expect a programmer to be able to write an MS-Word compatabile word processor for a mere $10k? If the programmer has a moderate-low income (for this area) of 50k/year, your $10k will give you approximately 2.4 man months worth of effort. You would be lucky to get a text window you can print from and change the font in that timeframe. Granted you would have the (probablly poorly-debugged) source to your crappy word processor, but what good that do for you?

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    6. Re:economics of software by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 2

      Not quite. The first copy of the software has all the costs of development, regardless of whether costs have been recouped or not. The _marginal_ cost of the second copy of the software is near zero: copy the manual, burn another CD, ftp from a server.

      Each copy of software also carries support costs. The more copies sold, the more people will call your support lines.

      The challenge for the software publisher is to price software so that enough customers buy it to cover the cost of development.

    7. Re:economics of software by johnnyb · · Score: 2

      How many geeks are going to write software they're not going to use themselves?

      *********

      Just because they would get paid doesn't mean it's not open-source. A number of people are employed producing open software for others. This is especially useful when the customer is a group rather than individuals.

      For example, if the artist's guild wanted to fund development of a better graphics package, it would likely be open-source, and the programmers would be paid. This would benefit everyone immensely.

  3. Brings a smile to my face. by YanceyAI · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sometimes I derive great pleasure thinking of Microsoft lawyers running around saying, "Hey wait, who can we sue!?" and MS lackies running around going, "Hey wait, how can we run those Open Source people outta business!?"

    Must be hard to compete with a good, free product minus draconian licensing. It's just beautiful man.

    --
    Can I bum a sig?
    1. Re:Brings a smile to my face. by mikosullivan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It brings a smile to my face too. MS is in a frustrating (for them) spot because they do in fact get it: they know that open source is a threat, they know why people like it, they are ready and willing to do whatever it takes to fight... they just can't figure out what to do. It's like the master buggy-maker watching Henry Ford set up shop.

      --
      Miko O'Sullivan
    2. Re:Brings a smile to my face. by dslbrian · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually this is quite fitting. MS put Netscape out of business by giving away a web browser for free, which worked directly against their main source of income. Now OpenOffice, by giving away an office suite for free, is going to hit MS right in one of their main sources of income. MS can't complain, after all they proved how well it works! Goes to show - what goes around, comes around...

    3. Re:Brings a smile to my face. by alienmole · · Score: 2
      they are ready and willing to do whatever it takes to fight...

      Actually, no, they're not. What it's going to take is for Microsoft to stop behaving like an exploitative monopoly that has been able to use its illegal position to continually reap excess profit from its market. But if its profit reduces significantly and permanently, the stock will tank, and that's going to hurt the stockholders, big time.

      No-one at Microsoft is ready or willing to step forward and say "yup, I guess our glory days are over, let's start competing fairly now." Instead, they're going to go down kicking and screaming.

      There is at least one person at Microsoft who knows what the deal is, though: why do you think Bill Gates stepped down as President? He got out (back into R&D) at a point a bit past the top of his game. The government lawsuit forced him to realize that there was nowhere to go but down.

    4. Re:Brings a smile to my face. by johnnyb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The interesting thing about Microsoft is that until now, they've been able to beat their competitors without talking about them. They always compare the new releases of each software package to _their_ old releases, and just pretend the competitor doesn't exist.

      Until now, the customer has had little way of knowing there is competition.

      Now, with Linux/Open-source, Microsoft is in a position where they have to compete directly. This means their marketing material will probably have to mention Linux. And with each mention, Linux will gain more and more headway, because it is big enough to be in Microsoft's marketing material.

      It's pretty sweet for those of us in open-source.

  4. OpenOffice XML file by RickHigh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I like OpenOffice. I like the fact the files are just xml files in a zip file. The fileformat is easy to reverse engineer and use. I am a big fan.

  5. Append to the beginning by hopews · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is a word for that. It is prepend. If this were graded there would be a -1 Word Choice above that. Come on /. Editors.

    Sorry if I'm being pedantic.

  6. OpenOffice.org Compatibility by javajeff · · Score: 4, Informative

    I find the compatibility to be great with the exception of bullets. A bulleted list in OpenOffice.org will not appear like one opened in Word. However, a bulleted list in Word will appear as a bulleted list in OpenOffice.org. Aside from bullets, OpenOffice.org performs great with tables, spreadsheets, presentations, and documents. I have not tested any documents that contain macros or advanced formulas, since I rarely use those features. OpenOffice.org is great for users with basic needs.

    Since my resume contains bullets, I have not been able to uninstall Word. OpenOffice.org is my default application for all Office filetypes.

    Regards,

    javajeff

    1. Re:OpenOffice.org Compatibility by jdgreen7 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is a slight incompatibility between Excel documents that contain the "VLOOKUP()", "HLOOKUP()", or "LOOKUP()" commands. OpenOffice implements them exactly as Microsoft has described them, however, Excel has a slightly different implementation than described.

      If you're looking for a number in OO, and one of the cells in your range contains text, the LOOKUP command will return an error. But, Excel just ignores it. Since my company has a number of older Excel documents that use that feature, we'd have to change them all in order for OO to work for us. Until then, we have to stick with MS.

      I am working on changing those processes and spreadsheets, but it'll take a while before we're able to switch. I really do like OO, but until they either change the implementation (I submitted a bug, but the closed it as "RESOLVED"), or I change the files, we can't use it company-wide.

    2. Re:OpenOffice.org Compatibility by unixmaster · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is known and fixed on openoffice.org cvs. Just check http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2 199

      --
      Never learn by your mistakes, if you do you may never dare to try again
    3. Re:OpenOffice.org Compatibility by sean23007 · · Score: 2

      I've noticed that about bullets, too, but I find that OpenOffice does a better job of them than MS-Office. I mean, it's more intuitive to use the bullets (if you're doing a whole lot of them) in OOo than in MS. But you're right, they could work on the OOo->MS compatibility in this area.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    4. Re:OpenOffice.org Compatibility by markbthomas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or you could grab the source and patch it :)

      If you don't know how then I'm sure an OOo hacker would do it for a cash donation.

  7. Good Way to Promote OSS by Rob.Mathers · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think that this is one of the best ways to promote awareness of OSS. I know many people who are somewhat computer savvy, they know enough that they don't mind trying new things, but they don't seek this sort of stuff out. They don't read all sorts of tech sites, but they do read newspapers. If we could get more coverage of OSS in the tech sections of every day newspapers (most ones that I know have a small tech section in with the business section, or a once a week all-tech section), we could slowly increase awareness of stuff like OpenOffice and Linux.

    --

    My other sig is funny!
  8. NYT Random Login Generator by blackeye · · Score: 4, Interesting
  9. Reg Free Link by ALoverOfPeace · · Score: 2, Informative

    link (it fills out the form and refers you, it's not a trick)

    1. Re:Reg Free Link by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2
      And it never works for me. I've tried it with Netscape and now Mozilla, and it always points me to http://www.nytimes.com/regi with all the fields blank. Does it need MSIE to work?

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    2. Re:Reg Free Link by Archie+Steel · · Score: 2

      When you get to the registration page, just hit "reload", and the page should load fine.

      --

      Reminder: find a new sig
  10. You Get What You Don't Pay For? by namespan · · Score: 2

    Every now and then, you get what you don't pay for

    This is close, but it's not quite right. The correct principle is: you get what the people you patronize want to provide.

    We often forget this in a world that's interested in repeating the "customer is king" mantra.

    --
    Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
  11. installed last night.. by josepha48 · · Score: 4, Informative
    I downloaded this a few days ago and last night I finally installed it. I tested it out on the few word docs and excel spreadsheets I have at home. It worked okay, but then I do not do that much with word and my word and excel docs do not test many features. I do more with email and html.

    So far it starts up quicker than staroffice and there is no so desktop which is nice. It failed to recognize my jvm during the install, but I'm not that bothered by that just yet. I am using it on Linux and installed it as root, and ran into a problem with permissions it seems. I had to change ownership to (chown -R : ) to then run it as myself. It would start up and then crash right away until I did this. Or I could run it as root. Not sure why though, and now I dont care as it works. It does use lots of disk space but then so does MS office and SO 5.x. So far I am pleased with it, as it gives me yet another option to deaeling with MS docs and excel spread sheets... I give it a thumbs up ;-)

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!

    1. Re:installed last night.. by sean23007 · · Score: 2

      When you install it, the command you should type in is:
      setup /net
      Then go through the setup program, get it where you want it, and then log in as yourself and run setup again, this time without the /net option. It will set up a folder in your home directory that OOo uses when it starts up.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    2. Re:installed last night.. by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      that's because you installed it wrong...

      setup -n

      let it go but chooese /usr/share/oo for install dir.

      then log off and login as you.
      go to /usr/share/oo and run setup...

      now you're cooking.... thats how you do a multi-user install... which is what you were trying to do as you installed it as root.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:installed last night.. by josepha48 · · Score: 2

      I'm the only user so I was not trying a multi user install, I just wanted it installed on a directory that was owned by root (/opt) at the time which is why I chaned the permissions. Nobody logs onto my machine but me.

      --

      Only 'flamers' flame!

    4. Re:installed last night.. by josepha48 · · Score: 2

      setup /net, setup -n /install -net , install /net none of them worked on so 1.0. I had to run setup and then chown like I initially stated..

      --

      Only 'flamers' flame!

    5. Re:installed last night.. by sean23007 · · Score: 2

      Hmm... you seem to be talking about SO, not OOo, but in OOo, you have to run the setup program twice. Once with the /net option, as root, then log out and log back in as your user and run setup again, without the /net option. I was having the exact same problem you described, and I tried chown, but was unsatisfied with that as a remedy. This method works, at least for OpenOffice.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    6. Re:installed last night.. by josepha48 · · Score: 2

      Actually I am talking about open office and it did not work for me. That method actually worked in startoffice 5.2 for me but not in open office 1.0

      --

      Only 'flamers' flame!

    7. Re:installed last night.. by sean23007 · · Score: 2

      OK. I'm just saying, it worked for me with Open Office 1.0.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    8. Re:installed last night.. by josepha48 · · Score: 2

      I found out that the problem was that after I chowned the file and ran open office as my user it created a 'dot file'. This dot file was why I could not do a net install. After removing the dot file aI deleted the install and then edited the install scipt to install in OpenOffice instead of OpenOffice.org1.0 (or whatever). Then I ran the script and then loged in as my user and ran the set up and then it worked. I really think that they should redo that setup program such that logged in as root you run the setup and it gives you the option in the GUI of net or none net. Then the first time that your run the program it creates the stuff in the home directory and all. Like most other programs do. This would be to confusing I think for new UNIX users.

      --

      Only 'flamers' flame!

    9. Re:installed last night.. by sean23007 · · Score: 2

      You're right about that. A new convert to linux would not want to deal with something like that. There should be a toggle in the gui setup program. Maybe in 1.1

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
  12. MicroSoft's cash cow and achille heel by peter303 · · Score: 2

    Businesses and people buy MS software mainly for the intergrated office applications, then are forced to buy Windows and networking applications to support it. If anyone could seriously dent this, then MS could be on its way out.

    Remember, MS changes stripes each decade. 75-85 it was a languages company, then became an OS company, then became a business software company. Lotus, Word Perfect, and Harvard Graphics "owned" the business app sector before MS did. Now MS is trying to become a personal entertainment company- games, digital TV, ISP ...

  13. Linux + OpenOffice IS ready for the desktop by bigjocker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is a fact. I have helped almost all my family (no geeks in there) migrate from Windows + MSOffice to Linux + OpenOffice with no side effects. If you install a nice system, and add the OpenOffice icon to the KDE desktop, you are done.

    How many times does your mom install a new printer? even when she had Windows and she got a new LaserJet she called me!. We all know all the people and institutions that are migrating towards Linux and OO, its just a matter of time to see it as a mainstream.

    On the other hand, it would come handy if the WalMart Mandrake PCs come with StarOffice preinstalled and with a HUGE icon in the middle of the desktop for all users.

    --
    Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow.
    1. Re:Linux + OpenOffice IS ready for the desktop by KjetilK · · Score: 3, Informative
      I just did the same thing, and I have major pains. I'm in it for the freedom, so it is OK by me. My parent's had an easy choice too: "well, you could stick to your old win95 computer, but you would not get any support from neither MS nor me"...

      I'm on Debian Woody, and I've been fiddling with both KDE 2.2.2 and 3. Configuring the HP OfficeJet T65 is a major pain. I have an ad hoc-solution now that works OK on PS files. But those PS files created by KWord look nothing like they did on screen, and often, some of the words are lost at the end of lines.

      I haven't got OpenOffice to import anything but it's native format. Is there some kind of subprocess that is supposed to do the filtering, that just dies? It's a hell to debug this stuff.

      The really bad thing is though that this box is not on the net right now, so it is too hard to get to the docs and to the updates. Last night, I burnt OO debs on a CD, and when I got home, it turned out that the CD was corrupted.... Arrrrgh!

      Well, I'm going to quite a lot of pain, some of it is definately not Linux' fault, but I think that if I hadn't been into it for freedom, I wouldn't have bothered.

      Freedom is still Linux major selling point.

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
    2. Re:Linux + OpenOffice IS ready for the desktop by MeNeXT · · Score: 2
      Stable Windows?


      Intuitive Windows?


      All I can sys is that I love the stability of Linux, FreeBSD and MAC OS X. As far as intuitive goes its a question of what you are used to.


      What I love about X on Linux and FreeBSD is the desktops. If you need to work on more than one app at a time and to cut and paste between apps nothing beats X.


      As far as stability goes, I only reboot when I install new hardware or upgrade the system to a new version about once or twice a year.

      --
      DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
    3. Re:Linux + OpenOffice IS ready for the desktop by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 2
      To properly handle footnotes, citations, tables of contents, figures, tables &c, simply use LaTeX. LaTeX documents are simple ASCII files with markup which specifies what is going on. Your footnotes would be marked up as \footnote{\cite{horst-patterns}, pg.~4} or something similar.

      I did all my papers my senior year of college in LaTeX. Best decision I ever made.

    4. Re:Linux + OpenOffice IS ready for the desktop by raistlinne · · Score: 2

      Why are you using woody for newbies? Well, if you're administering it than it's not a big deal, but still. Debian is just about the least user-friendly of the distros (my favorite, but still not user-friendly).

      How are you trying to configure your printer? Did you use printtool? Or what about foomatic? The linuxprinting.org page lists it as mostly working. I strongly suggest going a foomatic route if you can, it makes installing printers very easy.

      --
      They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- C. Sagan
    5. Re:Linux + OpenOffice IS ready for the desktop by FattMattP · · Score: 2

      Linux won't be ready for the desktop until there's a unified cut and paste across all of the applications. Cutting from one application and then not being able to paste into another is a big problem.

      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    6. Re:Linux + OpenOffice IS ready for the desktop by johnnyb · · Score: 2

      I used to use LaTeX until I found DocBook. It's a little hard to set up, but the results are excellent. It also has a much better separation between content and presentation.

    7. Re:Linux + OpenOffice IS ready for the desktop by jelle · · Score: 2

      "I'm on Debian Woody"

      They have me on that too, and they say it will reduce my dependencies.

      --
      --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
  14. Reluctance to Open Office by totallygeek · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I have been trying for a long time to get my office to consider Star Office, and now Open Office. We have continued licensing issues with Microsoft, and have even received (what I term as) threatening letters from law firms stating that we need to "double check" our licensing. Their suspect? Well, we purchased 300+ copies of MS Office 95, and upgraded them all later to MS Office 97, but we didn't jump to MS Office 2000 and now MS Office XP. So, Microsoft figures that we are using the new version and not paying....


    Long and short, articles like this help my case that Open Office is becoming more mainstream. I love it!

  15. Sleeping giant? by Sneftel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Interesting that the reviewer chose to focus on the OpenOffice flavor rather than the StarOffice flavor, given that large corporations (Sun's sugar daddies) would be much more likely to stampede for corporate support--and corporate name recognition.

    I think OpenOffice shows a lot of promise in the windows world, but I wonder how long it'll take for Microsoft Word to obfuscate its file format (it's pretty obfuscated as is, but I get the feeling they have not yet begun to fight). Far too often, it's convenience that rules the day; despite the fact that RTF is still a darn good format, people save in Microsoft Word 2008.324 .DOC format and then kvetch when Word 2008.323 can't read it. OpenOffice is trying to beat Word at its own game, but I frankly don't think all of that is sustainable. We will see encrypted document files, and even more draconian EULAs from Microsoft; I only hope that some corporations are willing to take the plunge and become vendor-independent.

    --
    The opinions stated herein do not necessarily represent those of anybody at all. Deal with it.
    1. Re:Sleeping giant? by sulli · · Score: 2

      Free is a helluva lot more interesting than cheap. Same reason nobody gives a fuck about Opera but Mozilla 1.0 (which actually works, shocker!) is getting tons of press.

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
    2. Re:Sleeping giant? by L.+VeGas · · Score: 2

      We will see encrypted document files

      hmmm, that's interesting. You mean files that could only be opened with MS Office? I can certainly envision a cat and mouse game of office documents between MS and open source, much like the RIAA / Valenti vs. practically everyone wars going on now. Wonder who would win?

    3. Re:Sleeping giant? by Ig0r · · Score: 2

      Who would win?

      Certainly not the users, and someday they may realize this.

      --
      Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
    4. Re:Sleeping giant? by ninewands · · Score: 2
      We will see encrypted document files
      hmmm, that's interesting. You mean files that could only be opened with MS Office?

      Even more interesting will be the litigation that would ensue if a large corp. decided to migrate from, say, MSOffice to OpenOffice.org and MS refused to assist them in decrypting their documents ...

      BigCorp CEO: "Mr. Gates, what do you MEAN that your right to keep my business overrides MY right to have access my own company's files?"

    5. Re:Sleeping giant? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 2

      File format is the name of the game.

      If OpenOffice.org manages to stablish its own, open, publicly available format then MS may be forced to support it.

      I as far as I am concerned will not need to buy overpriced software anymore if there are options that gurantee I will read my documents when and where I needed it.

      --
      IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  16. Re:perfect sig? addendum! by Telastyn · · Score: 5, Funny

    Spam: every now and then, you get what you don't pay for

    Pr0n: every now and then, you get what you don't pay for

    Warez:every now and then, you get what you don't pay for...

  17. Open Office Pre-installed from OEM by dlur · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We're a small tier OEM, and myself and another tech have convinced 'those that be' within our company to include Open Office on our low end systems instead of MS Worksuite 2002 OEM.

    Unfortunately the systems still come with MS Windows XP Home on them, but at least it's a step in the right direction. All of us techs now have Open Office installed on our computers and use it for pretty much all of our office app needs except for a few Excel quote sheets that have embedded macros that don't seem to function properly.

    So far we've had no complaints from any customers that have purchased these systems, but then again we've gotten no rave reviews either. I would definately say that it is an option though, at least for people who aren't tied directly into the MS specifics of the different file formats. Anyone who just wants to use a word processor, spreadsheet, presentation software and do thier work from scratch should be more than happy with this software.

    --
    Duris MUD - The best pkill MUD. Ever.
    1. Re:Open Office Pre-installed from OEM by HiThere · · Score: 2

      Actually, that's a big step in the right direction. That means that you can move between OSs without any document conversion (doesn't it? Or are there font problems?)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:Open Office Pre-installed from OEM by Zathrus · · Score: 2

      Welcome to the real world.

      It's not about "Microsoft wins" or "OpenSource wins" it's about doing your work in the most effective and cost effective way possible.

      Hopefully the OP's company will be able to convert their spreadsheets over to OOo -- but if they have too many spreadsheets that are heavily macro'd it may not be cost effective to do so -- regardless of the price structure of the suites themselves.

      People need to get their head out of their ass when it comes to things like this. The computer is a tool, not a political statement. And people simply want to get their job done, not fight with the computer over how they should do it. OOo is great (I use it at home), but if it doesn't do what you need then get something that does.

  18. There's only 2 major gripes for the linux version by Bollie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1. Ugly fonts
    2. Can't read ALL the Word documents
    3. Still a bit sluggish

    Three! I mean three major gripes!

    Seriously, font ugliness is a big problem under linux and it's all X's fault. You've seen the hundreds of people gawking at anti-aliased desktops, it just looks cooler.

    I believe there are many articles on exactly why fonts are ugly in linux... I also believe that the lack of cool, MS-compatible fonts (let's face it guys, Truetype was one thing MS carried from Win 3.1 to Win XP for a reason) are because of licensing issues.

    The next time a big company wants to donate money to open source, get them to design or fund fonts! That'll get Linux on the desktop. That'll cause secretaries to use OpenOffice and that'll make me happy.

    'nuff said.

  19. Nice to think about what's happening in Microsoft by pubjames · · Score: 3, Funny
    Somewhere in a Microsoft meeting room there's a whiteboard with this written on it:

    Defeating Linux and open source apps - strategy
    • identify strengths and weaknesses of opponent (done)
    • ???
    • Defeat linux and open source!
    They must be tearing their hair out. Nelson "Ha Ha".

  20. Re:Batch-mode Converters? by Verteiron · · Score: 5, Informative

    I don't know about VBA from Office, but OpenOffice has an Autopilot that does mass conversions. Run OO's word processor, go to File, Autopilot, Document Converter. Seems to work pretty well for me. It also imports templates and such and automagically guesses where you're keeping most of your Word files.

    --
    End of lesson. You may press the button.
  21. Comparison of how MS & OO handle the same docu by sootman · · Score: 4, Informative

    here is a page I made showing how Windows/MSOffice, Windows/OO, Linux/OO, and Mac/MSOffice handle the same document--a document, as it happens, that comes straight from Microsoft.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  22. OpenOffice.org, not OpenOffice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's OpenOffice.org, not OpenOffice, OpenOffice is trademarked.

    From the faq: 8. Why should we say "OpenOffice.org" instead of simply "OpenOffice"?

  23. Hope they help... by supabeast! · · Score: 2

    "We've gotten numerous submissions recently from people whose [company/school/whatever] is switching to OpenOffice."

    Hopefully some of those companies that are now saving many thousands of dollars by running OpenOffice (Especially the largeer firms/localities.) will consider hiring a developer to kick in some work on OpenOffice. Even if only a dozen companies worldwide did it, OpenOffice would suddenly get a huge boost of forward momentum.

  24. great trick by Kallahar · · Score: 5, Informative

    One great trick I found for converting excel files to HTML files. Excel does an awful job, writing an html page 10 times the size it needs to be, and the code is IE-centric. However, openoffice can open .xls files, and then save as html, and it outputs nicely formatted, standard HTML at very respectable sizes.

    Travis

  25. What is the percentage of "power" users? by burgburgburg · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Has anyone ever done a survey of what percentage of Microsoft Office users fit into the category of "power" users; i.e. consistently using what most consider the obscure tools/scripts/functions?

    I don't use Word much and I personally probably approach 5% of the potential functionality. I just recently was sharing a Word doc that I had added comments with (using their functionality for, not just writing them in). None of the recipients knew how to find my comments and they wanted to know why I had hilited some words (mousing over the hilite brings up my comment).

  26. Well... by Arminius · · Score: 2

    Working at a large Sun shop we have been evaluating Star Office 6, but even at a cheep $76 a copy price it still gets expensive when you are talking about 1000+ licences. Open Office 1.0 is looking like a better deal everyday.

    --

    ------
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    1. Re:Well... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sun has Enterprise licenses that drops the per-user cost the more licenses you buy. They have various levels from $50/user for 150 users to $25/user for 10,000 users. At 1,000 users, a company would pay $40,000 ($40 per user). (SOURCE: http://www.sun.com/service/support/sw_only/star_pr ogovw.html click on "StarOffice 6.0 Licenses")

      I couldn't find MS's volume licensing, but even if they gave a huge discount from retail (say 75%off the retail price of $450 for Office XP Standard), the 1,000 user company would still wind up paying $112,500.

      In other words, Star Office would save the 1,000 user company $72,500. (Companies might shy away from the free Open Office because there's no official support channels whereas you can call up Sun with tech support inquiries.)

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:Well... by Arminius · · Score: 2

      Yes I realize this. We actually could get the $25 a copy. But my point was that $0 $25. Don't matter, we will end up with the Star Office instead just because of the Sun support we would get with it.

      --

      ------
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  27. Not surprised... by pinkpineapple · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I spent already a couple of times registring my legit copy of MS Word 2002 talking to MS droids on the phone to get a new activation key. The people were nice and all was done smoothly (for the exception of spelling 2 numbers of 50 digits each on the phone which took 10 minutes each time) but the pain it takes just to be able to reinstall a software I pay for is just one last drop I can think would move people to Open Source. It's this feeling of making me look like a thief begging for a new key that tells me that MS is not making it easy for people to stick with their products. Not to mention the time you have to waste each time just to be "granted" the right to you MS products.

    PPA, the girl next door.

    --
    -- I feel better now. Thanks for asking.
    1. Re:Not surprised... by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 2

      "-- I feel better now. Thanks for asking."

      You're quite welcome.

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
  28. GNOME OOo users: That stupid exit-on-startup bug by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 5, Informative

    To my fellow OOo users running under GNOME, you may have encountered a problem where the program will often fail to start properly. This is not a crash. OOo is simply being purged by the GNOME session manager due to its relatively long startup time. I was a bit surprised to encounter this problem in 1.0, having thought it an OO bug. However, this article led me to search Issuezilla for a solution, which thankfully was determined.

    There are a couple ways around the purge. The easiest one is to add "unset SESSION_MANAGER" to the soffice startup script. One file, all GNOME users happy. A somewhat more intrusive and wide-ranging solution is to add "exec $PATH_TO_GNOME-SESSION/gnome-session --purge-delay=0" to ~/.gnomerc. Supposedly, this will solve a similar problem with Opera, according to the bug comments.

    --

    Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
  29. Stellar Product by behrman · · Score: 3, Informative

    I wind up doing a lot of work with some larger spreadsheets (storage system implementation documentation), as well as some fairly massive CSV imports from perl scripts. I haven't needed to do a lot of formulas/macros in the spreadsheet (since most of my spreadsheets are a result of perl scripts, I just make the script do it!), however, I've found that OOo has wound up working much much better than Excel for me. It's faster, it has better importing, great interoperability with my cow'orkers using Office, and the file sizes are smaller. Plus, I can install a copy on my laptop, both work desktops, and my three PCs at home (running Win2k, WinXp, and Linux across the 6 boxes that I use) without any fear of Microsoft Visual Gestappo Suite XP coming down on me, or my employer. I've been playing around with StarOffice for the last few versions and found it a bit cumbersome and broken (imports not working right, limited versions of Office formats to export to, really slow on my dual P2-233 linux box). OpenOffice, however, has completely impressed me.

  30. Re:perfect sig? The coin Flips.. by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2
    Windows: every now and then, you don't get what you do pay for...

    --
    "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
  31. Economics 101 by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One wonders why the high-priced lawyers and accountants at MS and the BSA gestapo haven't figured this out.

    Econ 101 - consumers purchase things because they perceive value > total cost. If the VALUE of MS Office lies in its perceived ubiquity (since the software functions of the two products are practially the same), the moment that this "value" the opportunity or real costs of BSA Audits, harrassment, and the fear of that 'disgruntled employee' narc'ing sometime in the future, well DUH people are going to move away from these 'excessive costs' whenever they can.

    It's my conviction that the widespread piracy of Win95 (and thus its widespread adoption) KILLED an arguably better competitor, OS/2. If every single copy of Win95 had to be paid for (the theoretical goal) it would not be the dominant OS. The tighter they squeeze, the more systems will slip through their fingers, indeed.

    Sure piracy costs Microsoft; if IBM had recognized this at the time, and been handing out FREE OS/2 versions MS probably wouldn't have to spend the $$ to buy the Justice Dept today.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Economics 101 by HamNRye · · Score: 2

      I'll agree... I was intrigued by OS2 warp, much like everyone else, but with all of the Win95 installs I was doing after the initial launch, I had several copies of Win95 (warezed) and still have yet to come across that warezed OS2 disc...

      I loaded windows.

      The same goes for my linux boxen. Replace a $50 piece of hardware that won't work with Linux, or install that warezed XP Home... Not the same situation with you paying $200 to support a $50 piece of hardware.

      Oddly enough, with WPA here and in effect, there is actually a downside to having a legit copy of Windows. My corporate version has no WPA, just that same CD key as always. I would never buy a home edition and deal with WPA. First and formost, I cahnge hardware too often while testing for clients. Having to call MS each time is not an option.

      Had microsoft really been vigilant about protecting it's IP, They would have far less (valuable) IP to protect.

      Hammy

  32. Resumes by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 3, Informative
    A couple of Resume points:
    1. Employers are often willing to accept HTML format instead of Word format for resumes.
    2. Microsoft doesn't take Word format resumes on their website .. they insist on ASCII only. Now isn't that interesting?
    1. Re:Resumes by tclark · · Score: 3, Funny

      >Microsoft doesn't take Word format resumes on their website .. they insist on ASCII only. Now isn't that interesting?

      They're probably worried about getting macro viruses.

    2. Re:Resumes by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 2

      I have a handcoded html resume since I am a web designer. However, most of the headhunter type firms request Microsoft word format so that they can make edits and then send them to companies. HTML or PDF is fine if you are going to send resumes on your own, but .doc is necessary if you want to go through employment firms.

      Every headhunter I've worked with has been able to copy my resume from their web browser and paste it to a Word document. At least, they've stated as much.

      One other note. Many companies that I have seen advertise jobs also specify Word format. If you send them HTML or PDF, you do not look as good as if you actually complied with their request.

      This is a problem, I agree. However, I've gotten interviews with companies that specified Word format, after sending them an HTML document instead. When I explained that this was because I ran Linux at home and would have trouble with Word format for this reason, the HR person seemed understanding enough. It also helped slightly that the HTML was hand-coded. YMMV, as always.

  33. Ch ch ch changes... by pubjames · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I find it amazing that people can be so blind about how the Internet/web is affecting the fundamental economics of the software industry.

    I remember back when Microsoft were backslapping saying they had 'turned-on-a-dime' with regard to the Internet, and 'won' the browser wars by giving away IE. I remember thinking - this is the beginning of the end for you, mate. The day MS gave away IE was the start of a new epoch in the software industry which will result in the death of MS. Ironic.

    1. Re:Ch ch ch changes... by pubjames · · Score: 2

      Why has this been moderated as off-topic? I'm talking about how free software distributed over the internet like OpenOffice is changing the face of the software industry. I fail to see how that is off-topic.

    2. Re:Ch ch ch changes... by pubjames · · Score: 2

      You must think in decades-long timescales, since this is nowhere near happening.

      If you study history, you'll know that that's how long these changes take.

      "The reports of my death have been exaggerated." - Microsoft.

      Tick tock tick tock tick tock.

    3. Re:Ch ch ch changes... by alienmole · · Score: 2
      Probably because a Microsoft drone got mod points. Every now and then, I see evidence of that. They can't resist reading /., but they've been brainwashed into thinking what a neat company MS is and how misunderstood it is.

  34. Re:There's only 2 major gripes for the linux versi by Indras · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That'll get Linux on the desktop.

    How often have we heard this phrase.

    --
    The speed of time is one second per second.
  35. Re:There's only 2 major gripes for the linux versi by aWalrus · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I'm using mandrake 8.2, and I'm a compulsive font freak (I do web design work). We used to have Windows at work but then switched to linux, and I installed the truetype fonts I had in Windows (hundreds). 95% of them installed correctly and I use them everyday with the gimp. OpenOffice does support antialiased fonts, but for some reason it didn't grab the fonts installed in my system automatically (haven't fixed that yet, since I don't use it that much) and you're right, the fonts it has off-the-shelf are really ugly.


    Also, have you checked out nautilus? if you don't mind the occasional crash (it's improving) those fonts look nifty!

    --
    Overcaffeinated. Angry geeks.
  36. Who do you call for tech support? by Yekrats · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article poses the question, "Who do you call for tech support?" if your office suite breaks.

    That's the big bugaboo question with corporations: Who do we blame if something goes wrong? That's the question that MS wants to stick in your craw, to give the perception that open source software is unreliable.

    However, if you're using Microsoft products, when is the last time you got tech support from Microsoft? I've been supporting Microsoft products in a Helpdesk environment for over six years now. I have never even thought of support from Microsoft as much of an option. Am I missing something?

    I do know that every time I have submitted bug reports to Microsoft (which I've done on multiple occasions) the report seems to disappear into a black hole. I've never got even so much as an automatic confirmation or anything. And always, the suggestion to correct the bug has gone unanswered, with no bug fix. Yes, I rather resent the poor service back to me, when I was trying to help them.

    Every open source project I've submitted bug fixes for have almost always sent feedback back to me. Usually in the form of a personal email from the author. Now how's that for service?

    --Yekrats

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une pipe.
    1. Re:Who do you call for tech support? by flyfishin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As a personal user, even if you purchase MS Office you don't get support. You can go to a web page and look up info or call them at $??? per call for support. If you want a company behind your office productivity suite spend the bucks and get it from Sun. Most coporations would be inclined to do it this way.

      If you are a personal user and the kind to go to the MS website to get your support then searching openoffice.org or google to get help isn't much of a stretch. The only stretching will be from the money left in your wallet.

    2. Re:Who do you call for tech support? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • every time I have submitted bug reports to Microsoft (which I've done on multiple occasions) the report seems to disappear into a black hole

      Amen to that. I recall trying to report a bug in MSVC 5.2, and drawing a complete blank. It wasn't a new version with a beta program, there was (at that time) no links on their site that we could find to report bugs, and whoever we got through to on the 'phone eventually ended up putting us through to tech support, who wanted to charge us $75 to ask two question.

      Think about that. You are talking to someone in Microsoft. You say to them "I have a bug to report. A bug. Not a technical support issue. I know how to use it, and it doesn't work. It hangs the machine if you try and compile an MFC collection class inside a double nested namespace. The product doesn't work, and I'm trying to provide feedback to help you fix it. Don't put me through to tech support. Do not put me through to tech support."

      "Transferring you now... Hi, welcome to tech support. My name is Mindy, and I'll talk to you for ten whole minutes for only $75 dollars. Mmm, you sound like a real stud. What's your credit card number, you hot stallion?"

      OK, I'm perhaps paraphrasing slightly at the end, but they really seemed to go out of their way to make it hard to help them.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:Who do you call for tech support? by FatRatBastard · · Score: 2

      My other favorite is "Who are you going to sue?"

      As if ANY software licence (GPL included) allows you to sue the maker. MS, Oracle, Lotus/IBM, Sun, etc all license their software such that they are absolved if anything goes wrong.

      Honest question here, when was the last time anyone's been sued for COTS software defects? I can't recall any.

    4. Re:Who do you call for tech support? by pmz · · Score: 2

      I have never even thought of support from Microsoft as much of an option. Am I missing something?

      I think it really depends on what amount of risk you associate with time lost trying to figure it out yourself.

      For example, I have been working in a proprietary development environment (high-end CAD), where the total cost of my software is probably $40,000 (just one seat!). The API documentation is sketchy at times, and our contract is definitely time-constrained. So, is it best for me to burn $100/hour of the contract to figure stuff out, or should I call up our support line and get an expert's answer quickly? In my case, the our software vendor is pretty good, and the support is well worth it.

      The same is true for some super-high-end server installations. I believe Sun sells a support option, where Sun actively monitors your servers. If something goes wrong, they know before you do, and begin figuring out a resolution! Is it possible to beat this? Again, a lot is at stake, here.

      I don't have experience with M$ support, so I'll stop talking, now.

    5. Re:Who do you call for tech support? by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 2

      If OO.o gets more popular, it might be worth somebody's while to start a tech support call center for it. Consider: everyone has as much access to the source as anyone else, so in theory anyone could provide support for the product.

      The "There's no tech support for Open Source Software" is a glass-half-empty way of looking at it. The upside is that a situation could arise where several companies are providing support, each with their own competitive advantages. They could charge for individual cases, as well as selling service contracts to corporations.

      Another idea: start a database of issues/resolutions. Any support company can use it, provided they feed back new solutions to it. It would not only lower the cost of providing service and eliminate redundancies, but it would provide the OO.o hackers with valuable data about their product.

      I'm starting to like this idea, and if anyone has a few million to spare, I'll gladly implement it. Or change my name and make for the Bahamas.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    6. Re:Who do you call for tech support? by sean23007 · · Score: 2

      Yeah, and I bet the kids all like that $35/incident thing a whole lot. Why would you pay MS $35 more for something they didn't cater for you, when you could pay the kid down the street $5 to fix it for you and teach you how to use it.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    7. Re:Who do you call for tech support? by flyfishin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Okay so you want to purchase a product. MS offers gives some freebie support. Unlimited installation support isn't really that big of a deal.
      Now lets do some math for the home user. You can buy StarOffice and get one free support incident. After that it is $25 per incident for phone support or $20 for emailed suport. I can spend $400 to buy a copy of MS Office and I get three free support calls(let's assume you install once and call for help) or I can buy StarOffice for $75, get one free call for installation, and pay for a two calls. Here's the totals MS(purchase + 3 support calls(1 for installation)) $400, StarOffice(purchase + 3 support calls(1 for installation)) $125. That's MS: $400 Sun: $125. After that point MS is $10 more per call. Yes, I think the MS deal is unreasonable for a home user.

  37. Re:There's only 2 major gripes for the linux versi by Rykky · · Score: 2, Interesting

    About the uglyness of the fonts. Im a (proud) Red Hat user and the fontserver that comes with it knows how to handle TrueType fonts. M$ distributes some TTF fonts for free (ms-webfonts something) plus you can use the TTF fonts from your windows install (you can technicly, but Im not sure legally). With this setup, I have the exact same fonts as the typical M$ user. Im typing this in Opera thats configured to use the TTF Helvetica font and it looks great.

  38. Re:There's only 2 major gripes for the linux versi by Misch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    3. Still a bit sluggish

    Last I looked, the Linux version of Microsoft Office didn't exist. When given the choice between "cake or death", most everyone will choose the cake.

    --

    --You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
  39. Sure. by jellomizer · · Score: 2

    I have seen numerious comments about how great OS products are and how much Closed Source are proned to problems. The truth is that A lot of OS projects are curently Inferior to there closed source counterparts. For main reasons that they are not completed yet. Or there not designed to do the same thing. There is a Top Quality Closed sourse products out there and also a lot of Top Quality Open Sourse products out there. But there is also a lot of Junky Open Sourse Products and junky Closed Source products. To be slanted on one side or the other can be a problem because it will lead you to getting the wrong tool for the job. Which is always the problem

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  40. Re:OpenOffice dash problem by davebooth · · Score: 2

    Its part of the autoreplace stuff - similar to the "smart quotes" options et al that have been adding bloat to word-processors for years. The question mark appears when you're displaying in a font or charset that doesnt have the character its looking for as a replacement (I think)

    Whatever the reason its easy to turn off. Disable the "Turn minus signs into dashes" autoreplace option.

    --
    I had a .sig once. It got boring.
  41. Re:There's only 2 major gripes for the linux versi by HiThere · · Score: 3, Informative

    I seem to remember that TrueType was an Apple product with MS collaboration.

    Whatever, the basic idea is so good that its worth is obvious. And I beleive that progress is underway. Don't both KDE3 and Gnome2 support "anti-aliased" fonts? That's a partial answer. Now what is needed are some decent tools for building those fonts. If I recall correctly, the idea of a font is a collection of objects that know how to draw themselves are various sizes and resolutions and which can be mapped to a keyboard. One way to specify this is with Bezier curves (+ hinting), but I don't see any reason that it shouldn't be possible to specify programs that would do the same thing:
    draw(char#, rect=(top, left, height, width), weight, color=false, solid=true, underline=false, ...)

    FontMaker used to show one a rectangle and allow one to specify which dots were black for which letter (rather like an icon designer). Fontographer, it's sequel, changed this to specifying the same thing in terms of what appeared to be Bezier curves, with hints for things like how lines ended, how you specified holes inside of letters, etc. These programs allowed the Mac to have MANY custom fonts that did just what was needed. The pixelated fonts looked ugly at every size but the design size, and appropriate reductions, but the bezier fonts looked good at many sizes. (There were scaling problems with things like serifs, size of dots, etc. which created esthetic problems if you deviated too far from the design sizes, so even scalable fonts look better at appropriate sizes.)

    I haven't gone searching for projects like these, but they would certainly be a "good thing(tm)".

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  42. Seriously. by sulli · · Score: 2
    When you buy Microsoft the tech support is crap. Crappity-ass crap. Now it's probably not if you buy the expensive $200+/year premium support or many-$10K/yr helpdesk-to-helpdesk support for corporate buyers, but that's not in the typical individual's budget.

    So I say this is a total red herring, and one that will bite the commercial vendors in the ass real soon now. As soon as OpenOffice hits Mac I'll definitely try it (and I'm using Mozilla now).

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  43. Pimping the benefits of OSS to the masses? by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A couple quotes from the article that made my jaw drop simply due to their mention:

    OpenOffice can't run macros written in Microsoft's programming language, either. (On the bright side, you're therefore safe from Word and Excel macro viruses.)

    I don't know if macro viruses are still floating around in the wild, but in a computer-illiterate, yet paranoid user culture, this may prove to be an important selling point. Time will tell if StarBasic can be used for similar abuses.

    The article notes a few things that, if I understand correctly, OOo does better than MSO:

    It's nice to have a proper Font menu (showing font names in their actual typefaces) at the top of the window, instead of on a toolbar that may not be open. It's also a pleasure to be able to open any kind of OpenOffice document (text, spreadsheet, presentation, drawing) from the File menu of any of its programs. [...] Both Word and OpenOffice Writer let you set up abbreviations that when typed expand into longer words or phrases. But only OpenOffice offers to complete frequently used long words automatically, which quickly becomes a huge timesaver.

    If you listen to Bill's Legions, MSO is the all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world that can do everything you can think of and more. I would appreciate being corrected here if MSO does the above, and I'd be surprised if it didn't.

    Fortunately, the open-source nature of OpenOffice.org holds tantalizing promise for improved versions. Anyone is permitted, even encouraged, to submit bug reports, wish lists of features and other feedback via the Web site. As a new droplet in the tidal wave of the open-source movement, you may even experience the thrill of watching your tiny input have an effect on the next version.

    *jumps up and down like a moron on speed*

    This is what keeps me coming back to OSS efforts. I may not be able to program worth a lick, but I can still directly contribute to the improvement of a program I use and interact with the programmers as if they're human beings, instead of distant gods on top of a mountain of C code somewhere. I think this aspect of the Mozilla project should have been screamed to the heavens even more than it was to the users, the idea that Joe User could make a solid, tangible contribution to making their computers easier and better, rather than waiting for God Gates to bestow His latest Blessings upon the unwashed masses. Maybe it's due to my anarchist leanings, but I think we're better when we work together and listen to the people affected by our decisions and our work, instead of assuming I, and I alone, know what's best for everyone else.

    Give a person a taste of the power, freedom, and agency s/he can have as an individual among many, and that person will never want to give it up. It's a liberating feeling.

    --

    Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
  44. For most users it should replace MS-Office by marian · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Admittedly this is just my own experiences, but all of the users I've had to support in an office environment, as well as my own use of office suites says that the functionality in OpenOffice and StarOffice should completely replace MS-Office with about zero user impact. It's good to see that OpenOffice is getting the kind of press coverage needed to make it a real challenger to Microsoft's dominance. The NY Times article is exactly the type of thing any product (not just open source) needs to become accepted as mainstream. Bravo!

    --
    "Suppose you were an idiot..... And suppose you were a member of Congress... But I repeate myself."
  45. I have one issue with open office by jilles · · Score: 4, Informative

    I downloaded and installed OOo right after it was released. I generally like the software. However, there is one show stopper issue that keeps me from migrating completely. It is currently not possible to make crossreferences to paragraph numbers. If for instance you have a document with a numbered list of references at the end, it is not possible to insert a cross-reference in the text to one of these numbers. The same applies to tables, figures, sections, formulas and headings.

    Since I write scientific articles and need to be able to do all of the above, I can't use OOo (I use framemaker right now). I checked with issuezilla and this is something they are aware of, even though there doesn't seem to be much activity on the issue. I really hope they fix this soon.

    --

    Jilles
  46. Re:Nice to think about what's happening in Microso by pubjames · · Score: 2

    It was:

    1) collect underpants
    2) ???
    3) profit!

    At least the Underpants Gnomes would end up with a pile of underpants - which could be useful - even if they didn't make any profit.

  47. While you have a point by einhverfr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I suspect that the engines of games will eventually be open source. But look at this:

    When you are buying a game, you are buying entertainment, and that content will likely still be proprietary (plots, etc). A compelling game is like a compelling movie, and it is not just the rendering, etc, but it is also the plot, the innovation, and the rest of the content.

    Think of games as being part programming and part litterature

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  48. Re:perfect sig? The coin Flips.. by Fjord · · Score: 3, Funny

    More like "Windows: every now and then you pay for what you got"

    --
    -no broken link
  49. Re:There's only 2 major gripes for the linux versi by pubjames · · Score: 2

    How often have we heard this phrase.

    Yes, but it's happening. A couple of years ago, the idea of Walmart selling linux boxes as desktop machines was laughable. Not now.

    OSS evangelists saying this is like kids on car journeys repeatedly asking "are we there yet?" Just because they're annoying - and we're not there yet, dammit - doesn't mean we're not going to get there.

  50. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  51. Honest question about OSS by tshak · · Score: 2

    Okay, so I've contributed many hours as a developer to OpenOffice (hypothetically)? How do I get paid? Seriously. Sure, it's fun. Sure, I benefit from all the other cool free applications that others are working on. But, how, as a programmer, do I pay my bills and my family? Sure, some things like a companies e-commerce system will remain proprietary, but I'm honestly afraid that the ubiquity of OS's and productivity applications will threaten my ability to make a reasonably comfortable income.

    --

    There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    1. Re:Honest question about OSS by Junta · · Score: 2

      Well, as I see it, the better places to work are for companies that serve business or a game company. OS and 'mundane' apps like Office and stuff could easily be replaced by reasonable open source equivalents for home users because the differences don't matter that much and they don't care much about support at purchase time.... Now companies *want* to pay for stuff and support, it feels more secure to them, and they are the ones that put down the big cash. Similarly, games enjoy a great deal of customers because each game offers something different and even if the engine and everything perform equal, two games may be differentiated by artwork and story, and even if both are equally good, that difference may cause both to be used...

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    2. Re:Honest question about OSS by tshak · · Score: 2

      But really, "Office productivity suites" are not "mundane" nor trivial. The only reason Open Source has been able to create decent office suites is because they've copied MS Office (which in turn copied Lotus but that's a different discussion!). There's a ton of market research and usability analysis that just isn't done with OSS. Sure, Linux as server doesn't need market research because us geeks know what we want! We also don't need perfect usability, so it's been extremely succseful. However, with Mac OS X, the first truely user friendly and solid Unix on the Desktop, the "mundane" stuff is open source, but the rest is all proprietary. This seems to be a great and very successful model. Mac OS X still get's paid, because people aren't just giveing away hours and hours of innovation for nothing. When it comes to the more ubiquitous stuff like file IO and a TCP/IP stack, we keep it open. I'm starting to ramble and I've got to get going, but to me its ounds like Apple figured it out, but it's not quite in line with many OSS (esp. GNU/GPL) philosophies, because the entire OS is not OSS.

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    3. Re:Honest question about OSS by Hairy1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      First of all many of the development team work for Sun, who I suspect are paying the developers very well. Sun will be paying the team through the proceeds from the sale of StarOffice, although I think they could package OpenOffice and sell distributions and support much like Red Hat. The model now is for companies to cooperate to fund development of mainstream apps as open source, rather than pay ongoing license fees for the same type of software as closed source.

      The second point is that there is no god given right for software developers to be able to make great gobs of money. Its a bit like a farmer complaining that people can grow their own food. Open source is here to stay - its part of the software ecosystem - deal with it.

    4. Re:Honest question about OSS by alienmole · · Score: 2
      You're taking an extremely narrow view based on a single scenario. For example, many companies contribute to open source, because it helps them with things that aren't central to their own business, but that they still need anyway. Read the article about Joel's piece posted the other day, about complementarities.

      I'm honestly afraid that the ubiquity of OS's and productivity applications will threaten my ability to make a reasonably comfortable income.

      It *does* threaten your ability to make a comfortable income if you plan to compete with open source products. But the software market is unfathomably huge and diverse, and by no means everything is open sourced. In fact, the most commonly open sourced items are those that are well understood, even commoditized. Linux, Apache, and OpenOffice represent the commoditization of OSes, web servers, and office suites respectively.

      This happens to all products eventually. To make a comfortable income, you have to *add value*, not just repeat what everyone already knows how to do. Making a comfortable income is up to you - your true skills and abilities aren't affected by what other people do. If you feel threatened that you won't be able to earn a living, it means that you don't feel confident that you have any useful skill to offer. Perhaps you don't, but that's not the fault of open source software.

    5. Re:Honest question about OSS by tshak · · Score: 2

      The second point is that there is no god given right for software developers to be able to make great gobs of money.

      I agree. But I want to. Maybe not "great gobs", but a healthy amount. And for the time, intellectual competance, and creativity it takes, I think I deserve it. Maybe I should get an EE degree and work for Boeing as a Areospace engineer. Are they going to build an Open Source airplane and all you have to pay for is the raw manufacturing costs? Personally, I like to contribute to the community in multiple ways. However, what other profession strives to make the product of their job virtually worthless?

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    6. Re:Honest question about OSS by tshak · · Score: 2

      I'm very confident with my skills and intellect. I have a lot to learn, but that's part of life! Still, what if I can *add value*? What if I add said value to an Open Source project? Your philosophy assumes that comptent programmers won't keep giving things away. They will based on the open source model, which will continually erode the value of software.

      I love some of the OS projects that revolve around little utilities for programmers or other fun things. But when it's targeted towards a mass market and a multimillion dollar market I get concerned for all of us, not just myself. It'd be like John Carmack open sourcing Doom3. It'd be stupid, and he won't do it for 3 - 4 years, which is after he's made a sizeable (and deserving) profit off of it. Since I work in Information Systems everything I do is proprietary anyway. I just wonder why we are trying to lower the value of our skills and hard work. (Disclaimer: I'm partly playing Devils Advocate here, but only partly).

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    7. Re:Honest question about OSS by alienmole · · Score: 2
      Still, what if I can *add value*?

      If you can add value, you'll do so out of choice, and one of the factors in your choice will be whether you feel you need to be paid directly for the work you're doing.

      Your philosophy assumes that comptent programmers won't keep giving things away.

      Not at all. People are always giving things away, as well as doing things to earn a living - usually both at once, one way or another.

      They will based on the open source model, which will continually erode the value of software.

      You're missing part of what I was getting at, which is that it's the economics of competition that erodes the value of software, just as it erodes the value of every other product out there, over time.

      I think you may have some preconceptions about the value of software - thinking of it as comparable to a physical product which requires significant resources to copy. This is a mistake. It's the Bill Gates model of what software is, and one of the the things open source represents is a rational economic response to this distortion.

      But when it's targeted towards a mass market and a multimillion dollar market I get concerned for all of us, not just myself.

      Give me an example of a product where this applies. I don't believe there are any. As I mentioned, operating systems, basic web servers, and office suites have all reached such a level of commoditization that the "multimillion dollar market" for them is fast becoming an aberration.

      The problem is that there are a lot of people who want to be lazy and get paid for selling more or less the same thing that they did 20 years ago, over and over again, without adding any significant value. Luckily, competition has a tendency to keep them from being that lazy. Instead, most are forced to think up new ideas, and develop new useful products, to earn a living.

      It'd be like John Carmack open sourcing Doom3. It'd be stupid, and he won't do it for 3 - 4 years, which is after he's made a sizeable (and deserving) profit off of it.

      Right, so as you suggest, he won't do it until he's earned what he feels he needs to from it. Where's the problem? He's creating real value which isn't easily duplicated "for free", so he gets to earn money from it.

      Since I work in Information Systems everything I do is proprietary anyway.

      That doesn't have to be the case. I'm a consultant who works on internal IS systems, but since I keep copyright to much of the work that I do, I'm in a position to open source some of it, as well as to contribute to open source projects that I work on. So for at least some of the work I do, I bill a customer for it, and upload it to Sourceforge the same day, with the customer's knowledge and consent.

      One thing I get out of it is access to "products" that I and the customer otherwise might not have had access to, for reasons which include budget, as well as the desire to have source code, both for reasons of continuity as well as control. Continuity, because vendors going out of business, dropping products, or changing strategies is a real issue. Control, because vendors often do things against the interests of their customers (competition again) - see Microsoft. Having access to source code prevents this.

      There are many other reasons for choosing open source, and most of them are equally rational.

      I just wonder why we are trying to lower the value of our skills and hard work.

      A big reason is competition. You're incorrectly focusing on open source as the driving factor here. In the business world, the choice of open source is very often (usually?) made for competitive reasons. This is often the case for individuals too. In many cases - probably more than some authors care to admit - work on open source is done to "make a name" for the author. Perhaps an author wants to work on a certain type of system but doesn't work for a company which sells such systems. So now, whether the author likes to think of it this way or not, he competes with the programmers at those companies by working on an open source package in that market. If you talk to an open source author, I think you'll find they're usually aware of that, and unapologetic about it. One of the effects of competition is to drive down prices.

      Of course, there's the side of open source that's "sold" as being altruistic, working towards a common good, etc. I'm not saying that doesn't apply. Again, both companies and individuals indulge in this behavior also. However, usually, when you examine them, choices are essentially selfish, even if in an "enlightened self-interest" kind of way. With free software, Richard Stallman presumably thinks that the world would be a better place if people followed his rules, and he would prefer to live in such a world. He's competing with all the people who have a different world view, and driving the value of their software down because he believes that value is too high. He represents an extreme in this respect, but even he doesn't suggest that people should work for nothing. He simply doesn't seem to believe that it's a requirement that people be paid repeatedly and handsomely for a single piece of work.

    8. Re:Honest question about OSS by tshak · · Score: 2

      Thanks for taking the time to answer my concerns. I guess, for larger projects, I'd rather spend my time helping a non-profit like World Concern with their Information Systems then I would helping a bunch of for-profit companies increase their margin and get nothing in return. In some senses I see how MS makes this sound "unamerican". When I was younger I was a lot more passonaite about OSS (MiniLinux), and Shareware, Freeware, Postcardware, etc. I still am for smaller projects. However, when it comes to a complete office suite or even an entire OS (however, I think the Apple model is great) I'm still not convinced that this isn't going to eventually cut into "our" bottom line as programmers. Most industries have unions to ensure reasonable compensation for their work, whereas some software developers want to create competition against themselves. It's a good thing that I didn't get into programming for the money! Thanks again for your enlightening responses. I've learned a lot and will continue to keep an open mind.

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    9. Re:Honest question about OSS by alienmole · · Score: 2
      I guess, for larger projects, I'd rather spend my time helping a non-profit like World Concern with their Information Systems then I would helping a bunch of for-profit companies increase their margin and get nothing in return.

      Right, but now you're talking about charity. Most open source is not about charity at all.

      In some senses I see how MS makes this sound "unamerican".

      MS has been one of the biggest contributing factors to the open source explosion. Their practices have prevented strong commercial competition, and exploited customers beyond what many are willing to accept. Open source is certainly "un-Microsoft", but it's not even remotely un-American. As I've pointed out, a big part of open source is about competition, and that's very American.

      I'm still not convinced that this isn't going to eventually cut into "our" bottom line as programmers. ... It's a good thing that I didn't get into programming for the money!

      You have a concern that's currently theoretical, with no current evidence of it actually happening, but are implying that it might affect your economic prospects today or in the near future? Programmers get paid very well right now, and the fact that traditional operating systems and office suites are not where the future money is has no impact on that.

      Most industries have unions to ensure reasonable compensation for their work

      That's not true at all. It's primarily jobs with low added-value, which can be done by any slightly warm-bodied person, which have unions. Programming is not that kind of job, and open source doesn't make it any less skilled a job.

      You're right that one of the purposes of unions is to reduce competition between individuals. If you're looking for something un-American, that's it. Unions cater to the least skilled individuals who are least capable of adding value. We'd be better off with more explicit social programs to help these individuals, since unions often have a negative effect on overall economic health.

      Your argument might make sense if the market for software was a zero-sum game, where the availability of a free product reduced the overall dollars spent on software. But the free products simply form a base on which the next generation of more sophisticated products are built - if anything, open source contributes to the health and vibrancy of the market for software. The Internet itself, as well as for example Java and XML, are direct examples of that - open technologies which are driving major spending.

      If the market for new kinds of software has any limits, its hard to detect what they are. You can't compare software development to what, say, Teamsters members do. It's certainly likely that if you're a low level "code monkey", that your pay will come under pressure in future, but that'll be from offshore developers and other people who are willing to work for less money, and has nothing to do with open source.

    10. Re:Honest question about OSS by tshak · · Score: 2

      Unions cater to the least skilled individuals who are least capable of adding value.

      So, all the Boeing engineers with BS or MS degrees fall into this category?

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    11. Re:Honest question about OSS by alienmole · · Score: 2
      Unions cater to the least skilled individuals who are least capable of adding value.

      So, all the Boeing engineers with BS or MS degrees fall into this category?

      I said that "Unions cater to the least skilled individuals", and that's just as true of the SPEEA as any other union. However, since unions are often effectively or actually compulsory, clearly not all of a union's members qualify as "least skilled". But it's the least skilled who are most protected by unions.

      Boeing is an unusual case because it is also a kind of monopoly in the US. (What is it about Seattle?) Workers in that industry may not have as much choice, if they want to stay within the industry and at the same geographic location, as people working in other fields. Unions try to negotiate a better deal for their employees. If you're a truly skilled worker, the best way to negotiate a better deal is to have companies compete for your skills, which may means switching jobs. If I personally were in aerospace and found my ability to sell my skills elsewhere was being limited, I would consider switching fields before I would join a union, and I would advise anyone else to do the same.

      I have a friend who worked at Boeing for many years (in IT), and when he left, his pay increased substantially at his next job. These artificial markets that get created by semi-monopolies and unions are never a good thing.

  52. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  53. I love Open Office, even if it's not perfect by surfimp · · Score: 2, Informative

    I work as a web developer, so my main need for .DOC files exists in creating proposals, contracts, letters and similar for correspondence with my clients. Like many other Windows users, I've been using the various Word products for as long as I've been using computers.

    I've always found Word to be one of the least-intuitive, poorly-supported applications that I've ever had the displeasure of working with. To say that I hate Word with a passion would not be an understatement. To make matters worse, with each new release, the number of Word's "features" seems to expand nearly geometrically, while my ability to use nearly ANY feature decreases by some sort of evil inverse proportion. Microsoft needs to hire Jacob Nielsen to conduct some usability studies on the app, seriously.

    So for me, ANYTHING that can help me to escape from the grasp of Word sounds good. I've got the 1.0 release of OpenOffice and I love it. Sure, it's got bugs vis-a-vis opening and saving Word files perfectly, and the bulleted list thing is really annoying (although some Windows people think they look really cool! LOL), but since most of my documents need to be created for hardcopy printing only, I'm learning to love OpenOffice.

  54. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  55. Re:OpenOffice dash problem by gimple · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Caveat: I am an English major.

    The problem is that using a hyphen, the "-" character, within a sentence is incorrect usage.

    What should be used is the em dash.

    The em dash is twice as wide as the hyphen, and is most frequently used to punctuate an abrupt change in thought for emphasis. In no circumstances are there spaces on either side of the mark.

    So OpenOffice doesn't really have a "dash" problem; it is flagging incorrect usage. If the author were to use two hyphens--like this--without spaces OpenOffice would change them to em dashes, which would be correct usage.

    By the way, journalists aren't know for their command of grammar or spalling. :)

  56. MS Grammar Checking, phhhft! by Interrobang · · Score: 2

    Who needs the silly grammar checking anyways.

    Not I, says this grammar wonk. I've got a better grasp on grammar than Word does (not hard, if you actually understand things like gerunds and subjunctives), and I'm tired of having to argue with it constantly. Why not switch? Because my project boss won't switch, so my hands are tied.

    In fact, Word has very silly grammar checking, and its spell-checker blows diseased goats, too...especialy from the point of view of someone who professionally must keep a dictionary or two AND a thesaurus underhand constantly, and who may have to consult numerous specialized glossaries on any given day besides.

    Nasty partisan shot: I like Word Perfect because it's the perfectionist's tool: It shuts up and leaves you alone. (If I have to fix those "you must really want..." MS 'regenerating' defaults one...more...time...)

    I Go To Bed Angry and Wake Up Angrier the Next Morning, just like Harlan Ellison, and here're the reasons!

  57. Re:There's only 2 major gripes for the linux versi by FatRatBastard · · Score: 2

    Last I looked, the Linux version of Microsoft Office didn't exist. When given the choice between "cake or death", most everyone will choose the cake.

    Except for Hitler. Remember, he took the vegitarian (that Nazi shithead).

  58. Re:GNOME OOo users: That stupid exit-on-startup bu by V. · · Score: 2

    Thank you. That is so annoying but I have been
    too lazy to try to figure out what was causing
    it. :)

  59. It would be nice if... by teslatug · · Score: 2

    If one of these reputable sources did a whole series of articles (or a long article) on a group of Open Source applications/OS's. They could group OpenOfice.org, Mozilla, Linux distros, etc., and present it as a complete solution to Microsoft software.

  60. Write Congress and pressure them to switch by browser_war_pow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If 1.5-2.5M federal desktops switched it would be disasterous for Microsoft. Go write, now

  61. Openoffice.org -- real life use by hobit · · Score: 2, Informative
    I'm writing a big course-pack for a class that I teach. I debated about using Latex or Word and, mainly for "free" reasons, settled on openoffice.org. I'm running this on an XP box and hope to be running it on my Linux box at work also.

    So far I'm pretty happy. The UI is okay, and things are pretty nice. However, I've had a lot of problems. (all in OO writer)

    • I had serious problems with bullets. They all just changed to bullets with the number 10 in them. After spending about an hour on this, I found it as a fixed bug with a workaround.
    • I've had the program crash once and my machine crash once (due to something else.) Both times I've lost work because there is apparently no crash recovery.
    • Saving as HTML doesn't seem to work very well. In this directory you can see the HTML file has had some of its graphics messed up pretty badly, while others are just fine. I think that if I group each drawing into one drawing this problem will go away. But still...
    • The spell checker is nice, but I can't see away to get it to ignore punctuation. So everytime I have two puncutuation marks back-to-back it calls it an error.
    • You can't change the default bullet that is generated by hitting the "bullet on/off" button. You'd think it would use the list1 style or something, but it doesn't.
    • If you want to contribute to openoffice.org you have to sign your code over to Sun. As far as I can tell, this means they can use it for whatever they want (StarOffice for example...)
    I've also found that the bib. tool needs a lot of help. Also, right-clicking seems to cause menus to pop but based upon cursor position, not mouse position. I guess that is okay, but it seems like I have to click twice to get the right-click menu that I want (once to move the cursor, once to pull up the menu.)

    Given all of these complaints I still expect I'll finish this using OOo. It seems to work well enough and I'd like to move away from MS tools if possible.

    --
    As Nietsche famously said, "If you stare too long into the Abyss, 1d4 Tanar'ri of random type will attack you."
  62. databases and OO by jd142 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yes, it is technically true that OO doesn't ship with a database program.

    However, it has some darn nice database features. If you have existing odbc sources defined in windows, you can access them. However, unlike word, which let's you access them via the mail merge function only, OO goes one better: you can see and edit the tables as tables. You can create new queries, that are then available to all the OO components.

    Let me say that again another way. You get everything MS Access gives you except for the ability to create custom forms. And they say that OO doesn't have a database.

    You can also use jdbc or just link to an existing excel file. That's right, you can access an excel file as if it were a set of records and columns. I just linked to an excel spreadsheet with 17,000 rows and 30 columns, viewed it as if it were a table in a database, wrote a custom query that will now be available to all the OO components.

    And they call this not having a database.

    I've got users using OO to edit mysql tables that hold data for our website because MS Access couldn't work correctly with the myodbc drivers.

    I really wish people would cover that aspect more in their reviews. It's a very important feature to us here. Our hidebound faculty will never move to it of course, but for some tasks like basic mysql database entry, that's what I'm going to have them use.

    1. Re:databases and OO by Micah · · Score: 3, Interesting

      > If you have existing odbc sources defined in windows, you can access them

      or with unixODBC in Linux. I had never touched unixODBC before, but there's a HOWTO PDF (I don't remember the URL, but it was in LinuxToday last week) that explained the process. I had OpenOffice.org talking to my Postgres database in minutes! (And the Howto was for mysql!)

      > You get everything MS Access gives you except for the ability to create custom forms.

      BZZT. File | AutoPilot | Form...

      ok, it might not be quite as complete as Access (maybe it is, I don't know how they compare), but it's there! I know you can write events for DB updates from StarBasic, and they can supposedly access form widgets, so it probably has all the functionality of Access. No reports though, that I'm aware of -- Access may lead there.

      > I really wish people would cover that aspect more in their reviews.

      Agree 100%.

      Really, OpenOffice.org is SOOO close to being The MS Office Killer it's not even funny. It just needs 1) more end user documentation, especially for the macro language (which is quite powerful), 2) maybe a reports system like Access has, 3) fixes for a few little bugs that have been mentioned here and elsewhere.

      All this should be done in a few months. Combine OOo for most uses and LaTeX for books and technical writings, and there will be absolutely no reason whatsoever to pay for MS Office.

    2. Re:databases and OO by Micah · · Score: 2

      yeah you're probably right, at least for a while. Open Source will certainly catch up eventually. Then there's GNU Enterprise, which already has fairly powerful forms capabilities, but it's a completely different mindset than Access.

  63. Re:Open Office feature by Misch · · Score: 2

    Try the "Insert" menu, choose "envelope". There were issues in the betas with envelope printing though, and I know I've burned a couple of envelopes tryign to figure out which settings to use in my printer. But, then again, I've burned envelopes in all the different printers I've used trying to get them to work.

    I also find that it can work best if you create an envelope, then save it, and just use that one as a template for the future.

    --

    --You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
  64. Besides, OOO is less confusing... by freeBill · · Score: 2

    ...than OO.

    Most of us think "object oriented" when we see OO. When we see OOO, we think "exclamation of extreme satisfaction."

    --
    Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.
  65. Re:There's only 2 major gripes for the linux versi by PurpleBob · · Score: 2

    I'd like to see a comparison between reasonable anti-aliasing and un-anti-aliased fonts. Every page I've seen that wants to say "anti-aliasing is bad" shows some excessively anti-aliased text as an example. The example on that page can only cause me to conclude that Corel Photo-Paint's anti-aliasing is really bad. Heck, it looks like he ran it through a blur filter afterward just to make his point. AA on my GNOME desktop does not look like that.

    (I'm not saying that GTK's AA is perfect. Diagonal lines tend to disappear.)

    I'm reminded of when Mac users show examples of anti-aliased paragraphs of text rendered "before Quartz" and "after Quartz", raving over how perfect the "after Quartz" picture looks. The "before Quartz" one always looks MUCH better to read, as Quartz makes each character absolutely true to the letter form but, as a trade-off, really fuzzy.

    I assume that the good antialiasing also takes hinting into consideration. So, are there any comparisons between properly-hinted AA and non-AA text?

    --
    Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
  66. Who you gonna call? Madame Cleo, that's who! by V.+Mole · · Score: 2

    This would be funnier if it weren't so accurate: Microsoft Technical Support vs. The Psychic Friends Network

    And I'm not just MS bashing. I've had experiences with MS tech that closely resemble these. Every time I hear a PHB say "We have to use MS, becase we need the support" I just laugh and laugh and laugh. Then I go back to my office and cry.

  67. Re:There's only 2 major gripes for the linux versi by HiThere · · Score: 2

    That's a good reference. I was contemplating something that wouldn't be able to handle truetype fonts, but would instead use it's own approach. Basically this would just be a different VM, though. Something that would allow you to do a different kind of hinting (to be determined).

    OTOH, when do those patents run out? 1989 + 20? = 2009 (right guess?) and how long would it take to build a new engine? and all the fonts to use it, too, of course...

    But if the 1992 patent is the blocker, then that's 3 extra years. Might make all the difference which one is the blocker.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  68. Bah I'm not saying it. by abe+ferlman · · Score: 2

    OpenOffice.org is even more inconvenient to say than "Gnu/Linux".

    No way, man.

    --
    microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
  69. OpenOffice and Standard File Locations by Wolfier · · Score: 2

    How do you install OpenOffice? It strikes me odd that it installs in its own space rather than to play nice with the file hierarchy standard.

  70. Be not ashamed! by xski · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sorry if I'm being pedantic.

    Not at all. There is far too little pedantry in the world today. Keep up the good work.

    -x

  71. Re:free won't cut it at my company by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    that's because forst your boss is a moron.

    he has his head shoves so far up his ass he cant see any color but brown.

    Second, if you thrust real numbers in his face he cant chi\uckle and ignore you, espically when you say the numbers out loud and his peers or boss hears it. (his bos is the best target... "I can save the company $$$$$$$.$$" but, be ready to have the balls to stand behind your reccomendation..

    if you succeed, you have your bosses job... if you fail... you are unemployed.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  72. Why? by alienmole · · Score: 2
    People are happy to claim OpenOffice as a successful Open Source project, but how many remember that the bulk of code in Open Office was produced as a closed source propritary program?

    In my experience, some of the best open source products are those that started off as closed source. IBM's Eclipse IDE is another example. I don't see any reason to discriminate against a good, open product because it once was closed. What's the logic in that?

  73. Star/Open Office Saves $, Improves Productivity by gdyas · · Score: 2

    I've just gotten & installed StarOffice after having Open Office for a while and damn, it makes me believe. I think it stands an excellent chance of doing real, deep damage to MS if only sysadmins & CTOs will wake the hell up and smell the gains in cost of operations.

    Amongst the big benefits:

    • Application-independent file format based on XML lets you know you'll always be able to get at your data, even if you switch applications again in the future.
    • OO is FREE and OPEN. As in no-payee-no-money, change all you want, and know exactly how data gets handled in your organization.
    • If you're scared about "support" (as if MS ever gave any, really) StarOffice gives you that AND the Adabas DB app to use, for tons less $ than the MS guys who're treating you like a beggar at their door with the licensing and contract headaches.
    • No other office suite of this quality is available in Linux, Solaris, Windows, AND (around the corner) Mac versions. In a mixed computer environment this is heavenly.

    And those are just the beginning of what the software is. Talking now about what it isn't, it IS NOT getting roped into a 3-year plan where you get to continue to pay money, but may or may not ever see a new version or any bug fixes. It IS NOT continually mutating file formats. It IS NOT macro viruses screwing with your systems here and there all the time. These are real problems with real costs attached, and to fix them the "nobody ever got fired for buying MS" status quo must change. Give it a serious look. Try it out. Do your jobs, for God's sake, and you'll see it's better.

    It's not an option. If you don't do it your competitors will.

    --

    The only tool you've got against psychosis is experience.

  74. Links in the article by webword · · Score: 2

    Funny how Microsoft, IBM, Corel, and some other companies are linked. However, there are no links to OpenOffice.org. How hard would that have been?

  75. Re:There's only 2 major gripes for the linux versi by PurpleBob · · Score: 2

    Perhaps you didn't read all of my comment...

    I'm making the distinction between anti-aliased text that takes hinting into account (apparently - I have no idea what the font renderers are doing behind the scenes), versus the kind that tries to be "picture-perfect" to what the letter would look like at a higher resolution.

    In the comparisons of "before Quartz" and "after Quartz", the text is anti-aliased in both cases; the "before" case is somewhat distorted from the true form but very crisp, yet the curves are still smooth and AAed, and the "after" case is the ugly fuzzy one.

    --
    Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
  76. How I fixed the ugly fonts. by Linuxathome · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. Ugly fonts

    Follow the instructions on changing the interface font from the OpenOffice.org font guide. Be sure to add the changes (with the checkmark) and check the two boxes next to the newly added changes (you'll see what I'm saying when you do it). That should do it for your interface font.

    For your other font ugliness problems (i.e. ugly fonts in the documents), the reason this is occurring is because true type fonts are not installed correctly. There are two remedies to this: 1) Do what the font guide from OpenOffice.org tells you (the hard way) or 2) if you have Linux Mandrake installed, run "Drakfont" and add the true type fonts found in your windows partition (c:\windows\fonts -or- /mnt/windows/windows/fonts directory, or if you don't have a windows install partition, just copy all the fonts in that directory from a friend's windows system to a temporary directory and have Drakfont load the true type fonts from that temp dir).

  77. I don't care as long as they are readable. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 2

    Ugliness is in the eye of the beholder anyway.

    I hear whining about fonts but I find them perfectly adequate.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  78. Re:perfect sig? The coin Flips.. by juliao · · Score: 2
    Better still:

    Windows: every now and then, you pay for what you don't get

  79. Next time try Psychic Friends Network by Tony-A · · Score: 2

    I think this was tried sometime back with the results of the Psychic Friends Network being slightly more helpful.