Slashdot Mirror
Native KOffice for Mac OS X
bsharitt writes "A preliminary version of KOffice has been built natively on Mac OS X. It looks like a lot of the hard part is over, and now a lot of cleaning up and bug fixes stand between Mac OS X and a free full featured office suite." There's also a story on the dot.
There already is free full-featured office suite that runs on Mac OS X. Openoffice.org has run on Mac for a couple releases now. Having used both open office and Koffice(koffice on Linux, openoffice on Linux and Windows), I find openoffice to be more versatile. It is all a matter of opinion though
But no, a version that requires you to load an X server doesn't count.
Congratulations to everyone who's worked on this.
Blogging Weight Loss, Distance Education, and more at verlin.com
There is a build of OpenOffice under X11 on OS X.
KOffice doesn't require X11. KWord, for example, runs natively under OS X.
GPL Deconstructed
So even thought some of the other screenshots are in the ugly Motif theme they will soon be all re-taken using the OSX theme.
Also notice how in the Dock the KDE applications icons show up (and scale wonderfully!). We have a script that generates OS X .app directories of the KDE applications and also generates those directories with the proper icons. You can see some of them in the background of the screenshot in Finder.
-Benjamin Meyer
Do you changes clothes while making the "chee-chee-cha-cha-choh" transformation sound?
An eMac costs 899 . Office:Mac costs 509 . So, yes.
Well, the reasons for porting KOffice to Mac OS X natively and the reasons why someone would want to use Konqueror on OS X may be different.
.war files (I do not know if this is an exclusive Konqueror feature or not, and I don't care - it is extremely useful).
Konqueror is not just a browser. It is also a file manager (kind of like Windows Explorer on SuperMan steroids). It suppors io-slaves, which gives Konqueror network transparency that I do not think is paralleled by any other file browser right now. Also, some people dislike the OS X Finder and would prefer to use Konqueror instead.
Konqueror is pretty cool - it has all the latest features such as tabbed browsing, but it also allows to split any view into two (and then again) - you can make it look like Norton Commander if you like.
Konqueror also supports archiving web pages as
So, there are many reasons someone would want to use Konqueror, and not just on OS X or Linux.
The reason to port to OS X could be so that KOffice were less dependent on X11 hacks and used Qt API more thoroughly, I don't know. The thing is - the more portable the code is, the fewer bugs there are (unless of course they start #ifdef-ing everywhere, then it just turns into a mess of duplicated non-portable code).
Paul.
Yet another troll.
Even a 3-year old reposting from a October 2000 review of Koffice in KDE 2. A for style, F for brains.
I think I need a new sig here.
OpenOffice on OSX has fallen behind. They are only up to 1.0.3, when other supported platforms are up to 1.1
The installation process on the Mac is much harder than other platforms also. X11 (and a few other dependencies) are included in the download, making it a whopping 173MB! That's roughly 100MB more than Windows and GNU/Linux versions.
I'm certain if KOffice was ported better than OpenOffice on OSX, it would be a more popular choice for those looking for a free office suite.
It's GNU/Linux dammit!
KOffice comprises the customary litany of applications...
This posting is plagarism of the worst sort. Cut and paste in its entirety from: LinuxPlanet. Taking someone else's work and presenting it as your own without attribution is simply dishonest. It is not informative or insightful.
Sailing over the event horizon
Snub the mac??!?!? Office for OSX has a better feature list than the PC version.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
According to the developer list, most of the bugs have been worked out and OO team are fairly close to finishing an installer for 1.1 for OS X. I wouldn't be surprised at a release next week for the SF expo.
-Alex
OpenOffice on OSX has fallen behind. They are only up to 1.0.3, when other supported platforms are up to 1.1 It was a loss cutting measure. 2.0 is going to be the first carbon port. For now deal with 1.03 or use whatever you've been using.
I don't knwo about you, but I for one will welcome our carbon OO overlords at that time.
--- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
Michael wrote: There's also a story on the dot.
:-)
He really should have linked to the story on dot.kde.org
"The dot" is "news for KDE-freaks - stuff that matters" so to speak. Hop on over, it's a nice place
Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
Yes they are.
Please stop trying to equate laptops and desktops. Even if we do use laptops:
Dell Inspiron 5100: $1,860 (15" LCD/2.66GHz P4/512MB/DVD-CD-RW)
Apple PowerBook: $2,198.00 (15" LCD/1GHz G4/512MB/DVD-CD-RW)
I'll even allow that the G4 may be more powrful than the P4, but not 2.66 times as powerful, so the PC wins power and price (though arguably loses in both cool-factor and the ethereal 'usability').
Build me a very powerful desktop Mac for less than $1000, inculding a 19" CRT. I did this 2 months ago. PCs are cheaper b/c there is more than 1 vendor - and isn't that why everyone hates MS? They only have one monolith to bitch at? As usual w/the Apple crowd, there's a double standard.
-bZj
PS: I hate MS just as much as anyone who uses computers for hours a day, but facts are facts.
.sig
Yes, of course you can. What makes you think that OpenOffice.org does not have a macro language with a complex object model available behind it ?
Not sure, well check out the complete (if somewhat involved) developers guide at OpenOffice.org API project.
Since partially completed ports apparently count, I recommend checking out the developer Aqua release of OpenOffice.org, Neoffice. Downloads of a test binary have been here for awhile.
Moreover, just yesterday, lead developer Dan Williams posted this state-of-the-port message on what still needs to be done to have a complete port of OO.o in Aqua:
All in all, these aren't problems that require all that much technical expertise, just a lot of trial and error, and a bunch of debugging. A lot of the issues that we have had for a long time, like the widgets and menus and the event loop, are actually solved; we simply need to convert our old hacks over to the new frameworks or clean up the code as it is. We can of course do this, but as always it requires more manpower.
So? Volunteers?
W
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
I'm not holding my breath.
You might not need to. See The State of the Aqua Port 2004 message from developer Dan Williams.
W
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
guess why Sun prefers Gnome over KDE for Solaris?
-----------
Actuall, according to Sun's own statements, Sun chose GNOME over KDE for a few reasons, none of them licensing related:
1) GNOME's architecture is more traditional. It uses CORBA, for example, instead of using its own mechanism (DCOP).
2) GNOME uses C, while KDE uses C++. It was only recently that KDE compiled with Sun's Forte C++ compiler. If the KDE libraries were compiled with GCC, then you couldn't use Sun's pro-leve development tools to build apps, because those use Forte. Sun developers were also much more comfortable with C rather than KDE's C++.
3) GNOME didn't have an HIG when Sun came onboard, so Sun had a major hand in building GNOME 2.x's UI. Meanwhile, KDE was pretty well-solidified by the time Sun came along.
Never have they said that licensing had anything to do with the choice. Indeed, no commercial developer has ever said they chose GTK/GNOME over Qt/KDE because of licensing issues.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
> The fake widgets are out of place.
;)"
Qt/Mac doesn't use fake widgets, but uses the Appearance manager, just like Cocoa and Carbon. *However*:
- Qt 3.3, which is currently a pre-release beta, and isn't detecting the new tab widgets and such in Panther, and thus falling back to older versions. Cocoa and Carbon were of course changed between Jaguar->Panther by Apple.
- The current port isn't meant to be pretty. It's meant to get things *working*.
One of the "Ben's" spearheading this effort had to say elsewhere:
"Colin, I'm with ya.
It's not like we don't know about the HIG, it's just that we only got things to *run* in the last week or two. Tweaking look and feel is still a long way off (Not to mention we're using a Qt beta. Some of it could be just the fault of incomplete Qt code.) If we were writing new code, it would be easy to start out fitting into the HIG, but since we're starting from existing code written for X11, we'll have to work up to it.
Making it fit in better is certainly on the TODO, but the first goal is to make it functional. So people, chill.
I tried and it is AWFUL!
Working on my Master's coursework I wrote some documents using Apple Works. Saved them in MSWord format (only format the Univeristy officially accepts - although I later discovered my tutor is also a Mac-head and would accept PDF), anyway, saved it in MSWord format. Came back to edit it later. All the formatting has been lost !!! OK so put it all back, cross fingers, save in Word format again. Come back later to edit, this time AppleWorks crashes each and every time I try to load a file IT HAD WRITTEN! That was the last straw so I went and bought MSOffice- and discovered the Entourage is actually quite a good email client (although now Mail has folders I've switched back to that).
Edward
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.