SoftMaker Rolls Out Office Suite for BSD, Linux, and Others
martin-k writes "Commercial office suite software is coming to FreeBSD, Linux, Windows, Sharp Zaurus and Windows Mobile. SoftMaker, a German developer, recently released SoftMaker Office, a multi-platform office suite that excels in Microsoft Office compatibility, claims to be much leaner and faster than OpenOffice.org and works on many operating systems, down to PDAs." While SoftMaker certainly isn't new, it is nice to see them roll out a finished suite as opposed to one-off programs.
I'm downloading the trial version now.... more on that in a minute. My question would be, "How much better is it than OpenOffice, and how razor thin is the difference between it and Microsoft Office, and how compatible compared with Open Office?"
I've had expectations raised many times in the past and while always initially excited found myself not using any products that had rough edges. For the longest time that basically meant I used Microsoft when I had to, vi and vim the rest of the time :-). Open Office was the first product with sufficient polish
and compatibility, so much so I could pretty much plug and play
replace Office for people with little fear they would have
trouble adapting.
Anything that falls short of that is likely to have problems gaining purchase in market share. I've used all of the KDE products, ABISoft, etc.... none of them really measured up. That isn't to they were bad products, many of them would be considered excellent in and of themselves, but that isn't the yardstick the buying public uses (and will use).
Well, I've downloaded and installed the trial version. I know it's not fair, but here is my five minute review (which is about all I have time to give for new products competing with products with which I already have perfectly good solutions):
Download and install went flawlessly, a requirement for any product anymore -- if the install doesn't go seamlessly, I won't spend a lot more time trying to figure out why. The program fired up cleanly, and was easy and intuitive enough to use especially if you've used any word processor or spreadsheet before. The graphics, layout, and presentation were good but the icons were not crisp as Microsoft's or Open Office's.
I don't have a suite of files to test for compatibility with Office and Open Office, but as I indicated, I have a solution for this type of work (Open Office), and I'm not inclined to spend much time beyond apparent return on investment.
PROS: Easy download and install, very similar to Microsoft Office (though that will change with the new Microsoft Office, not necessarily a bad thing), inexpensive comopared to Microsoft Office, established company, multi-platform and multi-form factor (for PDAs, though other than browsing, I'm not inclined to do much word processing and spreadsheeting (verb?) on PDAs).
CONS: Expensive compared to Open Office, not enough better (in my opinion) to warrant the switch, expensive to add typefaces, "compatibility" with Microsoft is a moving target -- one for which there is no guarantee of currency.
Cool that there's another player... Would I switch? Probably not. YMMV.
I have worked in a Windows publishing house. I have worked in a Mac publishing house. I've visited countless shops throughout Rochester. The majority of the print workflow you describe is frighteningly inaccurate.
The original source can come from anything from a text file to a Word document. Most often, it's Word. You're right there. However, the writers aren't concerned with that too much, they use what they are comfortable with. They use a Word processor to.. process words.
The book goes into Quark BEFORE going to press? If by every step afterward you mean it goes into Quark, then yes, you'd be correct. There are several hundred thousand dollar solutions dedicated to managing your Quark & InDesign files, and your assets. Check out Xinet and Dalim and Documentum and etc. The authors are out of the chain by this point. The page designers work in the page layout programs. They upload their changes to Xinet, where it is opened by the editor, marked up, changed, and approved or sent back. It's only THEN converted into a print-ready PDF. That lonely guy at the end of the hall you describe is actually 2/3rds of the workflow.
The only people that use Word are the original authors. The page designers wouldn't subject themselves to doing page layout in word. That notion is just preposterous.
I honestly can't say where you got your impressions from, but they seem to be extremely off base. This is coming from someone who went to college for print, has talked to people throughout the print industry, and now works in print.