Crossover Office 2.0 Released

freakyfreak2 writes "Crossover Office 2.0.0 was just released. Finally can get Office XP apps to run. Here's from the announcement. "The changes in this release are as follows: Support was added for Photoshop 7, Access 2000, Word XP, Excel XP, and Powerpoint XP. glibc 2.3 issues were fixed. The setup GUI was dramatically improved. Tablet support for Photoshop was added. File locking and file change notification support were added. Scripts were added so that the technically inclined can have Windows applications open specific file types using Unix applications, for instance, opening PDF fies with the Unix Acrobat Reader. Many other cleanups and bug fixes were made. " Here's the homepage and here's the change log. I'm still waiting on getting Dreamweaver MX to run."

Comments

nice, but...

[aggieben]

this is pretty nifty, but i think I'll stick with openoffice. I won't have to pay $100 to upgrade it when the next version is released and it's interoperable with MS Office.

You know...

[banky]

it has been my understanding that there's a really great program-loader for Windows applications. It has native window management support, vendor device support, and lots more!

It's called Windows.

I always thought that WINE was a stopgap, a thing to tide you over until your users were comfortable with OpenOffice or whatever. Now we can run tomorrow's Windows apps today. I can't seem to shake the idea that by running Windows apps on Linux waters down the latter and strengthens the former.

Re:You know...

[Camulus]

Think about this. Let's say that in your office you can use pretty much what ever you want on your desktop, except you must run MS Office because for what ever reason they use features in it that OO doesn't support. If it wasn't for Crossover/wine/vm ware etc., then you would be stuck with windows even if 99.9% of the rest of your work would be better suited by another OS. Now imagine being able to run Office on any OS you want. Yes, you are still running MS office, but at least on application suite doesn't decide what OS you must run on your computer. You see wine, crossover office, etc. offer choice. I don't know how many times I have had a friend that has a dual boot machine or uses VM ware because some specific application will not run under linux and they wish they could switch all the way over. This adds choice and I don't see choice ever really being a bad thing.

Re:You know...

[IamTheRealMike]

I always thought that WINE was a stopgap, a thing to tide you over until your users were comfortable with OpenOffice or whatever. Now we can run tomorrow's Windows apps today. I can't seem to shake the idea that by running Windows apps on Linux waters down the latter and strengthens the former.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that Wine does a lot more than MS Office. What about all that custom business software that there is so much of? No free replacement for them.

The idea that being able to run more applications than another platform "weakens" it is a position I can't understand. The purpose of an OS is to run applications, not to try and force users to run "pure" apps.

I also don't really understand why people seem to think that Linux native software is better than Windows software under emulation. If the integration is there, who cares what APIs it uses?

this is key to linux adoption

[b17bmbr]

before i get flamed or trolled, there are lots of great apps that run on windows, apps that don't come from microsoft. if a company can keep their same apps, running atop linux, then it will make migration much easier, even possible. then, when the install base of linux goes up, companies will offer commercial apps on linux.

the problem that linux desktop adoption has is not quality nor quantity. there are plenty of both. there is always that one app that can't be replaced. microsoft's hold on the desktop is tenuous at best. they do know this. why else all the EULA fuss over foxpro. they have traction, but they don't have momentum. they have a base that HAS TO use their products, but many don't necessarily choose to. this gives businesses one less reson to not look into linux.

Bitch Moan Whine

[Ikazuchi]

Yeah, sure. If you want to run openoffice, more power to you. If there are EQUIVALENT programs that are linux native, I'll use them. However, I don't see any programs equal to Photoshop 7 that are Linux native, and Adobe has stated that there won't be a Linux port of Photoshop.

The GIMP is nice, but it isn't Photoshop. Also, the Crossover office tools are wonderful for those of us in Windows shop who need Outlook, but run Linux boxes for development and just cause we can.

The analogy is MacOS X

[MyNameIsFred]

waters down the latter and strengthens the former

The analogy I would use is MacOS X. There is a difference. Office is available in Mac native version, we're not running under WINE. Nonetheless, I think having Office on the Mac has been beneficial to the platform.

Re:The analogy is MacOS X

[banky]

There's a different analogy with OS X.

Many apps now won't run on OS9, with good reason; either they're hybrid Carbon apps (meaning they use elements of Carbon, but also take advantage of OS X-isms) or Cocoa apps (for which no runtime exists on OS9). However, a quick glance at my Dock (and Fruitmenu) shows way too many apps that still run on OS9 via Carbonlib.

OS X is coming up on it's 4th major release, and still has plenty of warts, but EVERY TIME a developer keeps their "works on OS X and OS8.6+ w/ Carbonlib" alive, they're forcing Apple and the Apple userbase to deal with a world we generally don't want.

It's kind of the same with WINE. I used Linux exclusively for years. Some users I knew, they liked a couple Windows apps here and there. Forte's Agent, for example, was a "must have" for many of them. I'd say, Pan is really good, and uses Agent as inpiration. For years, it was never quite right for them; Agent was "done" and did everything they wanted. Rather than help out Pan, they ran WINE to run Agent (and a few other apps).

Pan lost out on a number of smart, capable users, potentially hindering its growth. Windows, on the other hand, retained users (even if it was via compatibility DLLs and whatnot).

You might say, "It's only a couple of users; Linux can survive that". Maybe, maybe not. I think that when users cling to applications like that, it hurts Linux. Just like people who start Classic on login hurts adoption of Cocoa.

Important for the Future of Desktop Linux

[north.coaster]

Linux on the desktop in very difficult transition for most businesses to make. In many cases there are thousands of legacy documents that need to be supported after the transition. If the transition is not smooth, then productivity will be affected which in turn will have a major impact on the bottom line. Try convincing the CEO of a large company that they can afford to take such a big risk. It's a hell of a lot easier to justify making the transition in phases, and in many cases it will be easier to switch operating systems while keeping the Office apps.

Many Linux advocates just don't get it. On the desktop, Linux is simply not going to move beyond being a niche environment until it becomes easy for average people to use the Apps that they today. Crossover Office has great potential as a tool to help accomplish this.

Could someone at /. do some editing please.

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

I have no idea what this story is about. It's traditional to make the first paragraph of a story a summary of what the rest of the story is about. In fact, when /. was established someone understood this fact and so had the idea of putting the first paragraph of each story on the front page with a link to the rest of the story. But that seems to have been forgotten over the years. This reads like someone just figured something out while sitting on the toilet and couldn't wait to run to his PC to tell his friends about it. It isn't even in complete sentences.

Why it matters...

[HarryLeBlanc]

Two words -- Microsoft Access.
Yes, I know that OO.o has some sort of database support, but many companies have invested in extensive custom apps in Access, and rewriting these using OO.o's feature-poor database tool is a non-starter.
And yes, I know that Access has a lousy native database, and that postgresql/mysql/firebirdsql can slice & dice those fries for you... or gnoda, or rekall... but serious Access apps have backends in Sql Server or Oracle or some real database. And it's still much cheaper & simpler to buy Crossover office & run the existing app than to rewrite everything (especially if your mickey geeks don't know python or tcl).
I do have hopes that eventually mono will provide a seamless way to port MS Access apps to a native linux app -- and I hope someone on the mono team is working on an application porter for Access apps -- but in the meanwhile Crossover Office is a huge step forward. There really isn't a good replacement for Access on linux yet. Really. But thanks to codeweavers, it's actually possible despite that lack to ditch Windows, switch to OO.o for word processing & spreadsheets, evolution for email,, etc, and run that legacy Access app too.
Mock if you will, trolls, but this is a watershed moment for linux. This frees many companies who are tied to Access but hate Microsoft. It'll be cheaper for IT departments to hang onto their Office 2000 licenses & port the desktop to linux than to upgrade to XP & licensing 6. Then they can migrate the applications at their leisure.