Slashdot Mirror
More Light Shed on Project David
Sun writes "Flexbeta.net received from Specops Labs screenshots "proving" that project David (previously covered here) is a real thing. The demo.... Office 2000 install. This is something both Wine and CrossOver Office know how to do for quite some time.
In a discussion on wine-devel some people noticed evidence inside the screenshots that project David is a CrossOver Office ripoff."
... if it's open source it'll be easy to spot a rip-off, if it's CrossOver-style proprietary then what's the point - just use CrossOver anyway!
Screenshots are great and all, but I'm still a bit sceptical. As soon as they say "Buy David now for $49.95. With our %100 compatibility, kick us if it doesn't work guarantee" I'll take it seriously.
I think this internet thing sounds like a good idea
this pic for references to an install of wine.
Finally, for those who know lots about these things, on this picture notice how the on the right and bottom of the page the scroll bar and status bar are clipped. This is a bug in crossover office but is fixed in the latest wine, so they appear to have basically made a crossover varient and not even bothered merging the latest release of the offical wine in. poor.
Combination - fun iPhone puzzling
I don't believe it. They used GIFs for the screenshots. Somebody needs to knock some sense into these people. This does not reflect well on their computer literacy.
Computer literacy doesn't mean "zealous revolution against all things that have been deemed uncool by the mindless nerd culture", understand?
http://www.flexbeta.net/images/david/office_instal l1.gif
in this one a subdirectory of their home directory is wine-20040408.
they could at least have made an effort.
How many computers are too many?
I dont really see a problem with this being a repackaged Wine. Provided that the company comply with the licensing terms, and that any changes to the source are given back to the community. More heads working on the wine project can only be a beneficial wherever they come from.
However, if they are going to be all take take take and no giving back to the community then I do see a problem with it.
Nick...
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
what bothers me though, is that they have this very (north) American-looking site to attract investors, despite the progress of *their* project. this so-called project exists purely to collect as much investors' money as possible without actually developing something. now they say they have screenshots. but guess what, hmm... how convenient.
this company somehow reminds me of this startup a few years ago, claiming that their then-upcoming operating system would become alternative for Windows and run windows applications without any glitch. after trials and errors (as well as marketing hypes), they changed their promise, as they couldn't make their OS fully compatible with all windows applications. the name of the new operating system was "Lindows."
Lindows survived, but I don't think this wine/xover rip off will survive, as they don't seem to have anything to sell but too-good-to-be-true claims. teach them what GPL means and protects if they still want to fiddle with OSS.
look at the simple and obvious point here.... they go from "planning" to a beta release in less than a week. any coder can figure out it is going to take a LOT more than a week to hit on any code worth using with a project of this scope and magnitude.
It seems a little ironic that the screenshots presented show-off all the best features of Windows applications.
Just about to agree to the EULA of Microsoft Office
Windows needs to be restarted to continue this installation
MS-Word asking you to register
Tell me again, why do we not use OpenOffice?
Why can't Specops make plugins for wine, like WineX from transgaming?
;)
Transgaming doesn't release their source code for the copyrighted pieces, but they do release modifications to wine.
I don't see a problem, other than they don't mention they use wine. Of couse maybe there is a readme.txt that has all the wine information. It's not released yet.
Though if it is Wine, its not really true virtualization like they claim. Damn, too much guessing, without seeing the code.
Well, that is the problem with open source. If the companies are also releasing the code to the purchasers, then the companies aren't violating or "ripping off" the open source apps.
What these companies are doing, in theory, is providing the support and services that Free/Open Source/Libre software supporters have always said is the way to make money.
So while you may see it as "ripping off" open source, these companies are doing exactly what the developers intended when they released their software under that kind of license: some very knowledgeable people can get the source and compile it themselves and do all the troubleshooting or someone who just wants a product that works and a support number to call when it doesn't can pay for the packaged solutions.
Could/Would your writing be any worse? How can anyone possibly be this stupid/dumb?
Dear Mr. A. Coward,
My native language is Hebrew. How many languages can you convey a message in so that people can understand, with or without grammar mistakes?
Sincerely,
Shachar
P.s.
http://www.shemesh.biz/sun.html for what my name means, as well as some clue about how much different languages can differ.
the problem is that these people are not releasing the code back to the community
Depending on the license (and the original poster was vague about this) there's no obligation to release source code back to the community under any conditions. Under the GPL, the company is only required to release source to the people it sells the software to. If I buy a copy of the GPL'ed Neat-O Keen Software from Acme, Acme is under to release the source to you. It must give me the source if I ask for it, but there's nothing that says you get a copy of it. If Acme makes changes to the code and uses it only internally, it is under no legal obligation to release that code to you. And I think, but am not sure, that if Acme makes changes to the code, and I buy it from them, they only have to give me the code, not you. I can still release the code back, but Acme is under no obligation to.
Under other kinds of licenses, Acme can make all the changes it wants, sell it to me and still be under no legal obligation to give me the code it changed.
even acknowleging the community that created the technology, except as a marketing target, or worse as a theoretical marketing target for fundraising purposes
Acme must include all copyright notices in the code and compiled binaries, but it is under no legal obligation to include references to the copyright holders in it's advertising. Remember, that's part of what the fuss about XFree 4.4.
You may not like it, you may think it is immoral, but it isn't illegal. When you release your code, you may want to think about that when choosing a license.
How can you say "GIFs aren't lossless, they're limited to 8-bit indexed colour." If you are trying to save an image with more than 256 colors... some color info will be lost. So its lossy of color!
Okay, I don't mind the joke becoming a debate, but if it does, can I ask about this one:
"[OpenOffice.org] lacks an email client, evolution does the job fine but not everyone agrees"
Now, everyone says this, I hear it all the time, and it makes no sense. Is there someone here who could explain
Why does an office suite need an email client?
No, really. Why? I mean, I've used email for years and I've used office-suites for years, and I've never even once had the urge to say "send this document by email" from a spreadsheet menu. And as yet, my email client has never had any problems with handling spreadsheet attachments in whatever's the default application, no integration required.
In fact, I'd prefer not to have office software integrated with email, because when you send email, you have to stop and think about what the recipient might want, what's the best file format to use, and how best to reduce the size of the attachment, nevermind double-checking you're not sending something confidential in the file headers.
But people are always on the OpenOffice support lists wishing that it had an email client. Why?
Surely it's a barrier to using new software? If OpenOffice.org had an email client, you'd have to swap email clients as well as office suites to use it. Maybe you like the email client you've already got. Maybe it would cost a lot to change email clients.
It's not as if I don't have these tools available. At work I have Outlook and OfficeXP (please don't send viruses, my company probably couldn't handle them). But I've never once used the two together in any way more complex than double-clicking an attachment and the operating system will decide which program to use. I use these programs all the time, and you'd be hard pressed to find some way in which they "integrate". In fact, Visio looks more integrated with MS-Office, and it's not even a microsoft product until recently.
What is it? Is it just convenient to buy them at the same time? Do people actually use the "Save and email this file" menu? Can you preview emailed spreadsheet attachments in a tiny little Excel window? Is there some sort of email collaboration feature that I haven't seen but would change my life if it worked?
What is it about email clients that people want them to be part of an office suite?
I really do not understand the desire to have an email client like this either. It appears to me that in general, most users do not benefit from an intergrated email client in any fasion. One influence however would be marketing, the people who buy software get a pitch about everything being intergrated. Maybe there is a thought that you are getting one piece of software to do email, word processing, spreadsheets, databases, .... as opposed to getting a piece of software for each. To them managing one program (even though in reality it is multiple programs just the same) is easier than 4. Who knows..
... with a digital camera. I wonder what their offices look like? I'm sure we would all love to know.
Remember [H]ard|OCP's expose "Behind the Infinium Phantom Console"? Perhaps someone needs to perform some similar detective work in this case as well.
At the risk of being moderated a troll...
I think that Outlook is a tool that has not really been replicated in the OSS community. Yes, you can point to Evolution, yes, you can point to 20 or so utilities that between them do the same things, but it's not the same. For people who live on Outlook, whoes daily buisness and productivity is built around Outlook, these tools that are so often pointed to are just not an answer that works. If I had to switch between even just 5 tools to get done what I used to do in Outlook in my last job, my productivity would have dropped to unaceptable levels.
Like it or not, with Outlook Microsoft built a product that works for a lot of people, that helps people get real work done. Could it be done better? I think that it could, but it would take a major OSS undertaking to do. One that would have to start by looking beyond the obvious, and into what keeps people using Outlook.t
Are you implying Outlook is like emacs for Windows?