Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Aqua OpenOffice.org v2.0 Cancelled

Posted by michael on from the learn-to-like-X-like-everyone-else dept.

Ant writes "According to MacSlash's story, a recent post on OpenOffice.org said no Mac OS X work has been done since 2003 and that there are no longer any plans for an Aqua version 'due to various licensing, political, and fundamental engineering difficulties'. :("

13 of 689 comments (clear)

  1. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  2. Of course they won't by northcat · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Of course they won't port it to Aqua. Otherwise Apple will sue OOo to death. Why, you ask? Just because they can.

  3. Re:What is X11 vs. native vs. NeoOffice.org??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    native is special because it runs faster and blends in with other native apps

    aqua and quartz are bad because they are made by apple

    x11 is good because it is produced by the good folks over at X.org

  4. More Mac Zealotry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Apple is running a religion like the Scientologists -- if you're not willing to pay us the extra money for your experience, you're a heretic -- they're just as much of a monopoly as M$.

    "OMG it has a different UI -- it's not Mac-like -- I can't use this, I'm too much of a one-trick pony to learn anything else!"

    Apple Marketing is counting on that to push their overpriced equipment.

    If you're too challeneged because you can only use one UI, you deserve to be separated from your money.

    1. Re:More Mac Zealotry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      yeah, kind of reminds me of all those dumb linux users to worried about word processors to take a shower and go outside once in a while. fucking zealots

    2. Re:More Mac Zealotry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Why dont you shut up and continue to live in your beige infested trailer trash life style!

  5. Re:What's the downside to using X11? by Megane · · Score: 1, Flamebait
    Installation of X11 after OS X is installed typically requires the user to reboot their system with their OS X install disc, and then install the X11 support atop their existing OS X installation.

    Wrong. You should be able to just insert the install disc, find the appropriate .PKG files, and double-click on them to run the installer.

    I guess everybody's just too busy constantly recompiling their Linux packages from source to mess with an OS X port. Must be the same problem with the MESS emulator, which hasn't been upgraded since 2003 either.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  6. Sour grapes by ultrabot · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Yeah, I run OO under X11 on OS X - but it is as ugly as it is on Linux. Which is pretty damned ugly and slow.

    Sounds like sour grapes to me. And then they wonder why the opes source community doesn't care about mac users...

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
  7. Mac OS X = Mac Porn X!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    Mac OS X is worse than Windows 2000 + OpenOffice-1.1.4
    Mac OS X is worse than Linux + OpenOffice-1.1.4

    How bad is Mac OS X?
    How expensive is Apple's PowerPC?

  8. Re:Oh noes! by Jah+Shaka · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    although apples logo used to be the rainbow thats the logo for the gay rights movements...

  9. Re:What's the downside to using X11? by sabNetwork · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yeah man. It's pretty damned ugly in Windows, too.

    Not to criticize your GUI fashion sense.
    --

  10. jobs vs jackson by Jah+Shaka · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    macfag

    loving jobs huh,

    who would you prefer to spend the weekend with?

    1. steve
    2. michael j

  11. Re:What's the downside to using X11? by Durandal64 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Because the everyday person doesn't need it, and it's fucking confusing for anyone but a geek. If geeks want it, they can install it. Why don't you just tell Microsoft that they need to include their POSIX layer with every Windows install and smack a "Getting Started With Windows Unix Services" tutorial on the screen during initial setup?