Slashdot Mirror


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."

23 of 292 comments (clear)

  1. What's with the links? by Entropy_ah · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They are freskmeat.net links but they just redirect to codeweavers actual site.

    <conspiracy>
    OSDN is keeping track of our clicking habits
    </conspiracy>

    --
    my other penis is a vagina
  2. Re:Excellent. by Tet · · Score: 4, Interesting
    kinda related to the Wine/Foxpro thing :)

    Only vaguely, in as much as it's WINE related. Crossover produce a very good product though, and I'd love to see them succeed. Also, unlike TransGaming, they contribute all their changes back into the main WINE tree, thus earning them huge kudos as good citizens of the open source community.

    --
    "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
  3. nice, but... by aggieben · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Don't become a regular here, you will become retarded. -- Yoda the Retard
  4. Re:"Support"? by delta407 · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can install other things under CrossOver Office fairly easily, and a lot of them actually work, but in this case "support" is thorough testing and hacking the WINE codebase to make sure everything works with whatever the application is.

    For instance, Photoshop 7 doesn't run under current versions of WINE, WineX, or CrossOver Office 1.2. I'm happy about this. :-)

  5. You know... by banky · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
    1. Re:You know... by Camulus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:You know... by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Insightful
      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?

    3. Re:You know... by phoneboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Three reasons I disagree with thsi:

      1. Less security issues. Provided I set up cxoffice/Wine correctly, any "damage" a rogue Windows app might do can be contained very easily. At worst, it will affect the "Windows" stuff, but it won't affect the Linux data. While I occasionally need Outlook to perform some tasks, I usually use native mail readers, so the risk of "some virus" or "some rogue piece of code" coming in is very minimal.

      2. Apps that will never have a Linux equivelant. One application I currently rely on for work has effectively been discontinued as a result of M&As, so the chance of seeing a Linux equivelant is zero squared. However, with a little coaxing, it runs just beautifully under cxoffice.

      3. Choice. Because I can run my critical business apps under an alternate OS, I am now no longer "locked" into a particular OS choice. I frequently switch between my Linux box and my Win2k box and I can do most of my basic work tasks in either platform.

      -- PhoneBoy

      --
      The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of anyone, including the poster.
  6. Dreamweaver by nagora · · Score: 4, Funny
    I'm still waiting on getting Dreamweaver MX to run.

    Why? So you can have huge chunks of javacript that sucks embedded into every single page? Or perhaps you want your HTML to look like it was laid out by a deranged monkey?

    TWW

    --
    "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
  7. Re:DUPE! by ccbaxter · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...not yet - give it time.

    --
    Dude, where's my Karma?
  8. Re:Photoshop you say? by jeremy_white · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is a review here.

  9. Bitch Moan Whine by Ikazuchi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Hitomi Ikazuchi Dragon Clan Barbarian Monk
  10. can get office working without crossover by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Seriously, a stock wine install (03-2003 here) should work fine. In my case I'm using Office 2000 under FreeBSD. Yes, it even runs the installer fine (make sure it doesn't use built-in CAB extractor but the one on the O2k CD), you do NOT need any "native" Windows partition/system binaries/DLLs to get most functionality. Exceptions are OLE stuff for Word saving, which needs native DLLs, and Access/IE is pretty much broke (but Crossover before version 2 didn't officially support either anyway).

  11. The analogy is MacOS X by MyNameIsFred · · Score: 4, Insightful
    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.
    1. Re:The analogy is MacOS X by banky · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
  12. Re:Photoshop you say? by Ikazuchi · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ah, Linux, where customizability is key. As longs as you don't make it like windows.
    God forbid people get to run the programs they like and make their computer look and act like they want.
    How DARE they!

    --
    Hitomi Ikazuchi Dragon Clan Barbarian Monk
  13. meanwhile, in the Redmond legal office... by ch-chuck · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Hello, Jim? This is Bob in the 'Office' department. Can you fax over that Visual FoxPro EULA? I think we might need to include that verbiage in our products too now. Sure, I'll be looking for it. Thanks!"

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  14. Important for the Future of Desktop Linux by north.coaster · · Score: 4, Insightful
    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.

  15. Could someone at /. do some editing please. by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  16. Dreamweaver MX does work under Crossover Office by leapy · · Score: 4, Informative

    It may not be fully supported by Codeweavers [yet?], but you can already install and run Dreamweaver MX in earlier versions of Crossover Office/Wine.

    You just need to add a simple script that gets over the "required resources" warning by moving the user into the same directory as the executable before running it.

    At least, it works for me. I do database hookups, PHP coding, etc.

    --
    --- Man hands on misery to man....until http://www.samsource.com/
  17. Re:Annoying splash pages by Havokmon · · Score: 4, Funny
    I was so close to throwing money at these guys as it *can* be a great product but I just found their "witty" embedded reminders too obnoxious.

    In a strange ironic twist, those go away when you do pay..

    --
    "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
  18. Because OO is horrible, as is(was?) Xoveroffice by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 5, Informative
    I'd geniunly like to hear from people who want to run OfficeXP on Linux. Why it is necessary?

    Well, I won't touch anything with the letters "XP" voluntarily, but if I might substitute Office 2000, then it's simply because, overall, it's better than OO *now*. No, this isn't a flame or a troll...simply the result of struggling and fighting with OO for months before deciding that it gave me more headaches than MS.

    To disclose, I'm not a Stallman disciple - I would prefer an Open alternative, but really I'm going to use the best tool for the job. Right now (and yes, I'm obviously talking 1.0) OO isn't it. Open anything reasonably complicated (things embedded, complicated formatting, etc) and OO pukes. The UI is a joke, even compared to MS, and that's hard to do. Opening ASCII datafiles is a pain in the ass. It's way too bloated (easily rivals if not beats MSOffice), and actually too integrated for it's own good. I could go on...

    Now, I would rather have Office running on linux than on a separate box (I can't dual boot my linux box, I use it as a server too). I tried xoveroffice 1.0, and found it to be exceptionally buggy. Things would occasionally hang, and worse, sometimes the hanging would necessitate a complete reinstall of xover. Not good! Then I tried vmware, and had some issues there too (it doesn't like slackware's startup scripts, so I had issues getting modules to restart on reboot).

    So far, my solution is to avoid Offices of all kinds. I use Matlab for my data analysis, and I do as much in that as possible to avoid excel. I can do a lot in that, but I would like a decent spreadsheet too, and one that doesn't hang at inopportune times.

    So, bottom line, 1) OO is a mess, and 2) I haven't found a great way to run MS Office on linux yet. So, at the office, we have a linux box, a mac(OSX), and a windows box. Between them, at least one does any job reasonably.

  19. Re:Or... by rsheridan6 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    A few weeks ago I had to make a 2 AM trip to Kinkos and pay $5 to print out a .doc file created by someone else. That sort of thing should be a good enough reason. OpenOffice still doesn't handle a lot of .doc files.

    I saw a project once (can't find it now or remember the name of it) which was a script that goes on a Windows server.. you email it a doc file and it automatically converts it to some other format using MS Word and sends it back to you. Since that would obviously handle any .doc, it would sure be nice if someone would set up a publically accessible server that does that.

    --
    Don't drop the soap, Tommy!