AbiWord vs. MS Word, For Now

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Wednesday September 1, 2004 @01:51AM from the abiword-is-an-unsung-hero dept.

Gsurface writes "If you have decided that it is time to kill MS Word, then it is time to look for an alternative. Flexbeta.net compares AbiWord, part of a larger project known as AbiSource, with MS Word and asks: is AbiWord a worthy MS Word replacement? Not to ruin the ending but according to the article the only draw back to AbiWord is that it currently does not feature a grammar checker, though a plug-in is in the works." (Also on this front, AbiWord's native Mac OS X version is labeled experimental, but seems to work very nicely.)

9 of 511 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Sadly... by cs02rm0 · 2004-09-01 01:54 · Score: 5, Informative

...these things usually need to be able to work with Word formats and that's fine with AbiWord as long as you keep to text only. Start adding fancy lines and stuff in Word and view it with AbiWord, or vice versa, and things start to fall apart.

Haven't got any complaints with it as a standalone piece of software, I only tend to use about 2% of a word processor's features myself though.
1. Re:Sadly... by Lord_Raptor · 2004-09-01 02:36 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Shouldn't this become easier in the Future with new Versions of Office (2003+) Looks like MS is going forward with XML, which should make plugins and filters much easier. Simple filters should be as easy as a XML transform. They also seem to be offering Royalty free licenses and documentation to the reference Schemas. info: http://www.microsoft.com/office/xml/default.mspx
AbiWord advantage by dtfinch · 2004-09-01 01:58 · Score: 3, Informative

Tiny download, very fast load time, about 1/3 second for me on the first run.
The need for a grammar checker by caitsith01 · 2004-09-01 02:08 · Score: 4, Informative

according to the article the only draw back to AbiWord is that it currently does not feature a grammar checker, though a plug-in is in the works.

-insert lame jokes with really poor grammar here-

But seriously folks... Is a grammar checker really that important a feature? I find that in Word, I turn it off because it drives me crazy. For one thing it is often out and out wrong. It will suggest corrections where none should exist, and falter on the more finessed rules of grammar such as singular references to indefinite pronouns or the subjunctive. Try typing "here be dragons" into Word and you'll see what I mean. If you're a pirate, Word is next to useless for noting up treasure maps, and that's just one of its many grammatical flaws for average users.

To me, these rules are the things that make English interesting and enjoyable. Products like the Word grammar checker just make people lazy and reduce the need to actually know the rules. Instead of making a computer do it we should take the time to learn the subtle details of our language. If you don't know the rules, not only will you struggle to express yourself but you will miss the details in other people's words. In this sense it's all a bit cyclic - the more our word processors fix our spelling and grammar for us, the more we devolve into a community of people with the linguistic skills of George Bush, totally dependent on pressing 'F7' to help us construct our sentences.

Or to forget the learned discussion and just quote the damn Simpsons like I was going to in the first place:

Lisa: Almost done. Just lay still.
Linguo: Lie still.
Lisa: I knew that. Just testing.
Linguo: Sentence fragment.
Lisa: 'Sentence fragment' is also a sentence fragment.
Linguo: Must conserve battery power... *switches himself off*

--
Read Pynchon.
Re:One big gripe I have... by klaasvakie · 2004-09-01 02:15 · Score: 3, Informative

what do you use for word processing and desktop publishing?

Latex and Lyx

--
# ssh -l neo the_matrix; killall -9 agent_smith
Re:Getting Rid of Word Perfect by sthingp · 2004-09-01 02:27 · Score: 3, Informative

The filter for Abiword also works for OOo. libwpd has a working OOo plugin and converter for WPD documents. http://libwpd.sourceforge.net/
Re:Mac OS X Native Versions by mccalli · 2004-09-01 02:31 · Score: 4, Informative

OO.o and Abiword both have "experimental" Mac OS X native versions. While you can run OO.o through X11, it doesn't support things like copy-paste from non-X11 applications, something everyone uses.
True, but I'm a recent convert to NeoOffice/J, frequently mentioned on here, which is a wrapped-version of OOo that does support native cut and paste, along with double-clickable documents from the Finder and vastly improved font-rendering.
That last point is worth stressing - I used OOo through X11 and working with imported spreadsheets was a pain due to the vast font differences. This is vastly improved in NeoOffice. In fact the issue is gone for me, but I'm not so rash as to say gone for everyone.
Cheers,
Ian
Re:I'd call corrupting files more than a quirk, to by Joe5678 · 2004-09-01 03:40 · Score: 4, Informative

Having Word fix corrupted Word documents

File -> Open

Click on corrupted file, click on pull down menu on the "Open" button, select "Open and Repair"
Re:I'd call corrupting files more than a quirk, to by anomalous+cohort · 2004-09-01 05:15 · Score: 3, Informative

why would the user ever want to *not* repair the file when they try to open it?
Because they opened the wrong file by mistake and that file isn't really in the format supported by the application opening it. This goes back to a principal in GUI design where the tool should never make an irreversible change that wasn't asked for by the user without first checking with the user. In this case, the user asked to read the file, not write the file. Yet, the tool needs to write the file in order to repair it.