Slashdot Mirror


StarOffice 7, GNOME-Office 1.0 Released

An anonymous reader writes "Abiword 2.0 has been released. Finally the Linux desktop has a quality word processor that is faster to load than OpenOffice.org and includes proper footnotes. It also no longer uses its own font directory. At the same time Enchant 1.0.0 has been released, a cross-platform abstract layer to spellchecking. Enchant has been proposed to be a Freedesktop.org standard." That's not the only news, though: Abiword 2.0 is part of the just-released GNOME-Office 1.0, which, as riggwelter writes "coordinates GNOME2 versions of AbiWord, Gnumeric, and GNOME-DB, the database interface." Sun's StarOffice has just reached version 7, as well: read on below for some more information on that, including a first-look review.

Jim Hall writes "I just noticed that Sun Microsystems has released StarOffice 7. I've been using the StarOffice betas for a while now, so I have been eagerly awaiting this release! StarOffice is, of course, based on the ever-popular OpenOffice.org. StarOffice 7 software adds functionality to enable export to PDF, and to the Macromedia Flash format. It also introduces the new StarOffice Configuration Manager, the StarOffice Software Development Kit, a macro recorder, and support for assistive technologies, as well as for complex text layouts. Multi-platform running on Linux, Solaris OS and Windows. Only US$79.95 to buy your copy for home (free for edu, plus cost of media+shipping.) Now is a great time to show this to your boss and pitch that 'MS Office to StarOffice' conversion project."

An anonymous reader writes "NewsForge has a 'drive-by' 'quick-peek' look at the new StarOffice up on their site."

One suggestion on office software for the Free Software desktop: Casually re-start a friend or co-worker's Windows computer with Knoppix and show them you can open their Word files with OpenOffice.org. Mention their machine is moderately safe from Word-borne viruses until they reboot into Windows.

91 of 336 comments (clear)

  1. StarOffice has a lot of catching up to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Microsoft is at, what, Office 2003? That's 1996 versions beyound StarOffice 7. Come on guys, get moving!

    1. Re:StarOffice has a lot of catching up to do by Kehl · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I use Star Office at work and Open Office at home. Open/Star Office has certainly been noticed by MS however with a patented and closed source MS ".DOC" format (yes it's coming soon!), it may cause some hardship. My last three job applications (CV's) were in .TXT format (containing a reason why I sent the document in this format) and I am proud to say that on 2/3 applications I got the job! Oh and don't forget finances! XP Pro Office XP Firewall Virus Checker DVD Player Photoshop .NOT(NET) Development package ..... etc --------------- Lets call MS software updates (for a "Techie" user) 750.00 per annum Linux 0.00 Allways nice when you have an imaginary balance of + 750 each year and high tail it to France backpacking! Or you could put it in Bills pocket ..... your choice =) Vote With your feet ----> GPL

    2. Re:StarOffice has a lot of catching up to do by scotch · · Score: 2, Funny
      Ah yes, I remember my days in the air force. We used to refer to the career slide makers as power point rangers. Captains, Majors, and beyond. I don't know who said it, but it certainly applies: "Powerpoint, never before has one tool allowed so many to say so much about so little." Or thereabouts.

      --
      XML causes global warming.
    3. Re:StarOffice has a lot of catching up to do by LDoggg_ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe because just calling something "superior" than something else is generally considered a flame?
      Whereas providing specific examples of why its better is usually moderated as insightful or interesting.

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
  2. Relationship to Mad Hatter? by EricHsu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    AP talks about another Sun thing, code Mad Hatter or "Sun Java Desktop". What's the relationship between StarOffice and this Mad Hatter deal? Why would they work on two parallel projects like this? Presumably MH builds on the translation libraries from OpenOffice? Inquiring minds want to know...

    1. Re:Relationship to Mad Hatter? by EricHsu · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Okay, answering my own question, Sun talks about Mad Hatter and it seems to be merely a Java front-end to StarOffice and misc other Office type programs.

      I thought it was going to be something cooler like the Java port of OpenOffice.

    2. Re:Relationship to Mad Hatter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Madhatter is a integrated desktop focused OS. First release will be based on SUSE Linux. Staroffice, Mozilla, Evolution, Gnome, tightly integrated. Target market is call centers and the like.

    3. Re:Relationship to Mad Hatter? by spektr · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Okay, answering my own question, Sun talks about Mad Hatter and it seems to be merely a Java front-end to StarOffice and misc other Office type programs.

      A Java front-end to StarOffice? I think not.

      As far as I understand it, Mad Hatter is more or less a SuSE spin-off that comes with a new Sun-theme and is bundled with StarOffice 7. At this time Sun puts the word "Java" in all their new products. This is just a brandig strategy like .NET

    4. Re:Relationship to Mad Hatter? by Illbay · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I think the important thing to note here is that a major player, Sun, thinks it's time to challenge MS on the desktop with Linux.

      I don't think even IBM has been ready to go that far (well, they could've done it with OS/2 eight or nine years ago, and I don't see that they've grown a spine since that time).

      This'll be interesting to watch.

      --
      Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
  3. Casual mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Openoffice is based off of Star, not the other way around.

    1. Re:Casual mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      OpenOffice is actually a pared down version of emacs.

    2. Re:Casual mistake by buffer-overflowed · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do you really miss the eliza psychologist that much?

      --
      The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
    3. Re:Casual mistake by kfg · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Do you really miss the eliza psychologist that much?"

      What makes you say that?

      KFG

    4. Re:Casual mistake by shellbeach · · Score: 5, Informative
      Openoffice is based off of Star, not the other way around.

      I don't think so ...

      OpenOffice was based on StarOffice ...

      StarOffice is now based on OpenOffice.

      From the OpenOffice.org Unofficial FAQ:

      1. 1.3. How does it differ from StarOffice?

        OpenOffice.org is an open-source project, which means that it is a piece of software (an office suite in this case) developed under a set of very liberal licenses (the LGPL and SISSL - more on this later).

        One of the freedoms provided is that one can take OpenOffice.org and package it as his/her own distribution. Then, this distribution can be sold to make a revenue. Such a distribution is StarOffice, from Sun Microsystems.

        Therefore, OpenOffice.org and StarOffice have exactly the same core applications, except that it misses out on certain fonts (like Asian language ones and a few for improved Microsoft file format compatibility), a database component (AdabasD), certain file filters, templates & a clip art gallery, and some sorting functionality. However, most of what OpenOffice.org lacks can be made up with the help of third-party applications...

      What you're saying is rather like saying Mozilla is based on Netscape ...

    5. Re:Casual mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually, the universe is a pared down version of emacs.

  4. So, what's the version of Gnome Office again? by dzym · · Score: 3, Informative

    2.0, as specified in the article title, or 1.0, as specified in the article text?

    1. Re:So, what's the version of Gnome Office again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      abiword is at 2.0. Gnome Office is at 1.0. Gnome Office includes abiword 2.0

      I don't think I can clarify more than that

    2. Re:So, what's the version of Gnome Office again? by yerdaddy_777 · · Score: 5, Funny

      It is Gnome Office 1.0 (I read the article, but don't tell anyone).

  5. Complete history by ENOENT · · Score: 4, Funny

    StarOffice is based on OpenOffice.org, which is based on StarOffice.

    Around and around we go!

    --
    That's "Mr. Soulless Automaton" to you, Bub.
    1. Re:Complete history by rampant+mac · · Score: 5, Funny
      "StarOffice is based on OpenOffice.org, which is based on StarOffice."

      Close...

      StarOffice is based on OpenOffice which is based on StarOffice which copies many functions from Microsoft Office, which debuted first on the Macintosh, who purchased ClarisWorks only to produce AppleWorks and later created Mac OS X that copies many *BSD features. Does this mean Microsoft Office is dying, StarOffice is dying or OpenOffice is dying? I'm confused.

      --
      I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    2. Re:Complete history by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 4, Funny

      Excellent, I now have a storyline for my Geek Soap Opera: "As the OS turns". Is your Office Suite cheating on your OS? Who shot J.R.E.? Sure, Mac OS X sure is pretty, BUT WHO ARE THE PARENTS??? If Microsft dies, who gets to keep the mansion?

      I love Linux. But I like OS X a lot more.

      And with a .sig like that, you my man, will cast in the leading roll!

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    3. Re:Complete history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's role.

      The leading roll is the one which I eat first. :)

    4. Re:Complete history by rampant+mac · · Score: 2, Funny
      "Who shot J.R.E.?"

      I'll only perform if you change that to "Who shot JBoss."

      Sorry, that's my contract, and it's GPL'ed :)

      --
      I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    5. Re:Complete history by Phroggy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      which debuted first on the Macintosh, who purchased ClarisWorks only to produce AppleWorks and later created Mac OS X

      It should be noted that Claris always was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Apple. Apple did buy ClarisWorks from Claris and rename it to AppleWorks (which is also the name of a word processor Apple created back in the Apple II era), and Claris renamed itself to Filemaker, Inc. which is still an Apple subsidiary.

      Claris the company is not to be confused with Clarus the dogcow.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  6. Pitching Star Office by -Grover · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I suppose you could go do the StarOffice pitch to your boss, the only problem I forsee is trying to keep up with M$ and their new ideas for keeping Office locked down with the proposed security interface with Win2k3, and incompatibilities with other Office suites. Could be more of a hassle than it's worth down the line...

    Blah...

    1. Re:Pitching Star Office by blibbleblobble · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I suppose you could go do the StarOffice pitch to your boss, the only problem I forsee is trying to keep up with M$ and their new ideas for keeping Office locked down..."

      I find the "I need such-and-such features. You could pay $600, or I have this system which is available free..." tends to work quite well.

      Of course, after the first "these 5000 documents are in Word97 format, and if we want Office2003, it'll cost 3 man-weeks to convert them" conversation, some people might have a serious think about file formats.

      Keeping up with the latest file formats? Doesn't that cost $500 per year per computer, plus half a day of everyone's time? And for what? The feature-list hasn't changed in 8 years.

  7. Pointless switch? by contrasutra · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now is a great time to show this to your boss and pitch that 'MS Office to StarOffice' conversion project."

    Why not switch the company to OpenOffice.org? I doubt the company needs StarOffice.

    You're just going from one pay-for product, to another (albiet less cost). If you REALLY want to show your boss the beauty of alternative software. Show him something thats great, FOR FREE! (that will get any bosses attention).

    And if you choose StarOffice just because "Money means better" to the management, you're just as bad as MS.

    1. Re:Pointless switch? by phraktyl · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For most large companies, it's not about free or not free, it's about dedicated support. From a company standpoint, they would rather shell out money for the non-free version if they can call someone on the phone and get an answer. Sure, the free version may have mailing lists and USENET, but a company can't rely on that, and they can't point fingers when something goes wrong.

      That's the same reason a lot of companies will pay through the nose for RedHat Enterprise---not because it does more, but because they have a single place to call when something goes wrong.

      --
      Karma: Marginal (mostly due to the border around the website)
    2. Re:Pointless switch? by DeathPenguin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >>And if you choose StarOffice just because "Money means better" to the management, you're just as bad as MS.

      Unfortunately, it seems that many management types look up to MS management. A friend of mine worked for an ISP which ran Windows server software. In spite of my friend colocating a Linux server which had no problems to speak of, a mail system superior to NTMail, and trying his darndest to get his boss to switch to free software, his boss still insisted on equating free with crap. PHB's (Pointy-haired bosses) don't know the meaning of the word "free," and are willing to piss away enormous amounts of money for a warrenty card and tech support number even if the product itself is inferior.

      That's where StarOffice comes in. OpenOffice is great, no question about that. Only problem is that it doesn't come with any sort of liability. Sun calls their version of OpenOffice StarOffice and fills this gap, maybe even going a little further to make the migration from MS to non-MS a little easier.

    3. Re:Pointless switch? by rmohr02 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Make the switch to StarOffice at first. Then, after StarOffice and OpenOffice have had new releases, show your boss how the programs look exactly alike, and that one is free, while the other costs $80.

    4. Re:Pointless switch? by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 4, Informative
      You're just going from one pay-for product, to another (albiet less cost). If you REALLY want to show your boss the beauty of alternative software. Show him something thats great, FOR FREE! (that will get any bosses attention).

      Of course you can also pay for StarOffice because...

      (i) The money going into StarOffice is being used to continue the development OpenOffice, as Sun still pays for a lot of the Development of OpenOffice.

      (ii) You can get product support, and training from Sun. Important for even small business, or any overstressed IT department.

      Not all of the cost of software is in the purchase of that software.

      --
      Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
    5. Re:Pointless switch? by kotfu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. Why just the other day, we had this problem with Word crashing all of the time. We called those bums at Micro$oft, got right through to a person, and told them that we didn't get our sales presentation finished on time because Word kept crashing. The MS guy was real nice, he took all of the blame, and even offered to remunerate us for our lost revenue. My boss said, "see, that's why we spend the big bucks for Micro$oft products, they have great support and always make things right."

      Really what happens is you wait on hold for 30 minutes, and then talk to someone offshore who may or may not understand the English you are speaking. After hitting your credit card for 35 bucks, you are told to reboot, and that will fix the problem.

      I'll take the mailing list any day.

    6. Re:Pointless switch? by contrasutra · · Score: 2, Insightful

      YOU GET VERY LITTLE SUPPORT WHEN YOU BUY STAROFFICE. You have to pay Sun MORE money for corporate support.

      On top of that, how much support do you need for an OFFICE SUITE? I of course understand how you would need support for an Operating System/Server, but who could justify spending the money for StarOffice (thousands of dollars) just for support.

    7. Re:Pointless switch? by phraktyl · · Score: 4, Informative

      StarOffice happens to fall under our existing contract for Sun anyway. But it is excellent support.

      We are still, unfortunately, stuck with SO5.2 (I know, and I'm working on it...), but we have gotten custom patches from Sun 3 times in the last 6 months for SO dealing with MS Word documents. I'd like to see MS provide patches for Word because it's not bringing up a Word Perfect file up correctly...

      --
      Karma: Marginal (mostly due to the border around the website)
    8. Re:Pointless switch? by RisingSon · · Score: 2, Insightful
      PHB's (Pointy-haired bosses) don't know the meaning of the word "free," and are willing to piss away enormous amounts of money for a warrenty card and tech support number even if the product itself is inferior.

      Not to be an ass, but in my modest experience in the professional software universe (7 years) I've noticed that most of the PHB's that insist on paying more money for an inferior product with more visible support usually are scared shitless of technology in general because they aren't gurus.

      I've thought about this quite a bit. If I was a technology Charlaton that landed a job in management, I'd do many things that I see other techies bitching about:

      Only use software that has a highly visible technical support. This would be my scapegoat when something goes wrong. Pass the blame.

      Have a temper. Scare people into not questioning my non-technical mind. That way when I'm in a meeting and I claim that an X-client on Win2k xhosting apps running on linux servers taxes the clients more than writing a distributed corba system that utilizes 100% of all clients (except Sundays) nobody will question me.

      Memorize all FUD that favors your previous decisions and speak in at least 30% buzzwords. This makes you sounds smart to non-tech top-level execs that write your paychecks and also frustrates just-out-of-college-newbies that know you're wrong but can't muster up an argument to prove exactly why you're full of horse manure.

      Spend 90% of you're time at work writing email containing mostly the crap listed above. This leaves a paper trail that will hopefully save your ass when your group fails ("Its not my managing - look at these 10 reams of paper I've written in email during project XYZ") and it also makes you look busy enough that no one bothers or questions you. And of course, you get to easily dance around any real issues the gurus harass you with.

      Don't let anyone that is doing the work actually speak with the customers, clients or end users. That way, if you're the only contact, all the customers, clients, end users (and thus employers) think any progress on the project is due to your hard work (and email - see above)

      Last but not least, since you don't really do anything usefull, spend the time you should be doing something productive playing the politics. Always smile when you're visible outside your group and make sure to go out of the way to ask how the exec's weekend trip with the family went.

      So, long drunken ramble summarized - the management that makes the decisions on what office suite to use in the group (or even company) may in fact not be making their decision based on the quality of the software. They may evaluate software based on the smoke it generate, perserving their longevity.

    9. Re:Pointless switch? by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

      For most large companies, it's not about free or not free, it's about dedicated support.

      oh bull crap. several PHB's tried trotting out that lie the LAST time we went around with Open source.

      Fortunatley we called them on the carpet. Made them gather the call data to microsoft from the help center. and show us the number of important support calls to Microsoft on Office.

      Oh guess what... ZEREO calls were made and billed to us No support was needed for Microsoft Office and therefore we wasted money on a support contract with them (that was pay per incident anyways... go figure)

      If making dishonest statements like the one above that "It's about dedicated support" make you feel better in the conference room them by all means continue that stance. There are more of us out here that are more than willing to deliver the full amount of information to the decision makers, or go above the heads of those that resist us.

      Open office, if you don't need the special import filters that Star office has. and yes, if you look hard enough you can get support for Open office.... even pay support if you want to pay for something.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  8. I don't think so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    One suggestion on office software for the Free Software desktop: Casually re-start a friend or co-worker's Windows computer with Knoppix and show them you can open their Word files with OpenOffice.org. Mention their machine is moderately safe from Word-borne until they reboot into Windows.

    ... Then have them yell at you for "breaking" their computer. Not everyone understands that Knoppix doesn't actually write to any of your disks.

    1. Re:I don't think so... by bogie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or have them get annoyed at you when OO screws up and loses all the formatting of the word doc.

      Sorry but even as a big OO booster, I'm the first to say that importing word docs is still a total crapshoot. Plain text letters etc come through fine most of the time. In fact most of the content comes through, but when it comes to even slightly complex word docs with images and lots of formatting OO chokes badly. Sure you end up with most of the text and images, but then you have to spend 5 minutes trying to move everything back to whre it should be the .doc import feature loses its charm.

      I don't fault OO for this since sucky MS won't open their file specs though. Unfortunately MS knows that proprietary Office file formats are the key to its desktop monopoly, so don't expect that to change in our lifetime.

      Honestly though I just don't think its right to outright lie to people and say OO can easily open all Word files. That's probably never going to happen. For me its not a problem since I never deal with a ton of word docs anymore, but for those who HAVE to both send and recieve word docs all day long I can't say they should see that as a plus for using OpenOffice.

      God I hate proprietary file specs and protocols.

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    2. Re:I don't think so... by shaggie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Amen to that.

      One of the biggest taboos when dealing with non-geek related side of any business is demanding a client to conform to your document standards. If the client sends you a file in .doc, you better make sure you send your files in .doc back to the client. Any time a client calls up complaining about being unable to read or open your documents, your job security is on the line.

      I did a test on our secretarial staff, I had them try OO once, they still stick to their MSO mentality. Most of the questions are where can I find menu feature X or Y, its not where its supposed to be or the like. New hires are all versed in the nuances of MSO and most never heard of OO.

      It is very difficult for us to switch over to OO at all. All the top management have considered OO for a very long time but reality is that we just can't do it because of our business realities and the education in computing usage being provided in our region are 95% based on MS products.

    3. Re:I don't think so... by RealAlaskan · · Score: 2, Interesting
      ... but when it comes to even slightly complex word docs with images and lots of formatting OO chokes badly. Sure you end up with most of the text and images, but then you have to spend 5 minutes trying to move everything back to whre it should be ...

      I'm sure you're right about OO's performance here. Unfortunately, you can say exactly the same thing about Word opening slightly complex .doc files. Word will choke when trying to make them, choke when trying to save them and (it's wonderously consistant!) choke trying to open them.

      I have opened a ``moderately complex'' Word document on the same version of Word on two machines, and had it paginated differently. I have seen one copy of Word fail to import some of the features of a document created on another copy (again, same version).

      ... I just don't think its right to outright lie to people and say OO can easily open all Word files.

      I think that's no different, and no more lying, than pretending that Word can easily open all Word files.

  9. Yeah for GNOME Office 1.0! by jimmy_dean · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Contratulations goes out to all of the developers for the Abiword, Gnumeric and GNOME-DB office programs. These applications show the power of open source software and the open source process. Thanks for all of the hard work and the dedication to excellence!

    --
    -> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
  10. What happens with XML... by The+Ancients · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have read various comments on this but wouldn't mind the /. crowd's various takes. What happens when MS's Office switches to bastardised XML? Is it going to tip the whole cart over, or is it a small bump in the road? For someone considering switching to *nix, this could make a significant difference...

    1. Re:What happens with XML... by Jody+Goldberg · · Score: 4, Interesting

      1) We'll start supporting it. Indeed I've already roughed in a basic framework for Office XP xml for Excel. Its a good deal easier than their binary format, especially given how much of their implementation detail is exposed in the file format.

      2) It will not be used very much because old versions of office can't read it (oops the Office 97 install on your secretaries machine is out of date).

      3) It will not be used very much because 100 Meg of uncompressed xml takes longer to parse than people with 30Meg of xls want to wait.

    2. Re:What happens with XML... by 4of12 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I guess there's XML and there's XML and getting between them is not necessarily easy.

      Microsoft made a big deal about the most recent versions of Office writing out XML, but that was because XML was a buzzword, sounded as if it might be more open than ".doc", and was essentially a selling point.

      From what I've read, people have been underwhelmed with the XML coming out.

      But your question is a good one when you see the potential for XSLT transformations that enable OpenOffice to import and export DocBook XML.

      If only a similar set of transformations could be developed for OpenOffice to import and export the XML of the latest version of Microsoft Office. From what I understand, the schema is not documented and the formatting and rendering rules for documents are still kept a private affair, just as it has been for .doc files.

      You're still locked-in, dude!

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
  11. Re:The old debate... by jimmy_dean · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think collaboration between the camps is fantastic. Take a look at freedesktop.org for this initiative. Other than that, a single thing is almost always a bad idea. Competition is a really good thing. There are plenty of talented open source programmers to go around for all of the projects. No need to put everyone in the same boat only to get people mad at each other for conflicting ideas. Then you get about 50% less people working on the project(s) because they can't express their ideas for program improvements. Bad, bad idea. :)

    --
    -> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
  12. Re:Problems with gnome. by Jody+Goldberg · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't see any problems with gnome-office listed in your discussion of gnome's failings. Can you elaborate on any issues you've had with recent versions of Gnumeric, AbiWord, or GNOME-DB ? We're quite interested in constructive feedback.

  13. Re:No macros and they JUST got footnotes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    I assume that the standard C library exists, but once I try to do any windowing, I am faced with half-documented APIs from a multitude of sources. Gnome, KDE, etc., it's all very confusing.

    Try Qt. It has superb documentation, examples and tutorials. And once you pick it up, the KDE API documentation (which assumes you know Qt) will make much more sense.

    If I run KDE, will I be able to run Abiword?

    You'll need to install some Gnome libraries to get it to install, but yeah, there's no problem running any app in any window manager or desktop.

  14. A related suggestion on open source office suites by mijok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sorry if this is a bit O/T but it's something I've wanted to say here for a while and no closer topic has shown up lately either (so please don't mod down...): Since we (probably) all want to avoid lock-in and thus open formats to be more widespread (ie. other office suites than MS) I have a suggestion that others might want to follow. I've tried to help Open Office spread in the following way (the reason chose Open Office is that it's supported on more platforms than any of the others AFAIK and is thus most suitable for this purpose): I'm (among other things) a business student and frequently books on eg. finance include a CD-Rom with Excel spreadsheets as examples of some concepts in the book. I test whether the sheets work flawlessly in Open Office and if so send the authors a suggestion that since Open Office would definitely fit on the CD they could spread that along for free and thus allow students who don't have access to MS Office to use the additional material if they just have a computer. So my suggestion is simply that others too do this when they encounter such books. Please note, however, that the authors of such books are businesspeople and thus "MS Sucks, Open Source rulez!" is not the way to approach them - just try to emphasize that it adds value to their book and that it's very easy to implement (you can tell how easily it worked for you) and if you feel like it you might mention that MS surely needs some competition (and they certainly acknowledge that since MS has been used in books as an example of how a monopoly sets prices).

    --
    Karma. Moderation. Is my .sig good now?
  15. Re:Lazy Questions by jimmy_dean · · Score: 2, Informative

    Abiword 2.0 will handle all of that except for the auto table of contents which will be a new feature for the next version, 2.2.

    --
    -> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
  16. Re:Got it wrong! by big.ears · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sorry, it is you who are wrong; the original statement is correct. Although the original codebase was StarOffice, the main tree is now OpenOffice, which StarOffice is now just a branded child of (there are others, like Ximian's OpenOffice). StarOffice includes some other things as well, which can't or won't be open-sourced.

  17. Re:The old debate... by Jody+Goldberg · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes is would be very nice if we could stop replicating each others work. However, its difficult to do that in practice because we're all operating on what are in effect completely different platforms. KDE uses entirely different data structures than GNOME, which is in turn different from OO, which is different from mozilla ... and MS sits on the sidelines and smiles.

    Adding to the technical challenges are the politcal bits. I've writting elements of gnome-office (libgsf) with the specific intent that it be sharable between the different platforms. Why bother rewriting OLE import/export 3 times ? Unfortunatly, that teeny little 'g' is a big problem. The kword folk have accepted the library, but the kspread team seems intent on writing their own. The OO people can't even look at it because 'the mac people would scream when they saw a glib depend'. Its depressing.

    For the time being we're stuck. Each of us feels our project can produce the best result in the shortest time. At best the projects can share test suites and documentation. Which is where Mitch Kapor's grant to Gnumeric comes in handy. We're using it to commission a set of tests in xls format (so that we can all read it, even Ms Excel). The other projects are welcome to use it along with all of our other interoperability tests.

  18. Re:Problems with gnome. by Dr_LHA · · Score: 3, Informative

    You using the NVIDIA drivers for XFree86? I've heard that for some reason Gnome/GTK2 has in the past (and maybe still has) problems with those drivers making it run slow.

  19. Finally!? A word processor!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Finally the Linux desktop has a quality word processor "

    And people wonder why Linux isn't 'on the desktop' yet!? Seriously, apps like these are needed; they aren't some kind of swish extra that only Windows users can have. So while it's nice to see a decent 'quality' wordprocessor, it's also a bit embarrassing really.

    What was everyone doing? Waiting for M$ to release Word or is it just a sign that Linux is still currently in the palm of techies, not office workers?

  20. Re:Lazy Questions by SCHecklerX · · Score: 2, Interesting
    While I'm sure abiword will get all of those features, I prefer that they aren't there. It's NICE having a WORD PROCESSOR that ACTS LIKE ONE rather than trying to be a document processor / layout engine.

    Word processors should be used for letters and very short papers. Anything approaching a book, or anything needing any kind of consistency should be done using a document processing language like LaTEX.

    Same goes for spreadsheet 'programming'. If you have to automate some data analysis, write a program. Spreadsheets should be used for quick analysis, or a place to keep your notes for anything not complex enough to warrant a database.

  21. Re:abiword by jimmy_dean · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nope, I've been running Abiword CVS HEAD for about a whole year (on a Gentoo stable box) and those types of problems haven't been around for months now. Are you trying this out with the Abiword 2.0 stable release or a pre-release?

    --
    -> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
  22. Re:No macros and they JUST got footnotes? by caseih · · Score: 5, Informative
    On another note, I've been trying to pick up some Linux programming in my spare time and am completely confused. I come from a Win/Apple background where the system APIs are fairly straightforward and well documented. In contrast, Linux APIs are pretty much non-existent.

    When I first read that I thought you were joking, but as I read the rest of your comments, I understand where you misunderstandings lie. I don't know anything about Apple's APIs, but I imagine that they are very clean. Win32, on the other had, is a mess. Linux *does* have very clean and well-defined system APIs. You are mistakenly thinking that windowing and GUIs have something to with system APIs. They don't. And they shouldn't. Instead, userland libraries supply this functionality. The windows gui is quite a hack, api-wise. And it has many, many security problems because of it's being put into the kernel as a system api.
    I assume that the standard C library exists, but once I try to do any windowing, I am faced with half-documented APIs from a multitude of sources. Gnome, KDE, etc., it's all very confusing. The worst part of it all is that the documentation is virtually nonexistent. Sure, there are blurbs here and there, but you'd be lucky to find a documentation system that links together related APIs, clearly enumerates all parameters and their meanings, and displays the data in a readable manner.

    Windowing has nothing to do with the standard C library (which all c compilers link against, even on windows -- that's what msvcrt.dll is for). This library, combined with the system apis (chapter 2 of the man pages) provides lowlevel access to the operating system. User interaction on linux comes through other higher-level apis from libraries such as gtk. This may seem backwards to a Windows developer to separate it this way, but this gives a great amount of development flexibility and increased application security.
    It makes me wonder how anyone gets anything done with this proramming environment.

    It's quite funny, actually, that experienced unix programmers wonder the same thing about win32 developers. I recommend checking out some books on linux development. I think you'll be slowly impressed as you discover the unix model of development and the simplicity and power of the posix-style api, and the tremendous availability of programming libraries to do things like gui programming, you'll be impressed.
    If I run KDE, will I be able to run Abiword?

    Yes, of course. You just need the gnome libraries installed (but not the full environment.
  23. Re:No macros and they JUST got footnotes? by harikiri · · Score: 2, Informative
    The difference between Window/Apple GUI environments and the GUI environments in Linux/Unix is this:
    • There is a "standard" API, but it's using the old, limited feature Xlib API.
    • Today, there exists two very popular alternative Desktop environments, which in turn are based on two different Widget-toolkits. These are Gnome (uses GTK+) and KDE (uses Qt).
    • Developers wishing to develop on Linux will usually pick one of these two Toolkits, as almost all Distributions offer both environments (and associated development libraries).

    So the problem isn't a lack of API details (GTK API's and Qt API documentation), but moreso an issue of choice.

    --
    Man watching 6 MSCE's around a sun box, looks alot like the opening scene's of 2001:space odyssey...
  24. Slight Error in Summary by rmohr02 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    StarOffice 7 software adds functionality to enable export to PDF, and to the Macromedia Flash format.
    I would like to mention that OpenOffice 1.1 supports exporting to PDF now. Perhaps OO will see Flash support in the future?
  25. Gnumeric Recieves a Grant from Mitch Kapor by Jody+Goldberg · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Mitch Kapor's OSA Foundation funds a free spreadsheet test suite

    Gnumeric has received a grant from Mitch Kapor (creator of Lotus 1-2-3) to develop an interoperability test suite with leading proprietary competitors. The money will be used as form of bounty to fund the expansion of our existing tests for worksheet functions (eg =SUM, or =ODDFPRICE). Our goal is to ensure that a users data will produce the same results (or better :-) using Gnumeric. The test suite will be in xls format, and will be freely available to all other interested projects.


    Exact prices have not been decided as yet, but this is an excellent opporunity for non-coders to help opensource programs, and earn a bit of money too. Specifics to be announced on the mailing lists in the coming weeks.


    Official announcement here

  26. The Cooperative Bug Isolation Project by Benoni · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you want to take Gnumeric 1.2.0 for a spin, consider participating in The Cooperative Bug Isolation Project, a research project being conducted at UC Berkeley. We have prebuilt Red Hat 9 packages of Gnumeric and several other popular applications. These binaries are built with extra feedback instrumentation that lets us understand how the software is working (or failing to work) in the hands of real users.

    Even if you have never written a line of code in your life you can help make the software better for everyone simply by using our special bug-hunting feedback packages.

    Read more about it or download and install today!

    1. Re:The Cooperative Bug Isolation Project by Benoni · · Score: 2, Informative

      Any chance of making the Gnumeric GUI a little less, um, sluggish?

      That depends on where the sluggishness is coming from. If the Bug Isolation Project builds are sluggish but standard Gnumeric binaries are not, then that is something I need to look at. Our instrumentation may be taking up more than its fair share of your time. On the other hand, if you see the same problems in regular Gnumeric, then your best option would be to file bug reports or contact the developers directly. They will be able to help you out more directly than I can.

      When entering data the toolbars enable/disable with an annoying lag (instantaneous with Excel).

      This may be intentional, or at least an intentional temporary hack. See this message from the Gnumeric mailing list archives, where Jody says "We're talking with [the gtk developers] to improve performance here, but in the mean time we've put the desensitisation on a delay to avoid pointless flicker when doing data entry quickly."

      And F9-ing a (sub)formula in the formula bar is a big missing item

      Sounds like a perfect item to suggest in either a bug report or on the mailing list. The Gnumeric developers (of whom I am not one) are generally pretty responsive to MS Excel feature parity requests.

  27. Re:Lazy Questions by jimlintott · · Score: 2, Informative

    LyX. If she spends thirty minutes with the LyX tutorial she'll never use a word processor again. LyX acts like a front end for latex. It is WYSIWYM (what you se is what you mean) and excellent for large documents.

    Best little piece of software I've seen. Ever.
    www.lyx.org

  28. Spreadsheet Programs by Jody+Goldberg · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Same goes for spreadsheet 'programming'. If you have to automate some data analysis, write a program. Spreadsheets should be used for quick analysis, or a place to keep your notes for anything not complex enough to warrant a database

    I respectfully disagree. Spreadsheet make a very nice interface to complex analytics. Real practitioners do their own calculations on the complex bits and use a spreadsheet front end as a scratch pad, a way to quickly twiddle data. Spreadsheets are not databases, and generally should not be used that way. However, to dismiss them as being merely stedding stones to real databases is to miss the point entirely. They're quite good at lots of other things.

    1. Re:Spreadsheet Programs by GileadGreene · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Spreadsheets are not databases, and generally should not be used that way. However, to dismiss them as being merely stedding stones to real databases is to miss the point entirely. They're quite good at lots of other things.

      Just to second Jody's point: I've seen spreadsheets (specifically Excel) used for, of all things, spacecraft design (among other things). In fact, JPL's Project Design Center (aka Team X) uses a whole slew of linked workbooks to develop entire conceptual mission designs. The beauty of spreadsheets is that they are very flexible, and it's easy to create and modify low-fidelity models very rapidly. As a result, Excel gets heavy use throughout the aerospace industry for doing all sorts of back-of-the-envelope calculations and simple math modelling. As Jody says, they make a great scratch pad.

    2. Re:Spreadsheet Programs by kannibal_klown · · Score: 2, Interesting

      At my company, our biologiests and chemists rely heavily on spreadsheets. While thye could do the calculations themselves, the spreadsheets give them instant gratification. They just have to enter the results from an experiment (or have a device automatically dump them to a spreadsheet) and have a macro or set of equations generate a report.

      Most of these scientists don't test 1 compound; they test hundreds at a time. So doing it themselves would be a pain in the ass. Using spreadsheets, they can instantly see the resulting graphs and determine where the good data is.

  29. Re:vs. Office by Deusy · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's a shame that the parent comment is a blatant troll because it does harbour a truth or two.

    Gnome Office and OpenOffice.org (I couldn't comment on Star Office as I have not used it) are many features behind Microsoft's latest incarnations of it's Office suite.

    However, Microsoft Office has had a head start. It's been going for a great deal longer than any of OpenOffice.org, AbiWord and Gnumeric. It also has many more developers.

    Yet the Free Software Office programs seem to be catching up. AbiWord has matured massively between 1.0.x and 2.0 - they're almost unrecognisable from each other.

    Gnumeric is the one exception to the 'fewer features' since it actually boasts more functions that Excel. A little bit of polish, tweaking, and a few subtle feature additions and Gnumeric will be superior to Excel - some argue that it already is.

    OpenOffice.org is also making great strides. 1.1 is far better than 1.0 in all areas - features, speed, and general polish. The plans for 2.0 are promising - there is a detailed roadmap that makes for interesting reading. Version 2.0 of OpenOffice.org will be a major milestone for the project. 1.0 was the initial release, 1.1 was the produce of a bit of spit and polish, 2.0 will be the first to feel like a true individual project as opposed to a bastard-brother of Star Office.

    How is it that these Free Software programs are gaining on the software developed by the software giant?

    Since Free Software developers develop for free, I think there's a pride assosciated with their work that inspires them to overcome obstacles insurmountable to a payrolled team. It could also be that we have a superior development platform, but that's just flamebait.

    --

    Free Gamer - Free games list and commentary

  30. Re:No macros and they JUST got footnotes? by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I found the manpages quite difficult to use because sometimes I don't know what an API is called, so I would have to do a grep on the entire doc tree

    Try 'man -k KEYWORD'. I don't use linux very much, but this has helped me a great deal.

  31. What about Document Management? by bondjamesbond · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The biggest coup for any productivity suite would be a nice document management application like iManage for DocsOpen. Law firms (like mine) MUST have such a thing with hundreds of thousands of documents.

  32. Abiword 2.0 by mbrubeck · · Score: 2, Informative

    Abiword 2.0 was released today.

  33. A strong pitch for Gnumeric by RealAlaskan · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Dr. B.D. McCullaugh is a big name in statistics, and has made a name for himself in (among other things) testing statistical software. In this article, he says:
    The problems that rendered Excel 97 unfit for use as a statistical package have not been fixed in either Excel 2000 or Excel 2002 (also called "Excel XP"). Microsoft attempted to fix errors in the standard normal random number generator and the inverse normal function, and in the former case actually made the problem worse.
    That's the entire abstract!

    According to the release mentioned above, Dr. McCullaugh recommends using Gnumeric instead of excel.

  34. Blatant bias.. by Jondo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Finally the Linux desktop has a quality word processor that is faster to load than OpenOffice.org and includes proper footnotes. It also no longer uses its own font directory.

    Koffice Loads faster than OO, has proper footnotes, has never had its "own" font directory, and is properly integrated into the rest of KDE.

    1. Re:Blatant bias.. by r00zky · · Score: 3, Interesting
      --
      I'm a chainsmokin' alcoholic sociopath, so-ci-o-path
  35. Re:It by jimmy_dean · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, I agree. And it's just MIME-type games. But here's how it works. You save your file in Abiword 2.0 as a Microsoft Word .doc. What Abiword does is it is actually RTF but with the extension .doc. If you do want a true RTF with the proper extension, that option is there too. How's that work for you?

    --
    -> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
  36. Re:Problems with gnome. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    >Its not my computer either,

    Try running it on your own computer

  37. OOo does Flash already by TrentC · · Score: 2, Informative

    Perhaps OO will see Flash support in the future?

    OpenOffice does export as Flash, according to tho OpenOffice.org 1.1beta2 Features Page.

    You won't be throwing out Macromedia's product any time soon, I gather, but it's probably a good option for those Impress presentations...

    Jay (=

  38. Re:vs. Office by LardBrattish · · Score: 2, Insightful
    How is it that these Free Software programs are gaining on the software developed by the software giant?
    My take would be that M$ have not really added any compelling "must have" features to Word since at least Office 97 & arguably Word 6.0 for Windows 3.1 (except XML and I am NOT buying Office 2003 for that, I bought Office 2000 OEM and cheap when I was building my own box & I didn't see any reason to upgrade to XP either). So with a fixed target the open source versions are bound to catch up with the "key" features RSN. Now, being fair to the great Satan there are not many more features that could be crammed into Word 6.0 that are actually useful to the majority of users. Unfortunately for them they have to get people to upgrade regularly and "now without that crash-bug that lost you 3 hours of work" ain't cool enough (and IMHO should not be chargable anyway - unless I can charge them for the three hours of my time they wasted...)
    --
    What are you listening to? (http://megamanic.blogetery.com/)
  39. Presentation application? by GileadGreene · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Abiword 2.0 is part of the just-released GNOME-Office 1.0, which, as riggwelter writes "coordinates GNOME2 versions of AbiWord, Gnumeric, and GNOME-DB, the database interface."

    I see a word processor, a spreadsheet, and a database app. How about that other stalwart of the "office productivity" suite, presentation software? Much as it pains me to say it, Powerpoint has become almost indispensable (at least in my line of work) these days. OO.org's Impress is nice, but still not quite on a par with PPT. A Gnome-Office PPT equivalent would be a nice addition to the suite. Or is there some other open source presentation option out there I'm not aware of?

    1. Re:Presentation application? by ambrosius27 · · Score: 2, Informative

      An astute observation. No, there is no GNOME Office PPT equivalent as yet. However, there is good news on the horizon: the Abiword folks are working with Sven Herzberg in creating just such an application, using the Abiword and GNOME libraries. See Criawips. Yes, the name is a bit odd, but some prominent hackers, including Martin Sevior of Abiword fame, are keen to work on this program to round out the core of GNOME office (see the Footnotes story, comment by Martin, for example).

      --

      ~~~~~~~~~
      dissertus scribendo latine videri volo.
    2. Re:Presentation application? by ambrosius27 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hey, what happened to my hyperlinks?

      Fine, here it is in plain text:

      *The first link (Criawips):
      http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/c riawips/

      *The second link (Martin's comment):
      http://www.gnomedesktop.com/comments.ph p?op=showre ply&tid=17276&sid=1353&pid=17268&mode=thread&order =0&thold=#17276

      Cheers!

      --

      ~~~~~~~~~
      dissertus scribendo latine videri volo.
  40. Why I can't switch to Abiword yet by The+Revolutionary · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I'm currently an OpenOffice.org Writer for various informal to semi-formal tasks. Although for anything "serious" I use LaTeX. Something like Abiword, which integrates better with my GNOME desktop, is just the sort of application I would like to use.

    Also, the story claims that one of Abiword's distinctive features is, "includes proper footnotes". Well what is this supposed to mean? I've never had any difficulty making OpenOffice.org Writer do footnotes properly. Is there some widely known deficiency of which I am completely unaware?

    There were also a number of other issues last I tried; perhaps this have since been resolved:

    Seemingly no support for automated numbering of a proper outline (i.e. cycle Roman numerals, capital letters, numbers, etc.). I can't even get it to work manually, changing the sort of "numbering" I want at each level of indent.

    select+delete or cut text fails to properly redraw the screen, leaving a line of the removed text visible, and leaving me to wonder whether I actually removed the section properly, or if it is just due to improper redraw.

    In "Web Layout", strange breaking occurs where page breaks "should be", leaving me to wonder whether it hit "Enter" accidently, or if it is merely this bug.

    Scrolling results in text distortion, making one or more lines unreadable until scrolled off the screen again, or until the application window is covered and redrawn (although disabling "smooth scrolling" seems to "fix" this).

    Also, Abiword doesn't appear to allow the insertion of any "objects" other than "pictures". Of course this isn't a "fault", as I suppose it is waiting for a framework to be standardized for this sort of thing.

    No, between everything else, I don't have the time now to get a handle on the code base and fix or implement these things myself, and so please don't tell me to.

    I'm simply stating that as I found it last I checked, it was not sufficient to meet my needs, and I will, if most of these issues still remain, have to wait a while longer before I can adopt or endorse it for regular use.

    I look forward to switching.

    1. Re:Why I can't switch to Abiword yet by msevior · · Score: 2, Informative

      For the numbered outline, simply define a new style based on "Numbered Headings" and change Auto numbering style from simple Numeric to Alphabetic, roman, whatever you like.

      For the cut+and select and delete bugs, I'm stumped. They work great on my box. Please submit a bug along the offending document in a bug report to our bugzilla.

      Web layout! I'm impressed that someone actually uses that :-) Please post a bug report and we'll that fixed.

      Regarding the scrolling causing text distortion, this bug was fixed right before the 2.0 release.

      I think must have played with a pre-2.0 beta. Look at the hint for auto numbered styles. They work much the same as MS Word. We could include more by default I guess but it's just as easy for the user to create their own and save them to a template file.

      So go ahead and switch :-)

      PS. We take good bug reports with easy to reproduce examples very seriously.

  41. Re:vs. Office by Guppy06 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "but Office XP is far superior in terms of usability and productivity."

    That's all well and good, but is it four times the usability and productivity of SO? Because that's what the price tag says (and that's just for the standard version). Hell, WinXP Pro retails for less than that.

    I'm pretty agnostic when it comes to buying software (and, yes, I buy software), but when it digs into my pocket book as much as a proposed MS Office solution does, I'm going to spend on SO instead and use the savings on ways to make money.

  42. Just one question... by RedBear · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just one question about all these wonderful new "office" suites. They all use the same, standardized, open file formats by default, and are 100% compatible with each other, right? Right?

    Because that would be a huge benefit of moving away from MS Office, right? Because all these different office suites are totally compatible and interchangeable, even though they can never be totally compatible with the secret, changing MS Office formats.

    So I don't have to keep saving in DOC just to exchange files between StarOffice and GNOME Office and KDE Office, right? I can save in some new, default, standard, universally recognized file format, and easily exchange files between all these different programs without any translation problems or confusion, right?

    And Microsoft will quickly be forced to create a patch for their Office products so they can read and write this new open file format that the whole world is suddenly standardizing on because it's used by default by every open source office suite in the world, right?

    Or am I smoking crack and about to get my first -1, Troll rating for openly wondering why there is still no apparent single, open, standard, widely used file format? One to compete on solid ground with the single, closed, proprietary file formats from Microsoft and others that we all revile on a daily basis.

    We've had 15 years or more to replace DOC and its brethren. Where is the replacement for DOC? Or the replacement that can be used for anything, like a combination of DOC, XLS, PPT, PUB, etc? I'd really, really, really like to know. Because until I know that, I feel pretty stupid telling people to drop the nice, simple, standard (de facto if not de jure) Microsoft Office file formats. When they ask what they're supposed to use instead, I have no answer.

    1. Re:Just one question... by pointwood · · Score: 2, Informative

      KOffice will switch to Open Office fileformats - you can read more about it in the Kastle 2003: KOffice Developers' Meeting Report.

  43. abiword not there yet by DuckWing · · Score: 3, Interesting

    unfortunately for me, AbiWord doesn't come close to OpenOffice Write. OO does a better job of converting MS documents. AbiWord, in all my tests, is pathetic at it.

    for OpenOffice, any MS Word doc with graphics is hosed and forget about Word Art.

    Quite frankly, both have a lot of work ahead of them IMHO.

    --
    -- DuckWing
  44. worse than that by GunFodder · · Score: 2, Funny

    We have Java 2 Standard Edition versions 1.2 through 1.4.2. Don't forget Java 2 Enterprise Edition versions 1.2 and 1.3, or Java 2 Micro Edition (no clue what versions). J2EE includes Java Enterprise Beans with at least versions 1 and 2, and J2ME includes MIDP with at least versions 1 and 2 as well. Actually there are more Java specs than you can shake a stick at.

    Java 3 may require several megabytes just to store the version numbers of all the included components :)

  45. Re:No macros and they JUST got footnotes? by GunFodder · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What a spectacular troll! Seems like a straightforward question, but the weakness of Unix has always been the standard windowing system, or more specifically the lack thereof.

    Just about every Unix system has an X11 server, but few seem to know the dark arts of programming directly to X. Everyone picks the windowing toolkit flavor of the month and programs for that, apparently under the assumption that everyone will eventually see the light and pick their toolkit.

    KDE, Gnome, CDE, OpenWindows, OS X, etc all have one OR MORE windowing toolkits! Even though the underlying OS is basically the same in all cases. I love Unix but I can see why folks prefer programming for Windows. The APIs may suck but at least there are fewer of them.

    Looks like the future may be an abstracted or even interpreted language, like Java or Dflat. At least a developer has a chance of writing multiplatform code in one sitting.

  46. What ist this fetisch with fast loading times by 12dec0de · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't get it. Why is everybody interested in the fast loading of a office suite? Or an Web-Browser for that matter? I start my computer, load mozilla, load openoffice (as part of my saved session) and it stays up. Do I hear you say memory restrictions? That the job of the virtual memory manager. The last time my system stayed up for 163 days until some work on the power system and a kernel update forced a downtime.

    What difference does it make whether it takes 1 or 2 minutes to load?

    1. Re:What ist this fetisch with fast loading times by WebMasterJoe · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I think you did not read my comment till the end.
      Interestingly, I don't think you read the end of my comment. :) Computer geeks use computers differently than the rest of the world. And the bottom line is, if the users complain, then it is an issue. You can't close a bug report with, "users aren't using application the way we expect them to."

      Clearly a slow-loading app isn't a problem if you leave the application open for 163 days. But you're an exception. Most people shut down their applications at the end of the work day, if not their whole system. For these people, I can understand why a long load time is bad. And if they complain, you can't very well tell them that you don't have a problem with the load time, and they should stop turning off their computers.
      --
      I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
  47. Inevitable quote from Young Frankenstein by The_ForeignEye · · Score: 2, Funny
    Abiword 2.0 has been released

    Just can't help thinking of

    • Who's brain is this?
    • Abby...something...
    • Abby...something?
    • Abby...normal
    • A B normal!!?

    So, what word processor did you just release? It's not really Abiword, is it?

  48. Re:Biased Story, apps already exist. by stm2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    90% of the features of current MSOffice go unused,


    According to MS (sorry, I don't have the source) most people use only 10% of the features, but the problem is that is not the same 10%. And if the software doesn't have only one of the feature people need, they won't make the change.

    --
    DNA in your Linux: DNALinux