Slashdot Mirror


Excellent Tutorial for OpenOffice.org on Mac OS X

Blano writes "Marc Liyanage recently posted a great article on getting up and running and optimizing OpenOffice.org on Mac OS X. He includes some tweaks and helpful configuration tips." Another option is getting the software on CD.

51 comments

  1. Open Office is a joke on the Mac by Romeozulu · · Score: 3, Informative

    Open Office on the Mac is a joke. It runs under X and looks like crap. I used Open Office on Windows and loved it, but refuse to use it on the Mac.

    I hope they plan on coming out with a "native" version sometime soon. I own a Mac because I love the interface, it's very hard to take 12 steps back and use this.

    1. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Informative

      * Open Office on the Mac is a joke*

      much of the point of this article is to guide on how to make it less of a joke and more of an usable tool.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Open Office on the Mac is a joke. It runs under X and looks like crap.

      Fair enough, even if the comment was trollish. The article aims to help make it less of a joke, but you really have to ask yourself this-

      There are a lot of talented mac progammers working on all sorts of cute but worthless apps, like 5 billion "download songs off your iPod" programs. The OpenOffice team has repeatedly asked for volunteers to help with the port to Aqua. There are a lot of people who really don't like Microsoft.

      So why is it that OpenOffice for Aqua is so far off? Come on people- stop bitching, step up to the plate!

    3. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by anarkhos · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Part of the problem is Sun wants the programs to behave the same on all platforms, which defeats the whole point.

      Why the hell would I want to help Sun anyway?

      --
      >80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
      >life
    4. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by bedouin · · Score: 4, Interesting
      So why is it that OpenOffice for Aqua is so far off? Come on people- stop bitching, step up to the plate!
      Maybe they're like me and anticipating that Apple will create a word processor and spreadsheet program equally as good as Keynote. Word is the only MS app I'm hanging onto, and I have no use for Excel.

      With the former developers of Gobe Productive now working for Apple we might see something happen soon.
    5. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 0, Troll

      So why is it that OpenOffice for Aqua is so far off?

      Because Office 2004 is a set of pretty darned good programs, while Open Office is... well, poop.

      Why waste time trying to put lipstick on a pig?

      --

      I write in my journal
    6. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by Taran · · Score: 5, Informative
      So why is it that OpenOffice for Aqua is so far off? Come on people- stop bitching, step up to the plate!

      The OpenOffice team is redoing their internal APIs for version 2.0 - the Mac porting team would be wasting their time porting a deprecated version. You can find more at the OOo Mac port site.

    7. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by bill_911 · · Score: 1

      To reinforce what others have said, NeoOfficeJ is an excellent OOo implimentation.

      What is needed are people who know JAVA to get NeoOfficeJ running under OOo 1.2.

      Most Mac users have machines that canhandle the extra resources NeooficeJ requires to run well.

    8. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by grrrl · · Score: 4, Informative
      Word is the only MS app I'm hanging onto, and I have no use for Excel.
      being in a scientific field I find that Excel is worth the MS-infection on my machine. It really is a superior spreadsheet program (anyone ever tried appleworks? what a joke! its a wordprocessor with boxes). I use MS word occasionally for typing up letters (and opening email attachments!) but for reports I use latex (via TeXshop) so appleworks word probably would do for me if I only bought excel (but its cheaper to get the lot)

      as far as keynote goes, I think it was such a great improvement over powerpoint at the time, but the non-existent development since then is going to leave it way behind - I know a lot of people use it and love it, but if they dont fix the printing/pdf options and add some extra stuff it will die - powerpoint already has copied all the great stuff keynote offers (well, i assume it has, except maybe "cube" transistions) and noone who hasnt yet switched ever will. its sad. (i also love the drag and drop pdf capability but i think this is more an aqua thing than a keynote thing..?)

      open office has never appealed to me (i installed it once... ) because i already paid for the excel package. like i said, i hardly use word processing and I have keynote, open office seems too clunky for the effort

    9. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by capmilk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why the hell would you want to help Sun anyway? To have a decent and free office software running natively on OS X. That's why.

    10. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by liyanage · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't like X11 apps on Mac OS X either. And there are things that are indeed not as good as on MS Word, especially keyboard shortcut / productivity tricks.

      The biggest drawback is the missing ability to assign keyboard shortcuts to style sheets. This is an absolute must-have for me. The nonstandard keyboard shortcuts really suck and hamper the workflow.

      That said, there is just no way to get structured PDFs using real OS X software, and that's why I'm using OpenOffice even though I would prefer a native OS X program that is tightly integrated.

      That's why I wrote the article. After working with OpenOffice for a while I have to say that not that much is missing in there to make it into the premier tool for long, structured technical documents. The PDFs that come out in the end are of excellent quality, including fonts and vector graphics and of course the structure information/bookmarks.

      It is actually quite impressive that you can get such a program for free. What's really interesting are the XML-based foundations, like the XSLT-based import/export filters. There are some *great* possibilities for shuttling structured content into and out of OpenOffice into other systems in the future.

      If there's ever a real Aqua version, it will be a killer.

      So I agree, it is hard to "downgrade" to the X11 level, but there is no alternative for what I use it for, and it is an impressive program, especially at this price.

    11. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by neillewis · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, the article is worth it just for the download link for a patched libfreetype for OS X that does reasonable quality anti-aliasing. Love it!

    12. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by lavaface · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What would really be interesting would be if Apple leveraged OO's codebase like they did for Safari. Why recreate so much when a great deal of work has been done? The community would love it, Apple would gain a spiffy (free???) app as part of the OS (or iLife). They may still have a contract with Microsoft but god, I'd love to see them do this!

    13. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by Maserati · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, you're definitely in the "Other" category of Office users. You use the heck out of one component and ignore the others. And I've long considered that Excel was the best of the package, Word still isn't as well-made as Ami Pro was 12 years ago and Powerpoint is a fucking joke - always has been, always will be.

      Keynote 2 needs to happen no later than MacWorld in January. I haven't heard a whisper. It's a damn sham., it's so much cleaner than Powerpoint ever dreamed of being. A lot of it comes from a massive infusion of Cocoa/Quartz/Aqua goodness, but all of those APIs are open to any developer that wants to use them - fairly well documented on the web too (check out Omni Group's stuff). We may yet roll out another half-dozen seats at the agency. And no, PowerPoint '04 is an improvement but it's still not up to snuff.

      For a real dream, imagine Visio implemented as a total Cocoa app.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
    14. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by bursch-X · · Score: 1

      Well you proved the point. For Mac users decent means having a native Mac OS X user interface FOLLOWING APPLE'S UI GUIDELINES, and not only having sort of Aqua looking buttons. You know the Mac interface is not about looks, it's about functionality and there I have to admit native MS Office is the lesser evil, though still far from well done.

      --
      There are two rules for success:
      1. Never tell everything you know.
    15. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Well,

      to top all the posts :D I mainly use PowerPoint and I find it excellent.

      I bought Keynote when it apeared without testing it first, big mistake. I simpyl can not get how people can work with Keynote. Its incredible complicated to use and lacks nearly all graphical features. Seems you are expected to draw diagrams etc. in third party programs and import or cut/paste them nto Keynote.

      I bought MS Office for Mac OS X to be able to make presentations ... besides the import of *.ppt for keynote sucks so I could not make PPTs on my old notebook and just use them as is.

      I installed Open Ofice, too, of course. But it was a hell to install and is one release behind the Linux and MS releases. Its UGLY, SLOW, and of confusing useability.

      It has a "master program" as front end from wich you start the word processing part, spread sheet part or presentation part. How arcane! The whole concept of having basicly one application which handles 3 types of documents .... thats not what I want. I dont like to wait 2 minutes until a document is open just because OO does:

      first start X windows
      then start the master program
      then start the necessary application part
      then starts parsing the XML files

      Finally: there are alternatives like "Rag Time" on the Mac which work pretty well. And at least 3 very good word processors like Nisus etc.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    16. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So why is it that OpenOffice for Aqua is so far off? Come on people- stop bitching, step up to the plate!


      Because the version 2.0 API's aren't complete, so any effort put into an Aqua version of 1.x would be a huge waste of time. Anybody who claims to be a fan of OOo should know this by now.

      Come on people, do some basic research before you shoot your mouths off.
    17. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I hope they plan on coming out with a "native" version sometime soon.


      Yes they do, as soon as possible after the 2.0 API's are complete.
    18. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And I've long considered that Excel was the best of the package


      Egads!!! I dread using Excel and consider it to be the worst of the bunch. Cut & Paste broken from the day they started shipping a Windoze version (the original Mac-only version Cut&Paste correctly) and M$ refusing to even admit there's anything wrong with it. That's the most annoying bug -- I have to change my whole work flow just to deal with this quirk. I've also run into too many times where Excel uses some bizzare math rules and returns wrong answers that appear to be due to round-off errors.
    19. Re:Open Office is a joke on the Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It has a "master program" as front end from wich you start the word processing part, spread sheet part or presentation part. How arcane!


      Actually how Unix-like. So much of *nix is built on a tool doing what it needs to do well and if you need something that requires the M$ typical swiss army knife approach, you make multiple tools and chain the output of one to the input of the next. So, instead of adding features to 'ps' at the expense of letting known bugs languish (ala M$), I can do something like:

      ps -aef | grep udt

      and find all the instances of 'udt' that are running instead of waiting for 'ps' to be upgraded so it has filterring.
  2. NeoOffice/J ~= OpenOffice.org for OSX by numbski · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.planamesa.com/neojava/en/index.php

    Take a look. It works beautifully here. Takes a little longer than MS Office to load, but once it's loaded, it's wonderful.

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

  3. Nice work by JavaRob · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was trying about 6 months ago to get OpenOffice working properly on my wife's iBook, so she could have something better than AppleWorks (without me paying MS anything)... it was *not* easy. She ended up sticking with AppleWorks despite its flaws and limitations. X-11 apps are really tough to integrate properly into OSX (Jaguar, at least - haven't tried Panther), even using nice windows managers like OroborosX.

    I think I'm going to give it another shot -- this guy really walks through all of the nitty gritty details clearly, and comes up with something that looks pretty usable. He might be using Panther, though... I remember reading somewhere that Apple's X-11 wasn't going to be available for earlier versions of OSX; I installed XonX (XFree86 for Darwin), not Apple's version.

    Anyway, he's going specifically for the goal of creating PDFs with bookmarks (which we don't really need), but you get all the details of setting up a workable install of OOo along the way.

  4. NeoOffice/J development status by JavaRob · · Score: 2, Informative

    Do you think it's ready for non-technical users yet?

    I got scared off a bit by the website's warnings like "it's really only a prototype" and "As this is a development project, NeoOffice/J is intended for software engineers and is not yet complete enough for regular users." (emphasis theirs).

    Personally, I don't mind working around some bugs and crashes here and there in exchange for cool new features, but my wife doesn't work that way.

    1. Re:NeoOffice/J development status by numbski · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think so, given a couple of things:

      1. Said non-technical user understands how a windows/x-windows style UI operates. Despite being 'native', instead of the menu being overlayed in the menubar, each window has it's own menu.

      2. User isn't scared off by the said application loading a bit slowly.

      --

      Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    2. Re:NeoOffice/J development status by p4ul13 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I think NeoOfficeJ is a fantastic implementation of OpenOffice. I switched to it because NeoJ will load associated files when you double click them. OpenOffice in its current OS X X-window implementation doesn't do this very consistently. On top of that the integration with OS X is just so much cleaner and friendlier.

      Neo Office J is being used to prepare for the eventual native OS X release of OpenOffice, so I want to do what I can to encourage the project.

      --
      Paul Lenhart writes words!
    3. Re:NeoOffice/J development status by Aram+Fingal · · Score: 1

      I would say that NeoOffice is much closer to ready for non-technical users than OpenOffice.org is. You don't have to install a bunch of separate packages to get it to work. Most importantly, it supports cut and paste with the rest of the Mac environment.

      There are some other little things too, from the perspective of a non-technical user. For example, you start, switch to and open files with a single icon in the dock for NeoOffice/J. With OpenOffice.org, you start it with the "Start OpenOffice.org" icon and open files by dragging to that same icon but you have to click on X11 icon when switching programs.

      Note that the main purpose of the article is actually not so much to just set up OpenOffice as to get it working with Acrobat Distiller. When I get a chance, I think I will reread the article and see if I can do the same thing to set up NeoOffice/J with Acrobat. I know a few people who may be interested in that in the near future.

  5. Other stuff by Marc Liyanage by jpkunst · · Score: 4, Informative

    Marc Liyanage is a great asset to the Mac OS X community. Check out some of the Mac OS X packages he provides for several important Unix applications. Though not linked to from that page yet, he also has a PHP 5.0.1 package ready for Mac OS X. (Caution: link points directly to the .dmg file).

    JP

  6. OOo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think the best implemntation of OOo for OS X at this thimr is NeoOffice/J

    It still does not really look like a mac app, but it does behave like one. In comparison to the X11 version it has:

    - quartz text rendering
    - native key commands (like cmd-s and so on)
    - one application package
    - double clicking files works normally
    - no seperate launchers
    - no extra software required
    - native printer and font support ...etc

    neooffice/j makes a lot of Marc's suggestions obsolete. The only drawback of /j is that you need a few hundred mhz tor run it.

    1. Re:OOo by liyanage · · Score: 3, Informative

      NeoOffice/J is indeed *really* nice, I write that at the beginning of my article.

      However, the point is that it is based on an obsolete version of OpenOffice that will not run the ExtendedPDF macro. If you don't need that, then I would indeed suggest to use NeoOffice instead of X11-OpenOffice.

      Once, NeoOffice/J comes out based on the current OpenOffice, I will immediately switch to that myself...

    2. Re:OOo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, for something secific like the ExtandedPDF macro, this is true, and it is really nice to be able to make 'real' PDF's.

      Maybe this should have been in the slashdot summary.

      Just running OOo on X11 for any non-specific purpose like this does not make much sense however...

  7. It works, but.. by T.Hobbes · · Score: 2, Informative
    I managed to install it and get it working, but the install is a little wierd: everything - libraries, executables, etc - is installed in the application's folder (i.e./Applications/OpenOffice/). Which is OK, but it kinda sucks in that none of the applications are (easilly) accessible from the command line. Also, when I started it from within gnome, it complained that
    Could not get value of CFPref AppleLanguages! Please reset your locale in the International control panel..

    Does anyone here know if there are other relases that work on OSX (perhaps a *BSD/PPC release?).

    1. Re:It works, but.. by FosterKanig · · Score: 1

      You are not what they should be targeting. Command line? That'snot what most normal people want.
      Because it doesn't conform to your geeky ideals, doesn't mean there is something wrong with it. Personally, I think it is crap. But not because I can't use it from the command line.

  8. Apple + M$ gives Open Office a chance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Apple can easily prodce a kick ass iOffice package that would make M$ Office look like the cluttered piece of junk that it is. Actually a fully working copy is probablly already in the software basement at Apple anyway.

    Appleworks is purposely kept lame all these years for a reason, the Apple/MS relationship which is competitive, but not hostile. After all Apple does want Virtual PC to be continued.

    So this uneasy reationship gives neutral party Open Office a chance to really take hold on the Mac platform and out produce Appleworks and be done cheaper than M$ Office.

    So to you Open Office programmers: Get a investor and some real interface/ease of use programmers and charge $20 or so for your product on Mac's.

    From there port to the Windows platform and kick M$ in the nuts pernamently.

    Just don't forget to keep it cross platform.

    Well? What the hell are you waiting for? My CC is ready, along with millions of other Mac users.

    Get busy

  9. Easy.. unless you're not using Panther... by uncleFester · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you're 10.2(.x) or earlier, you run into a bit of a roadblock at the X11 stage: Apple's X11 only works w/Panther. Anything earlier and you want to look for Fink and/or XDarwin. And have some alcohol handy.. it took me a little while to get X in place before the oO install.

    caveat - i'm playing with an iBook as a possible work-PC replacement, so though unix is my day job darwin/osX is new to me.. damn if it isn't cool as shizznitz though.

    -'fester

    --
    -'fester
    1. Re:Easy.. unless you're not using Panther... by grrrl · · Score: 3, Informative
      Apple's X11 only works w/Panther.

      unless they have broken it recently, I had apple's X11 working fine under jaguar, and it was a very simple install

      most of the issues with fink were pre-"apple X11" where you had a few choices for X, but I assume most people now just use the apple x11 as it is the easiest to install and deal wtih

    2. Re:Easy.. unless you're not using Panther... by peretzpup · · Score: 3, Informative

      Apple has stopped distributing the X11 beta that runs on Jaguar and forbids others from distributing it. See their X11 faq.

    3. Re:Easy.. unless you're not using Panther... by grrrl · · Score: 1

      oh yikes!

      thats so rude, BAD APPLE!

      but then, panther is lovely so you should think about upgrading anyway...

  10. Nice Article, but... by Harold+of+the+Rocks · · Score: 2, Informative

    "My reason for looking into this was that I need to produce long technical documents as PDF files."

    Why not just use LaTeX? Since PDF is native to Mac, PDFLaTeX seems (to me) to be the best solution. I've been using TeXShop for a few years now and have really enjoyed it. Sure, you don't get the GUI of an Office "suite", but I think the results speak for themselves.

    --
    bueller...bueller...bueller
    1. Re:Nice Article, but... by liyanage · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Why not just use LaTeX?"

      I didn't want to. I wanted a GUI environment with WYSYWIG rendering. I really want to see what I'm working on, that's a matter of personal preference. I don't want to look at my document in markup source code, I want to work on it the way it looks on paper.

      And some of the users who will use the inhouse templates I've created will not want or be able to learn LaTeX.

      As for the results speaking for themselves, that's exactly why I created this setup. The results are astonishing and they closely adhere to our corporate design guidelines.

    2. Re:Nice Article, but... by vonFinkelstien · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I can see your point about not wanting to force LaTeX on users (LaTeX is very easy to learn, but not everyone wants to take the time); however, I don't see the point of needing WYSIWYG.

      In LaTeX I type some code and then click "Typeset" in TexShop, which shows me what the document looks like with TRUE WYSIWYG (i.e., not Word's sudo-WYSIGWYG). What's so hard about tha? But then I learned word processing on WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS years ago, and was used to hitting "Print Preview" to see what the doc would look like printed.

    3. Re:Nice Article, but... by Blano · · Score: 1

      I think it works both ways. In the user world of those who are savvvy but non-technical - they simply work visually and consider going to a shell or Terminal the dark ages and will not adopt it. (although we know it is not) Marc's point in this is to encourage exploration and hopefully stint development of a pure OS X port. And users will adopt an alternate app if it allows for visual creation similar to procedures they are already familiar with.

  11. It needs to be OSX native... by analog_line · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...before my customers will even consider throwing Office away, and trust me, they REALLY want to, with the raft of problems that it creates daily for just about all of them.

    However, those problems pale in comparison to the issues that these decidedly non-technical people will have in trying to use the horrendously awful X-based interface. I'm having enough trouble getting them able to operate OSX without having a fit of panic every 10 minutes because it doesn't work like OS9. I don't need them getting even more confused with all the X requirements of Open Office.

    Yeah, Open Office is great. I use it on my Windows and Linux installs, and recommend it to my Windows-using customers. However until they get it native, unless someone makes a special request I'm not going to bother further confusing my Mac customers with it.

    1. Re:It needs to be OSX native... by liyanage · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I absolutely agree.

      In its current state on Mac OS X, the X11 version is usable for fairly technical people.

    2. Re:It needs to be OSX native... by norkakn · · Score: 2, Informative

      the native version should be out in 2005. Yeah, its a while, but it's free (-:

    3. Re:It needs to be OSX native... by tverbeek · · Score: 1
      In its current state on Mac OS X, the X11 version is usable for fairly technical people.

      Definitely. Between home and office I have a couple Athlon desktops and a Pentium2 laptop running Linux, a Pentium3 running Win2K, a G5 PMac, and a G3 iBook. OOo works adequately for me on all of them, which has been an incredible convenience, because no matter which one I'm sitting in front of, I can (through the magic of Samba and/or FTP) pull up the same documents to work on. And as a matter of fact, the one I run OOo on the most is the G3 iBook.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    4. Re:It needs to be OSX native... by analog_line · · Score: 1

      Yeah, free, until those customers need to pay me to help them figure out how to use their office software, and ask me what the hell this "X" thing is. Some of my clients eyes start glazing over when I try to describe permissions to them, never mind what a window manager is.

      With Microsoft Office, they only need to pay me to perform pretty well documented workarounds every so often.

  12. doesn't pass the "wife test" by ChristTrekker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    OOo, at least on the Mac, doesn't yet pass my "wife test". I'm getting my wife to switch from her crusty old PC to our new Mac, and the change in interface is already enough. I don't need an app that works vastly differently than everything else. I need one that integrates well.

    My solution, given AppleWorks well-known limitations, is to try to install old versions of Office to run in Classic. While still not native, it's closer than an X11 app is. So far the biggest problem is getting my new floppyless Mac to communicate to my very old System 7.1 Mac. It takes a bit of updating by sneakernet on the 7.1 side to get it to even see my network.

  13. Never Understood Integrated Works Suites by Salvo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've never Understood the whole OpenOffice/*Works type Applications.
    Having one Application for Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Drawing and Painting just doesn't make sense. They are three different creative tasks, which occasionally have overlap.
    The Windows-OLE/GNOME-Bonobo concept makes much more sense to me. Write a Document in AbiWord/WordPerfect. If you want to add a pretty Picture, Embed a Sodipodi/CorelDRAW! Drawing. If you just want to write your Resumé, just use AbiWord/MSWord. It just seems a lot more Unixey than including everything in one Application. You can also utilise previous work using a Linked Object. I could create a technical Drawing in AutoCAD and link it into a Report in Word. Then, when I wish to update the Model with more information, I just update the original and the Illustration in my Word Document automatically updates. You can't do something like this with a Works Suite, and if I want to use something more powerful (like AutoCAD) than the built-in Offering, I can. Platform Portability can be a problem with OLE/Bonobo documents, but that's what PS/PDFs are for, aren't they?

    Most *Works-style applications store all types of documents in the single File Format. Where's the sense in that. If I want to find the letter that my father wrote to Grandma, I have to search though a dozen photos of grandma, a spreadsheet on Superannuation, 20 different letters to do with the Family Tree, a Picture of the family tree, a drawing of a desk, until I find the letter that I'm after. All these documents appear as Gobe Productive Files in the File Manager. There is no way to determine that one is a Spreadsheet, Painting, Drawing or Document.