OpenOffice 2.2 Released

xsspd2004 wrote with a link to a Desktop Linux post about the newest version of OpenOffice.org. Bug fixes and the usual changes can be found in the project's release notes. The developers are using the turn of phrase 'a real alternative to Office 2007', hoping to win over some folks not too thrilled with the commercial software's new look. "Overall, version 2.2 should appear better to users thanks to its support for kerning, a technique that improves the appearance of text written in proportional fonts; kerning is now enabled by default. OpenOffice's PDF (Portable Document Format) export function has also been enhanced with the addition of the optional creation of bookmarks feature, and with support for user-definable export of form fields. A quick look at the release notes also reveals that many minor bugs have been repaired in this new version. Most of these appear to relate to the Calc spreadsheet and Base database programs."

Comments

probably

[wizardforce]

maybe not yet but this can easily be fixed by using an open standard. hopefully Microsoft's plan to get a closed source one won't happen. but then isn't a clsoed standard an oxymoron?

Re:probably

[pr123]

Has anyone had success inserting .eps (epsi) figures which have no preview figure? I have found that I am unable to: 1) View such figures, 2) Print such figs. 3) Export such figs to pdf If eps figs can't be supported, OO is virtually useless for tech papers. How about the draw outputs...There was no capability to export to eps so such figs could be imported into other apps.

Re:probably

[Anonymous Coward]

How about the draw outputs...There was no capability to export to eps so such figs could be imported into other apps.

There is.

Re:probably

[gweihir]

OOffice is compatible with MSOffice in that is has problems handling EPS. Under Linux it works usually, by using GostScript to render the graphics. However the same documents do not display EPS on MS platforms.

Made me stick to LaTeX for all my technical writing.

Side note: No MS-Office Component can handle EPS, despite of what some people claim. Some can handle EPSI, which is EPS with an embedde bit-image for non-EPS capable applications.

Re:probably

[Anonymous Coward]

...by using GostScript to render...

Do you mean Goatscript? *shudder*

Re:probably

[pe1chl]

eps figures work for me, but only when printing to a Postscript printer. this is to be expected, as there is no postcript rendering engine anywhere in the chain except in the printer.

(this can be different in Linux, where there often is a "virtual" postscript printer that uses ghostscript to convert to the printer-specific format before sending it to the printer. but this depends on the spooler configuration which usually depends on the particular distribution and the printer installation wizard they use)

Re:probably

[fritsd]

PP probably means ghostscript. What are you more scared of, goats or ghosts?

Re:probably

[Anonymous Coward]

He's probably scared of goatse.

It's nearly unusuable.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a 1 GHz Athlon system with 1 GB of RAM, running Ubuntu Linux. I just tried out this release, and it's damn slow. It's not due to a lack of memory, either. The top command shows I consistently have 300 MB free, and the machine isn't swapping.

This is pretty bad. It takes three to four seconds for the menus to appear, even after opening them several times. There's a noticeable delay when typing. It actually reminds me of college, when we had to use the teletypes connected to the DEC PDP-whatever, and there were 45 other users connected.

Anyway, does anyone know what might be causing these problems? KOffice runs just fine, as done AbiWord. I know my system isn't the fastest, but 1 GHz should be more than sufficient for an office suite. I haven't used previous versions of OpenOffice, so I don't know how they compare to this release. Regardless, I am not impressed. Could these speed problems be due to OpenOffice's supposed use of Java for certain tasks?

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ouch, 700 Megs of available RAM on yet another Linux distro.
That's even worse than Windows Vista... Why not use a REAL FOSS, OS not just a sloppy 'kernel'.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[Anonymous Coward]

How'd you come up with that figure, chap? Reading the GP's post, he clearly says he's got 300 MB free. That's not unusual when you're dealing with 1 gig of RAM.

It's ideal for the OS to use as much RAM as possible at all times, but sometimes that's not possible. If he is only using 200 MB of RAM for the kernel and any applications, and has only accessed 500 MB of file data since booting his system, the kernel would have nothing beyond 700 MB of data to keep in main memory. So he'd have 300 MB free.

Sure, the kernel could bring into memory file data it thinks may be relevant in the future. But often times such schemes end up seriously degrading performance, since the wrong data is brought into memory, and eventually needs to be swapped out without ever having been used.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[andy314159pi]

Microsoft Word on Mac with a super dual core intel has an irritating delay. I can type significantly faster than it can display. This is problematic because I work past errors because the don't display until I'm sometimes a few words down. I am guessing MS word is faster on its native Windows. But the point is, even in the 21st century here, typesetting programs are still slow. Who'd athunkit.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[Anonymous Coward]

Here I thought I was the only one with a problem. I'm on a 2 gig Athlon with a gig of RAM. If I dare to have Opera open, OOo gets fussy. If I'm typing on any line besides the very bottom line, shit gets tremendously laggy - as if it's paging 200MB of data from RAM to my pagefile and back just to move the text around. So God forbid I have to go back and edit anything - the lag makes it way too much of a headache to even comprehend.

It's gotten to the point where I type all my papers, letters, and what have you in a plain text editor, then copy-paste them to OOo to polish and print.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[zubernerd]

Microsoft Word on Mac with a super dual core intel has an irritating delay

Office Mac 2004 (I'm assuming that's what you are using) was compiled for PowerPC, therefore the Rosetta PPC emulation layer is executing the program. Even the best PPC emulation can come close to but is not going to match the "real thing". (http://www.emaculation.com/ppc.php) I run MS Word for Mac 2004 on a G3/266 (OS 10.2.8 w/ 384MB RAM) and it is fairly snappy. Using the MS office suite on Intel based macs will get better when the next version comes out, since it will be a Universal application ("Fat binary").

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[Dan_Bercell]

This version is slower then Office 2007 (not to mention much less features) on my notebook running 2gig RAM, intel duo core T7200 2ghz.
 
IMO OpenOffice is just slow, I just keep up with the new releases so I can recommend it to home users who do not want to purchase office. As it stands now Office is a 1 time purchase, Office 97 is still faster and better then OpenOffice, so the free value of OpenOffice isnt much of a pushing point.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[shaitand]

'That's even worse than Windows Vista...'

Yeah if you ignore the 2gigs of swap vista uses on boot.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[andy314159pi]

That is good information. If I payed for Office 2004 will I get a free upgrade to the Universal binary? Or will I have to buy Office again?

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[nexex]

It's MicroSoft...you will be paying again.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[tehmorph]

You can download this free update to get the faster word processor you desire!

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[nine-times]

On the Mac? First, you don't want to use that on the Mac. Try NeoOffice instead. That will keep you from having to run X11. Second, for all the nice things I would want to say about NeoOffice, it's not exactly snappy.

Really, I use NeoOffice. I've donated to the project. I'm grateful for all the good work they've done. But even the Intel-native version doesn't run any faster than Word 2004.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[OECD]

I am guessing MS word is faster on its native Windows. But the point is, even in the 21st century here, typesetting programs are still slow.

Arggh! Word is a Word Processing application. It is NOT a typesetting program!

Word is centered around getting you the info in the doc, it doesn't care much about how it was displayed on the originator's computer. Fair enough, that works when you're just worried about the info. If you're at the point where you care about design, Word fails it. By design. (You should have the info in some other program at that point.)

Sorry, but that sort of confusion makes my life hell (but also keeps me employed.)

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[TheRaven64]

There is a Carbon port of OO.o in development. It is not quite finished, but it was shown at FOSDEM, and is surprisingly fast. The current plan is to port it to Carbon, and then gradually move to Cocoa. Some people from Apple, apparently, recommended this to the team as the best way to port an existing C/C++ codebase to OS X.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[ChameleonDave]

I would like to second you on that. OpenOffice.org is outclassed by Abiword and KWord in terms of speed. I use all three programs, depending on my needs at the time. I also have MS Word just in case, but I never need it.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[nine-times]

...and I'll be giddy when it's done, but I've been waiting for years already.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[Anonymous Coward]

Try this:

File -> Tools -> Options -> Memory

Increase the values of: Use for OpenOffice.org

from the default value to something like 64MB or more.

YMMV.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[ZakuSage]

Are you running AMD64 Linux? I used to on my Sempron 1.6 GHz 1 gig DDR and OO.o would be beyond slow. Since I switched to x86 Ubuntu, OO.o has run far, far faster. With quickstart on (which really only uses a minimal amount of memory), Writer will launch in about 4 seconds and everything feels really responsive.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[Lothsahn]

I just tried OpenOffice 2.2. Run Windows XP with an Athlon XP 3000+ and 2GB of ram. Fairly underpowered for today, and it's startup is pretty snappy (~3 seconds). It's significantly faster than OpenOffice 2.1.

I'm not saying OpenOffice hasn't been bloated and slow to start--but this is a huge improvement. I'm happy.

Plus, it IS free (beer/source)...

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[JackieBrown]

I have been impressed with abiword. So far it has opened ever word doc I have thrown at it. And it opens in less than a second. I have started using gnumeric for the stuff my job sends me in excel format and it is working very well. (Granted we don't have very sophisticated spreadsheets.)

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[magixman]

Poor performance is my chief complaint too. I have a spare sub-1GHZ box on which I threw Ubuntu/Open Office and it is too slow to be usable. On my main box it is usable but so much slower than Microsoft Office. This issue has to be solved. I do like the product and find that the word processor is clearly better and *almost* worth the wait. But then again I am rather impatient. Sorry.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[SaDan]

Interesting, because I just dumped the last of my Windows systems for Ubuntu (Feisty Beta), and they run OO just great. Pentium III 1.0Ghz systems w/512MB of RAM, nothing really fancy about them.

Sounds like you've got a load of stuff installed... maybe it's time to trim your packages and services? I'm just running the default install of Ubuntu Feisty with a couple extra apps installed.

It's actually faster on these systems than it was on a P4 1.8Ghz w/256MB of RAM running Windows XP.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[SaDan]

The pushing point for OpenOffice is you don't have to worry too much about the OS you are using. OO exists in many forms, and is fairly uniform between OSs.

Speed is not an issue for some people, especially when you have a limited amount of funds for computer hardware and software.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[tftp]

It is a good, valid point for corporations considering partial migration of some employees to Linux+OOO. But it is a very weak selling point when you talk to an individual - s/he has already a computer with an OS on it, and the fact that the OOO can run on some other computer is not that interesting.

It's far more important to mention that OOO allows you to do nice documents with pictures and fancy formatting ... pretty much like free WordPad does, though, with some additional functions. MS Office 2003 Pro can be bought today for about $110-180.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[craiglarry]

This doesn't make sense, and none of the very knowledgable explanations make sense either. I mean they're right in their own way, I assume, but that still doesn't explain why your operation chokes up and others don't, does it? I'm running open office on Kunbuntu Dapper x386(amd athlon 64bit) and OO works really well. Yet Koffice works better, especially in the usb functions. Of course it doesn't do curly quotes, but go figure. So use koffice if it works so well. You can spend days figuring these kinds of things and still not have an answer. If you have a reasonable alternative, use it.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[miquelets]

I use a similar machine and Ubuntu Feisty, my Openoffice starts from scratch with a big file in 6 secs. Much quicker than previously. All round much better.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[Anonymous Coward]

A G3/266 with 384 MB RAM? Whatever you might consider snappy would be DOOOG slow by my standards.

I once sat at a Powerbook G3/400 with 320MB RAM and 10.2.6. No thanks. Even by iBook 800 with 640MB memory wasn't too fast.

Now back with Linux anyway, but I would expect that you (like me a few years back) just got used to the slowness of the Mac; the advantage over Windows is that at least response time is equal, heavy load or no load; Windows (and Linux) totally crap under high load; hell, Linux even "forgets" to move the mouse pointer under high load).

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[Anonymous Coward]

You consider an Athlon 3000 with 2 gigs of RAM fairly underpowered? Wow.

What an achievement of OOo's coders that it even runs on such a lowly machine.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[rbanffy]

and again... and again... and again...

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[rbanffy]

He must be the guy with a "My other computer is a Cray" bumper sticker.

Now, seriously, I program computers since the Apple II days but it always amazed me a younger cousin of mine, a chemist in the oil industry, had access to computers far more powerful than anything I have ever used.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's gotten to the point where I type all my papers, letters, and what have you in a plain text editor, then copy-paste them to OOo to polish and print.

Actually, that's a good strategy whatever office suite you're using. I've seen people waste so much time fiddling and reformatting theses and essays where the (inevitable) next edit will mean they have to do that crap all over again...

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[Gazzonyx]

How full is your drive? Are you paging to a drive on a different channel? Are you using 5400 RPM, 7200, or 10K, SATA or IDE? Is you static data on a seperate spindle than your dynamic data? All the cycles in the world won't mean a thing if you're constantly I/O blocked. The last 15% of a 5400 RPM drive is basically unusable as far as I'm concerned (well, usable for most home users, but not anyone who considers themselves a power user). Just a few thoughts, if you've partitioned correctly and still have this problem, then it very well could be OO...

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[ikeleib]

You are experiencing a bug. That is not the normal behavior. I would suggest filing a bug with Ubuntu. First starts are known to be slow (sometimes up to 15 seconds), but second starts should happen on the order of two seconds or less. If you have the quick-starter enabled, they are almost instant. The screen flickering is definitely aberrant behavior.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[ady1]

Not really. It is actually a page designer app and a crappy one too.

Okay maybe it does has some word processing options (TOC generation, mail merge etc) but still, most of the options people use in it are related to page designing like inserting and aligning a picture or aligning the text etc.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[HTH NE1]

Will NeoOffice prevent a problem I'm having with OpenOffice.org 2.1 always opening my spreadsheets maximized to my 2048x1536 screen, and when I hit the unzoom button, it is still maximized, sometimes with the resize widget off the bottom of that screen? (Earlier OOo 1.x versions wouldn't remember a spreadsheet's window size, but at least didn't open them filling the screen.)

BTW, I'm glad to see that this was addressed:

Annoying focus behavior of OOo was fixed

When a document is loaded in the OOo GUI a view is created at the end of the loading process. Until now OpenOffice.org always grabbed the focus to the window of this view. This is very annoying when a large document was loaded and the user sent OOo to the background as he wants to do something else while the document is loading. At the end of the loading process the document suddenly was brought to front and disturbed the user in what he was doing at this time (on WinXP it might flicker in the taskbar only when the focus meanwhile was transferred to a different application). Now OOo will bring the window to front (or starts flickering the window in the task bar) only when a modal dialog was opened in the OOo document window as part of the loading process (e.g. a dialog asking for granting execution of macros). The window could have been left in the background even in this case. But as modal dialogs could prevent OOo from opening other documents until they are closed, users might get confused if they didn't notice that their first document is still blocked by a dialog waiting for being closed by the user. As part of the fix for this annoying user interface bug it was was also fixed that dialogs opened in the loading time sometimes had the wrong parent window what especially created problems in the GUI test tool. As this bug fix has an impact on the visual experience of OOo I found it's appropriate to send out this notification thought it's neither an enhancement nor a feature change.

Thank you, Mathias Bauer.

Re:It's nearly unusuable.

[hszp]

I'm getting confused here.
vi, copy, paste. polish, print - so far so good.
Read, notice sg, need to add a paragraph or two, what's the next step?
Back to vi, cp, paste, polish, print?
If not, you end up doing exactly the same thing everybody else does and have to deal with office, which is slow/incompatible/etc.
Something like the html and css separation should be "the right way to do it", any long-term positive experience with that, anyone?

How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[NevarMore]

IIRC Open Office is Java based which means much of its performance is relaiant on how well the JVM is doing.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[SirTalon42]

OpenOffice is not Java 'based'. It does have Java sprinkled all around (like the help system requires Java I believe, and it uses several other languages as well (I think OpenOffice uses at least 11 different languages, counting all compile time as well as run time...).

OpenOffice isn't what you'd call a pleasant experience to hack on (some might blame the closed source roots where it would mostly be the same group of developers for a long period of time that are paid to work on it).

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not well. I'm using JDK 1.5.0_09, for the record. I'm also using the OpenGL pipeline for Java 2D, since I heard that can lead to speed improvements.

I did try to use NetBeans recently, and I found that it was terribly slow, too. Worse than this release of OpenOffice, even. So maybe you're right.

I don't know much about the architecture of OpenOffice, but why do they need to depend on Java? Couldn't they rewrite those portions in C++, or some other more performant language?

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is NOT java based. In fact, you can even run it without Java at all.

Please stop spreading this myth.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[cyphercell]

Without Java it is significantly lobotomized. For instance you can't run wizards which cuts out documentation for a good amount of things to do in the entire suite. Furthermore there is always this "it looks like it can do it", but then when you click on an icon either (a) nothing happens or (b) it tells you to install a JRE, you can run it without Java (I do it every day), but it sucks. Having said that, I think a good way to go would be to let less "advanced" users run it without Java while the technically inclined develop with Java, another possibility for future development would be to toggle Java mode on and off. Then again that might make someone's flagship look bad.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[Qwavel]

> OpenOffice isn't what you'd call a pleasant experience to hack on
> (some might blame the closed source roots where it would mostly be
> the same group of developers for a long period of time that are paid
> to work on it).

I would blame the fact that it is a very diverse and unique code base. It is mostly C++ but it is not based on any common libraries. Even for their GUI they decided to completely go it alone, which means that they make no contributions back to any libraries, and learning to hack it is very hard. At one point they considered switching to standard libraries but then didn't get around to following through. And then they started adding Java everywhere they could.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[laffer1]

Yes, which makes it difficult to port to new platforms. Mozilla isn't much better.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[nbehary]

"And then they started adding Java everywhere they could."

Maybe I'm wrong, but you say that like it's a late occurrance. Star Office was heavily Java dependant as I remember.....I thought it was getting less and less as OpenOffice has gone on. I think the Java's always been there......

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[faolan_devyn_aodfin]

Just as human excretion isn't shit based: It just has shit sprinkled all around (like in the turds because they require shit I believe but it also contains many other things)

Excretion isn't what you'd call a pleasant experience have in your pants (some might blame the fact that it smells bad and is the roots of all sorts of infections).

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[aztracker1]

Well, considering it started out as a commercial application from Sun, and is still mostly supported by Sun, is it really that much of a surprise to see such a strong Java tie in?

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[sumdumass]

Have you checked to see if you have the latest version of JRE? I'm not sure if it but I'm gonna try. The release notes thing said at least JRE 2.4 preferably 5.0 update 11 Which doesn't sound right for some reason. Maybe it is 1.5.0 update 11 and I'm reading it wrong.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[Dionysus]

Well, considering it started out as a commercial application from Sun, and is still mostly supported by Sun, is it really that much of a surprise to see such a strong Java tie in?

That's wrong. StarOffice was developed by a company called StarDivision in Germany in 1986. Sun didn't enter the picture until 1999.
See here

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[SaDan]

I cannot provide links at the moment, but I do remember when StarOffice was a seperate entity in the software world. Sun bought them, and OpenOffice was born (or became popular) around the same time.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[the_womble]

It does have Java sprinkled all around (like the help system requires Java I believe)

Not the help system. I have Open Office with Java turned off and help works.

According to Wikipedia you need Java for some database access, latex, xslt and some other filters, accessability tools, the media player (not on all platforms) and scripting in Beanshell.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[justinlindh]

Can we please quit crucifying Java for performance related issues?

Sure, most professionals will finally admit that Java is an awesome server side backend. To deny this would make you clueless. However, try running an efficiently coded application such as Netbeans. It's a client side app completely coded in Java, and it's extremely efficient. I can run the IDE on a large project and still get instant responsiveness on tasks such as "find usages" on classes/variables. Visual Studio can't claim the same.

Just, please... I know it's popular to blame Java for all that ills you. It's just no longer absolutely correct.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[pe1chl]

5.0 and 1.5.0 are the same thing!
Some marketroid at Sun thought the Java version numbering wasn't increasing as rapid as is customary in the market, and decided that what is internally numbered as 1.5.0 had to be externally marketed as 5.0
That is why the version jumped from 1.4 to 5.0

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[rbanffy]

While parts of it were written in Java. I remember distinctly that it was made to be compatible with gcj. That would mean it is compiled to native code, right?

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can we please quit crucifying Java for performance related issues?

Until the vast majority of Java applications a) stop sucking b) don't make my computer run like mollases in winter c) don't require me to install yet another ancient but very exact version of a JRE then no, no we can't quit crucifying Java. Because it deserves it. A lot.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[jbolden]

Java apps by in large are 3-5x slower than the same apps written in C++. That's because:

1 -- C++ gives you access to low level routines and these are used to improve efficiency
2 -- C++ is inherently faster because of its more C like defaults
3 -- Java tends to create longer chains of function calls because of the way the libraries are architected
4 -- Java is running on a JVM not on the hardware and thus adds another layer of calls

Its perfectly correct to blame Java for being slower than C++. The fact that there exist fast Java apps doesn't mean that Java apps on average aren't substantially slower.

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[nbehary]

It actually started out as a commercial application from Stardock (i think it was). They were bought by Sun, I think mostly because StarOffice had so much Java. That doesn't really change your point though.......

Re:How do other heavy Java apps perform?

[faolan_devyn_aodfin]

ouch, flamebait.
I wasn't trying to be rude. Maybe next time I parody, I should perhaps say so.
Anyways, all in good port I hope.

Equation editing in Open Office

[andy314159pi]

I stopped using OO because the equation editing is really difficult. I'm sorta dumb, so I wasn't able to pick up the jist of it. In my own defense, I can use TeXmaCs without any problem so I was able to figure that one out. But for interoperability with Word, OO is the only option on Linux, so I don't generally use TeXMaCs unless I really want something to be pretty. But in any event, I hope they work on the equation editor in OO and then I'll switch over.

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[cyphercell]

Your sig makes me sad :(

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[SCHecklerX]

I haven't used the EE in OO (heh) lately, but from what I recall, it is very much like what was in word perfect. You are able to actually TYPE equations instead of having to click-click drool and hope for the best. Take the time to read the help files on the equation editing language in OO. You'll wonder how you could have ever done it any other way :)

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[andy314159pi]

actually that's how TeXMacs works and it's super fast to do it that way. But I couldn't pick up the macros as easily for OO's EE. It was fairly straightforward for TeXMacs.

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[CastrTroy]

I like it a lot more then the EE in MS Word. I like the fact that you can type the equation. In MS word, you are forced to click on stuff, and even with a lot of practice, it still takes about 10 times as long to enter a complex equation in MS Word. With OO.o, once you get some practice, you can enter very complex equations very easily.

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[TheRaven64]

OpenOffice, like LaTeX uses the standard AMS representation for mathematical notation. The only difference is that LaTeX uses \ as the escape character, while OO.o uses %.

It was a pleasant surprise for me when I switched to LaTeX and found I already knew all of the equation syntax.

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[miro f]

actually I used to do a whole lot of equations in word. Getting sick of clicking, I found out there are shortcuts for most things in word, and it made writing equations MUCH quicker. Google is your friend here.

One thing I like about Word's equation editor is that it shows up instantly as you type, OO'o, while I prefer the way equations are written in it (since I'm a coder), is incredibly slow in actually showing me what the equation looks like.

Give me oo's syntax, with Word's speed, and I'll be happy =)

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[nbritton]

Provided I have enough time I'll write up all my math notes and homework in OOo Draw, using the 'Insert > Object > Formula' thing. Doing this gives me full layout control. Works great.

Here's an example:
http://www.nbritton.org/uploads/OOo_Draw_Example.p df

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[jmv]

The OO.o equation editor is shit, but so is Word's. I've been writing all my technical stuff in LyX for the past 10 years now.

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[testerus]

I stopped using OO because the equation editing is really difficult.

You should give Dmaths and OOoLateX a try.

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

OpenOffice, like LaTeX uses the standard AMS representation for mathematical notation.

LaTeX uses the standard AMS representation?

I'm not sure that's giving enough credit to Knuth, Lamport et al.

Re:Equation editing in Open Office

[jmvbxx]

That's interesting because OO's equation editor is one of my favourite features.

I find the 'command line' entry to be much quicker and more intuitive to use than the button system employed by M$. In general, I prefer using the keyboard over the mouse so this functionality fits me just perfectly!

Re:but

[Colin Smith]

MS Office isn't 100% compatible with MS Office...

HTH

Nice :)

[teebob21]

The kerning issue should help OpenOffice immensely. Most of the folks that call me asking for a "real" word processor after they bought their bottom-dollar Dell have complained that many of the fonts "look funny". Personally, that was my only complaint about OO. Many times, during an edit, I would try to delete that small space between characters thinking I had fat-fingered the space bar while typing.

To the first poster: No, I assure you it is NOT 100% compatible with all the bells, whistles, proprietary hidden tags, and closed formats of Office 2007. Nothing short of MS switching to ODF will allow that to happen. It WILL however, produce .doc documents that are readable by those still stuck with no other option than MS products. It will also allow you to read the flood of .doc-only documentation out there.

Hmmm, methinks we need more ODFmentation in online manuals. The switching by several European goverments is a good start....

Re:Nice :)

[cyphercell]

That is nice, I habitually do the same thing. What I'm really looking forward to though is Base. I work in an office that uses way too many spread sheets for things that are served much better with a database. It makes me crazy using the find feature in an excel sheet when I know that a database would cut my time and frustration down to a minimum. Currently I have a query linked to an external xls sheet, I manipulate the query in edit mode and that's the most functionality I've been able to get. I haven't been able to find much documentation for manually creating forms, I don't have wizards (which happen to be well documented) at work (because we don't have a JRE) and haven't been concerned enough to develop the small app at home.

Re:Nice :)

[shaitand]

I'm looking forward to base as well. Last time I tried it I found that it simply wasn't stable enough to use. The featureset was almost complete enough but the app crashed repeatedly on multiple computers.

Re:Nice :)

[kosmosik]

> The kerning issue should help OpenOffice immensely. Most of the folks
> that call me asking for a "real" word processor after they bought their
> bottom-dollar Dell have complained that many of the fonts "look funny".
> Personally, that was my only complaint about OO. Many times, during an
> edit, I would try to delete that small space between characters thinking
> I had fat-fingered the space bar while typing.

Pheeeh. You shouldn't be bothered about shit like that when writing. When you actually write something you just spawn out words, sentences, paragraphs, titles, sections and so on - this is purely semantic, co the look of this should not bother you. The look (if you really care about it) should be managed by professional typeseter/DTP operator.

When you wan't to *write* something font kerning should be of no matter. It is the content that matters. So the reasoning is flawed from the start. If great writers have to be bothered with kerning we would be living in small houses made of shit or something similar. :)

Re:Nice :)

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, thanks for the intro to writing 101, but what about desktop publishing? I mean come on if we all thought like that we'd all still be using typewriters and free hand like many modern authors.

Re:Nice :)

[teebob21]

Hehe, I agree with you on merit. But I'm a student, not a novelist. My work has to look good, and I have to be the one to do it. If you can find me a typesetter for my composition class, great!

Re:Nice :)

[fusion9290991]

ODFmentation... Open Document Fermentation? Is that like doing your documentation while drunk?

Re:Nice :)

[jetxee]

ODFmentation is a nice idea, but it would generate hate to ODF rather than sympathy. Also there is a lot of compatibility problems between different ODF applications. For example, I cannot open half of my .odt documents in AbiWord.

ODF is a good idea, but it is not mature enough yet. First we need an easy to use libodf with BSD license, then we shall ODF support everywhere, then the ODFmentation will happen naturally.

P.S. ODFmentation != OOomentation.

Re:Nice :)

[TheRaven64]

LaTeX. Seriously. I learned it as an undergrad, and haven't used OpenOffice.org since then. I occasionally use more visual DTP tools for smaller things, but a word processor is some kind of half-way point between a text editor and a DTP app, and it's particularly good at either. I'd recommend you have a look at it; for simple essays the amount of markup you need to learn is tiny (\section, and maybe \subsection and \chapter about covers it).

As someone who is paid to write, I will also add that I find it a lot easier to write using a fixed-width font. It's harder to read, which means I a constantly thinking about what I want to be writing, not about what I just wrote. I actually find I write best with the screen on my laptop turned off (which does wonders for the battery life) but I don't do that so often, since I keep wondering if I've hit a modifier key and I'm now dropping random commands into a terminal.

Re:Nice :)

[kosmosik]

Well maybe just try write your stuff without bothering much about how it look and when you finish writing go over it again and adjust it to look nice? Also you could use LyX which produces beautifuly typeseted documents without bothering you - you just write.

Re:Nice :)

[Blakey Rat]

Sorry, regardless of what your workflow is (or "should be", although I'm not an elitist jerk to tell other people how they should be doing things), bugs like that should be fixed. Also, as a good philosophy, applications should be adapted to users, not the other way around... look at how Excel killed off other spreadsheets for a perfect demo of how this should work.

Equations still aren't fixed

[Gertlex]

When I read what was new in this version a few days ago (and it's the only main thing I've read to be new about this release), I expected the most obvious fix to be in the equations objects. Every computer* I've seen has had some sort of problem rendering and often even printing a document with equations in it. It still isn't fixed. The workaround for this, however, is exporting to PDF.

I've never had any other sort of display problem with OOo. It's still a good program.

*All Windows machines... The one time I opened a .odf file on OOo in Linux, the formatting was entirely different from what it was on Windows and I had to back to a Windows machine...

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[daeg]

As a slight rebuff to your comment that rendering was completely different. We run OOo in Windows in the office to create documents and insert placeholder text, then run them through an automatic python script that decompresses and alters the document (mail merge, basically, but slightly more complex), then automatically generates PDFs hundreds or thousands of times per day. The only difference between Windows and Linux (RHEL4) that I have really seen are sentences breaking at different words and fonts in general appearing slightly larger, but not horribly obvious unless you're an anal retentive perfectionist.

I've been extremely happy with the 2.1 version of OOo, and I can't wait to try out 2.2.

I do wish their revision log were better written, though...

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[niiler]

My big thing as a scientist is that it would be nice to have equations display ON THE GRAPH. It's really hard to suggest this as an alternative to students in lab classes when it doesn't have even this basic feature.

On the other hand, this is/has been my only real complaint for years. I use it exclusively, but then, I'm a geek.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Gertlex]

I'd forgotten this problem... I had it last semester. I assure you my professors had no qualms telling us to put the equations on the graphs. Conversely, I had qualms to tell them that OOo can't do that. General solution, especially since campus computers all have Office, is just to import the graphs from excel. Worked. Usually...

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[cyphercell]

Everything in Openoffice.org must go to a PDF, I think that's his point.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Dan_Bercell]

On the other hand, this is/has been my only real complaint for years. I use it exclusively, but then, I'm a geek.

This is the same with all Open Source applications. They work really well, however you have to be a geek/nerd to be able to use it properly. Sure normal users can make use of Open Source software, however it requires a nerd/geek to install it and support it.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Anonymous Coward]

Use PyX instead. If you know a little python, then it is a synch to learn. The advantages are that it can embed Latex in graphs seamlessly.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[shaitand]

All software requires a geek to install and support it. If a non-geek is attempting to install and support software they had better have a rigorous backup scheme and a recovery disk handy. Even then not all data is easy to backup and restore without restoring the problems they have caused over time.

This is one of Apple and Microsoft's worst crimes. They have spread the myth that laypeople can administer their own machines. Computers are extremely complex devices. Their complexity is probably as great as that of anything man has designed. Being able to click 'next' does not qualify you to install and maintain a piece of software. You need to understand how the operating system distribution and the hardware operates to be able to do this properly.

Most MCSEs fail to attain the appropriate level of understanding needed to properly install and support software. Forget home users. Both Microsoft software (and other easyware) and Open Source software require the same level of understanding and knowledge to properly install, configure, and maintain. Easyware just attempts to make the decisions for you and hide the complexity, Open source software typically reveals the complexity and in so doing the full potential of the application.

That said, Open Office is easier to operate than Microsoft Office. Either one is a slow bloated mess IMHO.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Anonymous Coward]

Normal users are just plain bad with all software. It all requires a nerd/geek to support it. Open source software's problem has always been it's beta testers (volunteer nerds/geeks), but this is getting better as usability curriculum has become a bit more commonplace not to mention the fact that standard users become a little bit more savvy as generations move on.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Anonymous Coward]

All software requires a geek to install and support it.

Quite right, the average computer user is the equivalent of a bunch of sixteen year olds driving around until their cars run out of oil or a headlight goes out. At which point they immediately drive that car off a cliff and get a new one.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[RobertM1968]

Sometimes it is more a matter of using the wrong tool for the job. I used to do DTP/layout/"typesetting" and the firm that subcontracted me had strict rules about font size, kerning, font face, etc. For a company like that (which applies to many large companies who have a specific look that MUST be maintained), creating your next newsletter on OO or Word should not be the method of choice. We used Quark Xpress because we could control everything right down past the decimal point for any attribute and it would print as expected and as rendered. Ease of use (eg: Word & Write) have led many companies to complain about such differences/lack of capabilities from apps that are not true typesetting/DTP apps... they are word processing apps, and there is a big difference when such "anal retentive" needs are required...

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Planesdragon]

They have spread the myth that laypeople can administer their own machines

"GNU called. They want their snooty arrogance back!"

Face it. Complex systems become mostly worked out, and then smart experts create turn-key implementations of said systems, which after ten years or so are better than what an expert could do themselves. It happened with assembly lines. It happened with automobiles. And it happened with computers, more than ten years ago.

(And a computer really isn't THAT complicated. It's not magic, it's not rocket science. It's an automobile that uses digits, components, and abstraction rather than chemistry, mechanics, and physics.)

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Dan_Bercell]

I am sorry, but I strongly believe 'normal' people have been tought to believe computers are complicated. If someone actually reads the dialog boxes that come up and pay attention to the warnings computers are very safe and easy to use... the fact is the 'normal' people are nervous when using computer, thus believe it they are complicated.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[solanum]

I'm also a scientist. Graphing is really inadequate in Calc, but there again it is in Excel too. Worse in Calc though. I mostly use Openoffice and Linux, but still have to switch to Windows for SPSS, SigmaPlot and Reference Manager. The open source equivalents are no where near in those areas. Too specialised I guess. The one feature I really miss in Calc is non-contiguous copy and paste, something that has been in Excel for many many years. I put a feature request in for it years ago and had some support but nothing was ever done (the ignore spaces option in paste special is not the equivalent of this feature).

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Hooya]

are you using the UNO bindings? we do something similar with about 1000+ documents on each run. and found that after about 100 or so documents, OOo stops responding. so we had to put a nasty hack of killing OOo after evey 50 or so documents and restarting it. this was OOo 2.1. i'd love to hear what your experiences are...

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Anonymous Coward]

http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=228831&t hreshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=18552367

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[shaitand]

'And it happened with computers, more than ten years ago.'

Spoken like one of the laypeople or MCSE's I spoke to earlier. Next thing you know you'll be telling me how frontpage allows laypeople to design webpages. Just watch any real web coder cringe at that claim.

'which after ten years or so are better than what an expert could do themselves. It happened with assembly lines'

This must be in some strange alternate universe that you live in. Where I live custom built automobiles far exceed the cookie cutter vehicles you buy from a dealer. The same for anything produced on an assembly line (including aforementioned automobiles).

I'm not a mechanic but even I know that an expert can adjust his engine in even a cookie cutter vehicle to match the fuel he is using and get better performance and longer life than the rest of us. There is also a reason that every car in the Daytona 500 is built, tweaked, and customized by experts. Cookie cutter and assembly line production do NOT give better results, they simply increase quantity of a 'good enough' design in order to make it cheap and readily available.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[shaitand]

'the fact is the 'normal' people are nervous when using computer, thus believe it they are complicated'

That is only true of old people. Young people aren't afraid of the computer at all and they are more dangerous than the old people for preciously that reason. The old people think that just because the young people can figure out how to install a webcam and use a few applications they downloaded from the internet (along with all the spyware that came with those applications) that they are competent.

Not being afraid to use a computer is prerequisite to learning about the machine. Actually spending a few years to learn how computers function is prerequisite to administrating a machine.

Computers are as complex as anything man has designed. Nothing man has designed is really that complex, we actually don't design things to be difficult to understand we design them to be easy to understand. The material is a bit dry but the only thing standing between a reasonably bright individual and real understanding of a computer is the years it takes to learn and master the functioning of each layer of the hardware and operating system. You learn the physical operation of the hardware and then the logical operation of the hardware and so forth until you understand what is happening when you install an application.

For instance, many printer instructions will tell you to plug in the printer and then install the printer software. Unless your OS has a built-in driver AND succeeds in recognizing the hardware you plugged in then your normal self will NEVER get that printer to work without an expert.

Maybe 1 in 10 times you plug in a usb storage device in a winxp computer for the first time and instead of telling you after a moment that your hardware is ready to use it says installation failed. Subsequent plugging in also fails. Other thumb drives work. A normal person does not know how to fix this problem. Your tech savvy grandson doesn't either. Figuring out how to fix this problem the first time you encounter it will take seconds if you understand how the system works. Even someone who doesn't really understand but has been shown how to fix usb problems will figure it out. In this instance a normal person will be lucky because they'll think the thumb drive is bad and get a new one. The new one will probably work.

You install norton antivirus but the installation fails with a script error half way through. Crap, norton doesn't show up in add/remove programs. Norton won't let you install again, it says norton is already installed when you try. A real tech savvy teen might even discover the rnav.exe tool but alas it doesn't work. If they had called a technician to perform this task the tech could have first warned them off of norton and failing that could have utilized his deep understanding of the inner workings of the operating system to resolve this problem.

'If someone actually reads the dialog boxes that come up and pay attention to the warnings computers are very safe and easy to use'

Sure, they are safe and fairly easy to use. That doesn't mean they are safe and easy to administrate. I never said computers shouldn't be used by normal people. I said that normal people shouldn't select, install, configure, and maintain the hardware and software that will be used in them. Once they are setup for the normal people they should feel free to use them to their heart's content.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[MeNeXT]

They were intended to replace the secretaries typewriter not the printers printing press. The layout may vary depending on the printer you are using and many other minor factors.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Planesdragon]

I'm not a mechanic but even I know that an expert can adjust his engine...

Stop. You just admitted my point.

An expert mechanic will buy his own car from an assembly line and modify it. They will get a better result than their customer, but they will tell their customer to buy an assembly line car and let him check it every few months or so. A small segment of the market will have everything hand-assembled by very well paid expert mechanics, but even those cars (yes, even every one in the Daytona 500) will use off-the-shelf parts wherever they can, because their time is simply better spent building from a solid base than making that base in the first place.

I never said that an expert won't give you a better result, in a computer or a car. You said that "All software requires a geek to install and support it", and that somehow most folk can't administer their own machines. Of course they can -- "administering" a home PC is no more difficult than the routine "drain, swap, fill" maintenance in an automobile.

All any person smart enough to pay for their own computer needs to administer their own computer is a ~ten part user guide. The lack of said guide is OUR fault, not theirs.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[daeg]

Ours runs usually about 600 or so before finally dying, but I also have a script that kills them and restarts them after about 50 conversions to help curb memory usage. We occasionally run documents through with large tables and large images, which seem to bog OOo down a bit, but overall the memory usage is surprisingly small. We run four simultaneous headless OOo and the scripts are smart enough to try a different instance if it isn't responding. I tried using the OOo Daemon but it didn't seem to play nicely.

And for more information, each web server runs its own OOo processes and the Django-based (Python) front end communicates directly with OOo over the PyUNO bindings.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Anonymous Coward]

"You said that "All software requires a geek to install and support it", and that somehow most folk can't administer their own machines. Of course they can -- "administering" a home PC is no more difficult than the routine "drain, swap, fill" maintenance in an automobile."

That will be true in your wish world. You just look around: there's the clear fact that people doesn't manage to administer their computers. Even less they doesn't manage to make sensible use out of them. Or else the Internet wouldn't be so filled of worms, spams, social engineering tricks and "ownz boxes". Even too many "professionals" seem not to find their asses' way out of software or else you wouldn't have episodes like the "slammer" worm (can you really name yourself a professional and still have an sql engine wide open to the Internet?) or the fact that for the most part even what should have to be simple deployments are bewildered with redundant (as in unnecesary, not high avaliability) hardware and software and topologies that simply don't make sense (unless you enter on the equation some marketing guy from the vendor company that clearly sees a benefit the more software/hardware he can manage to sell you).

Even you say in your car analogy "...but they will tell their customer to buy an assembly line car and let him check it every few months or so": the "standard computer" selling point is the "average joe" doesn't even need to have their computer checked by the expert every few monts of so. Obviusly people buy that assertion because -exactly like you, they want it to be true, not because *is* true.

There are "drain, swap, fill" computers. As someone else pointed out a Tivo is a computer as is a wireless AP (they both can have Linux within them too) -and they are plain easy to use. I expect computers being more and more "user-savvy", but the current fact is that general purpouse computers, because they are "general purpouse" are difficult to properly use and probably they will remain difficult to use in the future too.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[shaitand]

The AC did a fine job of responding but I will add.

'I never said that an expert won't give you a better result, in a computer or a car.'

You did say, what you said was quite straightforward and can't really be misinterpreted. You said the turnkey solutions are superior in assembly lines, automobiles, and computers. Let me refresh your memory.

'create turn-key implementations of said systems, which after ten years or so are better than what an expert could do themselves. It happened with assembly lines. It happened with automobiles. And it happened with computers,'

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[Planesdragon]

You did say, what you said was quite straightforward and can't really be misinterpreted. Give that you managed to, let me add in the necessary emphasis.

'create turn-key implementations of said systems, which after ten years or so are better than what an expert could do themselves. It happened with assembly lines. It happened with automobiles. And it happened with computers,'

If you can't interpret simple written English, well, then it's no wonder you think that the common man can't administer their own PC. It's hard to follow the basics when the only instruction you're given is "read the MAN pages, noob!".

Let me break it down to you:

* Expert A creates a turn-key solution, and spends his time improving that solution and selling it to his customers.

* Expert B creates a customized solution, and spends his time creating customized solutions for his customers.

ten years pass.

* Expert A's solutions have improved year-over-year.
* Expert B's solutions are the same as they were ten years ago, and unless he uses A's system as a base ("on his own"), his from-scratch solution is worse than what A simply drops off.

Re:Equations still aren't fixed

[shaitand]

'Expert B's solutions are the same as they were ten years ago, and unless he uses A's system as a base ("on his own"), his from-scratch solution is worse than what A simply drops off.'

Make up your mind. You can't have it both ways. Either you claim that cookie cutter turnkey solutions are superior in function to custom solutions or not.

'I never said that an expert won't give you a better result, in a computer or a car.'

Yes you did. You said that a turnkey solution would give you a better result than a solution custom tailored to your needs by an expert. You were of course incorrect.

First, you equate custom built with only using made from scratch components. Both custom and turnkey solutions are allowed to take advantage of improvements in technology and mass manufacturing. An expert who selects a custom assortment of off-the-shelf components is custom building you a computer just as surely as if he designed and soldered circuit board of each modem and CD-ROM.

Second, you suggest that expert B would be designing one solution. That is what expert A is doing with his turnkey solution. Expert B will use his expertise to build you the best solution for the job, not the same never improving solution over and over again. There is no law that says Expert B must produce one solution that remains static and never improves. Why on earth would Expert B keep the same solutions for ten years instead of improving them? That would be an awfully big mistake for someone who is an expert.

The real situation is that both A and B take advantage of new technology and production techniques. Both take advantage of the shelf components. Expert B will use the shell of expert a's system if the end result is the same set of components he wants at a reduced price but that hardly makes Expert A's solution superior in function, only in price.

Expert A designs a system to meet the most common needs. Expert A uses the cheapest components possible to do so as long as they are compatible with each other and will meet the performance expectations of most customers. Expert A makes and sells loads of these so that also reduces cost. The resulting peg can be coaxed into most holes and will even be a perfect fit in a few holes.

Expert B designs a system to meet the exact requirements needed. He uses the best components for the job at hand, sometimes they will be less expensive and sometimes more but they will always be perfectly matched to one another and the task at hand. The result will provide the best possible performance the task at hand rather than providing only that performance needed to meet customer expectations. Expert B doesn't make nearly so many of these as Expert A, so the price might be a little higher but the resulting peg will always be a perfect fit in every hole.

Expert A is designing a system to result in the least number of complaints and the maximum amount of profit for himself or his company. In short, since profit is the difference between what you pay and the value of the system, expert a is trying to provide the absolute minimum value that will satisfy a non-expert. Expert A is not trying to produce the best system for the USER, he is trying to develop the best system for his pocket.

Expert B is designing a system for you. This system that 'the expert can do for themselves' will always be superior to expert A's turnkey solution.

Turnkey solutions are cheaper than Expert solutions, not superior. They won't magically become superior over time either. An expert implemented solution will always be superior to a turnkey solution. There may come a point when the cost isn't justified but that is an entirely different debate.

Now stop spreading FUD, flinging insults, and continuing a tirade. No matter how you try to twist it, turnkey solutions never become as better than solutions customized and managed by someone who actually knows what they are doing. First you claimed they did, then you claimed you never said you did because I demonstrated that you wer

Re:but

[andy314159pi]

Was Einstein a news anchor too? That guy was the total jack of all trades!

More than money

[DogDude]

It's gonna take a lot more than just saving some money to make people consider switching. Not that I think there's very much room for improvement on MS Office at all at this point, but competing based on price alone doesn't work in almost any business. In fact, that's Business 101.

Re:More than money

[vux984]

It's gonna take a lot more than just saving some money to make people consider switching.

OO's word processer and spreadsheet are pretty much on par with Microsoft. If those are the only components of office you regularly use, you probably shouldn't be shelling out for MS Office, period.

I can't speak to OO's powerpoint equivalent - I hear its decent on its own, but not as compatible with MS as it should be. So if you need to create and present powerpoint its fine, but if you need to share power point with others its not as good. (Although OO is free so there is nothing stopping the people who you need to share with from getting their own copy - this may or may not be practical depending on who you have to share with. Conversely if you only need to view other peoples powerpoint stuff then you can use MS's free powerpoint viewer.

The real OO killer in business is Outlook. Businesses essentially buy outlook and get the rest of office for free. And outlook is tough to unseat, there aren't a lot of great alternatives, especially once you start looking for groupware features, calendering, and PDA sync support.

But for home users, where most of them are on webmail/gmail/msnlive/whatever, outlook express, or are just using outlook as POP3 client, OO is a great alternative.

That said, even in business Office isn't unkillable -- Exchange web access is rapidly reaching the point of unseating outlook, PDA sync is becoming wireless direct with the server, and if outlook takes a fall then evaulating Office v OO becomes a much more level playing field.

Meanwhile, in the home market, Microsofts increasingly aggressive anti-piracy moves are finally starting to shift people away. It used to be that everyone had a pirated version of Office at home, but as these become more of nuisance to use, users are starting to open up to alternatives instead of shelling out for office or fighting with Genuine (dis)Advantage.

But I think the biggest thing OO needs is some advertising to build some brand awareness and credibility. Couple that with a pre-installation deal with the likes of Dell or HP and they could make some serious inroads.

Re:More than money

[LaughingCoder]

OO's word processer and spreadsheet are pretty much on par with Microsoft.

Well, I can't really comment on the word processor, but I can say definitively that the spreadsheet is a far cry from Excel - especially the graphing feature, which is very poor. As I understand it, the whole graph subsystem of Calc is scheduled for a ground-up rewrite, which substantiates my claim. So, if you require graphing capabilities in your spreadsheet, it is best to avoid Calc and use Excel.

Re:More than money

[cyphercell]

Open source software *never* competes on cost alone. Open Office is competing with Microsoft because it offers lower levels of functionality at a lower barrier to entry. Anyone running a home business can use Open Office with mail merge in order to complete their billing, they can put together simple presentations and fliers with Impress and Draw as well as do their bookkeeping in Calc. Essentially, MS Office is turning into an enterprise level suite while Open Office is nipping at Microsoft's heels in the SMB market.

The other way open source software works against proprietary is time vs. required functionality. We all readily admit that MS Office is basically a finished product (aside from usability, though contestable). Given this Open Office *will* be comparable one day and the enterprise hooks that Open Office need to keep playing catch up are already firmly in place. I heard it on youtube the other day and I love it "proprietary software cannot fight the future".

Re:More than money

[shaitand]

'And outlook is tough to unseat, there aren't a lot of great alternatives, especially once you start looking for groupware features, calendering, and PDA sync support.'

Yes but I wonder why? Evolution was good but I've never seen an actual cross-platform open source attempt usurp outlook. If you had a cross-platform backend that provided groupware and email functionality then I could use your app tomorrow. The only thing that keeps exchange in most offices is the fact that you need it for groupware functionality.

Re:More than money

[DrgnDancer]

I have to say that Entourage, MS's Mac groupware effort isn't even close to as good as Outlook. Seriously it's probably the single best thing they've ever come out with from pure usability/user experience point of view. Sure it's got security issues, but from the straight "it does what I want it too" point of view it's an awesome app, and one of the few things I really miss from Windows.

Re:More than money

[quarrelinastraw]

that Excel's graphing features leave something to be desired, but it's not like Excel actually has good graphing features. Excel's graphs are ugly, often misleading, and frequently default to using the wrong information to make graphs. I can't tell you how many scientific presentations I've seen where the default Excel standard error bars are clearly wrong. The graph features may be easy to use, but they're not at all good in the sense of creating honest graphs that clearly display data.

Re:More than money

[quarrelinastraw]

Sorry, Internet problems. The first sentence is meant to say "It may be true that OOcalc's graphing features leave something to be desired"

Re:More than money

[vux984]

/shrug

I find the graphing feature in both of them too annoying to use except for basic data visualization, in which case either are perfectly adequate.

Its true Excel's extra options get one closer to 'presentation quality results' but not close enough.

Re:More than money

[shaitand]

It's always puzzled me because I can't think of anything especially spectacular that outlook actually does. You might have trouble converting some power users because they are married to outlook specific behavior but 99% of outlook. I honestly haven't seen anything that should take more than 6 months or so to replicate in outlook. Most of the useful features are basic and obvious. Are some of them patented or something?

2.2 and still no outline mode...

[Anonymous Coward]

In the Openoffice issue tracker outline mode is a low priority issue that has been open since 2002 - that is almost five years ! Meanwhile, many users keep MS Word around just because this way of handling text makes them much more productive.

So have they fixed...

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

So, I have just two questions:

Firstly, does anyone have a useful, user-focused summary of the new features, instead of the cryptic mess on the development site?

And secondly, have they fixed PDF export bug in Writer that we were discussing here the other day? The bug database suggests not. :-(

Re:So have they fixed...

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a glossy brochure high level summary here and a gory details hacker version here.

Open Office

[Henry V .009]

Because she does all the real work at our workplace, we set up the secretary's home computer for her. She wanted an office suite, and we put Open Office on it.

Just yesterday she was telling me that she doesn't like it and wants Microsoft Office (for Word and Excel). Open Office is slow and ugly, according to her, and the default font size in Writer is way too small.

Re:Open Office

[geekoid]

So, who did you hire to replace her?

Re:Open Office

[Anonymous Coward]

It definately is an alternative, and it costs so much less too.
Just as much explanation as you gave!

Re:Open Office

[nexex]

Awww c'mon you can admit it! We just wanted to go home with the secretary, getting to set up her computer was icing on the cake.

Re:Open Office

[Paperweight]

Sad but true. Seriously, how hard can it be to make a simple fast word/excel/powerpoint clone?

Re:Open Office

[Anonymous Coward]

the default font size in Writer is way too small.

What an absolutely ridiculous complaint. If you don't like it change it. Whoever heard of a secretary unable to change the font size?

Re:Open Office

[Dunbal]

Yes, it's immediately obvious at a glance that OpenOffice is crap,

      Let's have a look at your program, then...?

      Open office is a pretty damned good program considering the PRICE. Yes it's missing bells and whistles. Yes there are a few bugs in there. But instead of saying how crappy it is, you are invited to contribute to the development process. Perhaps that way when Microsoft decides to tax you again, a non "crappy" alternative will be available.

Re:Open Office

[JackieBrown]

I don't know. Let me know when you're done.

Re:Open Office

[Paperweight]

OK I take that back. I just installed it and its pretty fast :) It seems faster than the older versions.

Re:Open Office

[seaturnip]

Ooh it's my fault it's crap. I see!

Re:Open Office

[Virgil Tibbs]

My girlfriend is like that.
she's been using it for around three months yet she "hates" it
"everything" is in the worng place etc.

to be honest I think that users just find migration really difficult - especially if they have to encounter two systems - my girlfriend has to encouter office 2003 & open office.

What i wish was that somebody would release a mod or summat for openoffice to "officify it" - no not for me but for those who scream they want it.

yes I suppose that would include writing a talking paperclip.

Re:Open Office

[Abcd1234]

OTOH, I installed OO.org on my mother-in-law's computer, and she's perfectly happy with it. I suspect the difference is one of familiarity. Your secretary is probably quite familiar with Office, and rather used to it's appearance and behaviour. A person like that will inevitably complain because OO is different from what they're used to. Heck, they may even make up complaints to justify their position.

Re:Open Office

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

to be honest I think that users just find migration really difficult - especially if they have to encounter two systems

That sounds like a reasonable proposition. On the other hand, I look at Firefox—again, a more-or-less drop in replacement for a Microsoft “standard issue” product that most PC users are familiar with—and in that case, almost everyone I’ve seen make the switch has viewed it as an improvement, regardless of computing experience. Those who haven’t are usually concerned with compatibility issues where Firefox doesn't do what they need—in that case, rendering “IE only” web sites usably—and frankly, expecting most users to ever change product because of the developer’s personal philosophy or ethics is daft.

Re:Open Office

[TheoMurpse]

I suspect you asked her for $130 bucks so you could get her a copy, right. After all, this was her home computer, not work computer.

PDF = wow!

[LotsOfPhil]

From the summary:

OpenOffice's PDF (Portable Document Format) export function has also

Wow, I just glanced at it, but this whole "pee-dee-eff" thing looks like it might do well...

Re:PDF = wow!

[apathy maybe]

OpenOffice.org has had PDF exporting for ages. I know a few people who use it, simply because it is so much easier to use the one click PDF export, then it is to buy Adobe software and install it and so on. I personally don't use PDF (I use (X)HTML when publishing stuff), but I can understand why people who print stuff do.

On a slightly different topic, I used to use OOo all the time for my word processing needs, but I've taken to using Abiword. It is a lot less fully featured (almost to being an annoyance at times, especially when working with footnotes or endnotes), but it has two features that I really like. It is a shitload faster to load. And the files that it saves are human readable. The main reason, it is a shitload faster to load up.

There is no way that I would use Abiword for a document more then 5 or 6 pages (~2500 words) though.

As a comparison to MS Office, I haven't used it in years (except on a Mac and that doesn't count (and it was still more then a year ago)). But I remember that I much preferred Writer to Word, and I thought that Impress was easier to use then PowerPoint.

Re:but

[TopSpin]

Ya but is it 100% compatible with MS Office. Cause if its not I can see why a lot of companies would think twice about making the switch.

While I agree with you about companies not switching, remember that there are other vectors for OO success. Where I am, in the world of VC funded startups and contractors, OO has become a defacto standard; nobody here pisses away money on word processors or spreadsheets. It all leads to PDF anyhow. Microsoft's stuff is too expensive, isolated to one platform and a security problem. OO is cheap, fast, portable and more than sufficient.

How OpenOffice fixed my Word doc

[wronzki]

True story - I had a Word document that had somehow gotten corrupted. It was a large file but not huge - ~60 pages, a bunch of figures, ~3 MB in total and it took Word several minutes to open. I opened it in OpenOffice, resaved it as a Word doc, and whatever was broken got fixed - Word could now open it in seconds.

Re:How OpenOffice fixed my Word doc

[The Great Pretender]

Been doing that for other people at my company since OO v1. The other thing you can do, or could do, is open a Excel spreadsheet with password protected cells in Calc and just uncheck 'protection' then re-save as an Excel file. Really helps when the original spreadsheet designer has left the company and something needs changed.

Re:How OpenOffice fixed my Word doc

[ChameleonDave]

I too have had similar experiences. I have repaired both Word documents and Powerpoint presentations that would no longer open in their native applications, by opening and saving them in OpenOffice.org.

Re:How OpenOffice fixed my Word doc

[junglee_iitk]

Can you tell me where is the this "protection" thing? I am unable to find it :(

Re:How OpenOffice fixed my Word doc

[junglee_iitk]

Never mind, I found it. The problem was that my open office version was in German and I don't know German.

Freedom! Re:More than money

[Anonymous Coward]

It's gonna take a lot more than just saving some money

Freedom, a bargain at any price! Also, my company standardized on open office because we can export to that format from our tools that are written in perl.

Added bonus: OO is more secure than MS Office.

linux section?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this in the linux section? Open Office runs on almost any operating system.

Re:linux section?

[AmberBlackCat]

My guess is Linux users are the ones most likely to use OpenOffice.

Re:linux section?

[QueePWNzor]

Because the "Kill Micro$oft" section was removed. Linux -- close enough.

Can it do UUIDs yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

We couldn't consider it b/c we had to have MS-Access or equivalent functionality.

They added some dbase and another engine that I forget with... 1.5?

But, it couldn't handle UUIDs (GUIDs), so it wasn't usable :(

I hope they fix that at some point...

Pity it's a dinosaur already

[blubadger]

What am I missing here? The future of word-processing is on the network. Networked documents are accessible anywhere, editable by multiple users anywhere, and generally better protected against data loss.

As for "power features" like macros and mail merge, how many people really need or use them?

Not me, which is why I won't be upgrading my OpenOffice this time round.

Re:Pity it's a dinosaur already

[Zadaz]

I was going to reply to this, but the network went down in the middle and I couldn't save it.

Re:Pity it's a dinosaur already

[FunWithKnives]

Did you really just imply that no one really needs or uses macros? Wow. I better tell all of those journalists, authors, court reporters, university students, and generally anyone that does any large amount of data entry that they are using archaic technology.

Or maybe macros actually save many people from pointless redundancy and massive headaches, and you don't really know what you're talking about. But nah, that couldn't be. Not on Slashdot...

Re:Pity it's a dinosaur already

[blubadger]

I implied that few people use them, which is surely the truth. I implied that most people would be better off using a networked WP app, for its other advantages, which I believe is the truth.

And if macros are so great, let's have them online! It's gonna happen, and I doubt OOo with have much to do with it

but...

[Anonymous Coward]

But does it run on Emacs?

Tangent: Office 2007

[Mongoose Disciple]

Not that I think there's very much room for improvement on MS Office at all at this point

Having played with Office 2007 a little bit, I feel like they were mostly trying to get two things done:

1) Improve the UI. I can't think of anything I ever wanted Office 2003 to do that it wouldn't do -- but figuring out how the hell to make it happen, that was the rub.

2) Open up the APIs better from a developer perspective and make it easy to write other programs that interact with Office easily, such as plug-ins for Office at both the document and application levels.

You can write some pretty amazing (and easy to use / pretty) things to tie into Office now fairly quickly. It's going to be like a million monkeys with VBA macros all over again, except with way better UI and security. Some of them are bound to turn up something really good out of the sea of crap that emerges.

This second point is something I don't see OpenOffice being capable of competing with -- sure, you could try to streamline the OO APIs and make it easier to hack on, but you still wouldn't be writing a plug-in for the world's most popular spreadsheet (or whatever) program and there wouldn't be as wide of developer appeal. Then again, I don't think OO was ever trying to go for that market -- they're more for the "Look, I just want something that can read .doc files that works" crowd.

same experience here...

[Anonymous Coward]

Startup in California I'm contracting for...

$2 millions in funding (first round). I visited their office. 30 employees, 29 Windows machine, 1 MacOS X machine, 30 OOo installations, 30 Firefox. Why spend money on an Office suite that brings nothing but lock-in?

With the level of inefficient inertia plaguing big companies, I expect these to be amongst the last to switch. Though, well, some are leading the way (e.g., Peugeot-Citroen switching 20 000 desktops to Linux)

Re:same experience here...

[sumdumass]

With 2 million in funding 30 copies of a $500 program doesn't even come to one percent of the startup. I Think it is like .007something.

It doesn't seem like a huge savings when put into perspective. But then again, My last business was started with less then $10,000. I think If i had 30 computers needing MS office, I would be about $5000 in debt from the start. And yes, contrary to popular belief, You don't have to be rich to own your own business. God knows you will be poor in the first couple years though.

Re:same experience here...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's 15K in opportunity costs just flushed away. What if 15K allowed you to keep your doors open for an additional week so you could land that large account or contract? At that point 15K wouldn't seem so trivial.

Re:same experience here...

[MeNeXT]

It's because you're not seeing the forest from the trees. MS Office is like a desk in the office, while it's needed, who supplies it is irrelevant. In this case it's 100% savings and not .007% of $2 million. I haven't seen a business who needs $500 office software. I have seen a lot who believed they did.

Re:same experience here...

[sumdumass]

Well, actually, it is a 100% of .007% of $2 million. And why You haven't seen a business that needs $500 office software, you have seen businesses that have had to procure more software to get a job done.

I'm not supporting using MS Office over OO. It is that the savings aspect doesn't seem like a bid deal when placed into perspective. Now suppose those 2 million are annual profits and not startup costs. .007 percent of 2 mill every four years or so seems like even less of a savings. The big benefit seems to be in the open document that leaves you in control of your data, less restrictive licensing, less upgrades into worse security situations, multi platform and much more. And if none of that is tempting enough, then less then one percent of startup costs or annual profit over fours years for a savings isn't either. Especially when you consider initial retraining and support costs are going to negate a small portion of that savings.

And this is all considering that some other APP doesn't have a MS office specific requirement that OO can't fulfill. I know of several programs like this.

In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[Anonymous Coward]

The developers are using the turn of phrase 'a real alternative to Office 2007', hoping to win over some folks not too thrilled with the commercial software's new look.

I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't be thrilled by the way Office 2007 looks. I think it looks fantastic. I've been using it since Beta 2 was released and I can't get enough of the little things that Microsoft has added to make using their software easier.

The Equation Editor is very functional now and you no longer need to install MathType to enter complicated expressions. Also, the equations produced by Word 2007 look perfect every time I open the document or send it to anyone else. PDF exporting is not required to fix minor typesetting issues. If OpenOffice can get their equation editor to work as nicely as the one in Word 2007, then they'd be on to something.

The Themes selector applies the theme as you choose it so you can preview the final result before applying it. This feature is best used in PowerPoint 2007 to browse through the available "looks" you can give your presentation.

The Ribbon menus are brilliant and they have made it easier for my parents to do common things in Word. They always complained that things were 'hidden' in the menus and they could never remember "where to go to do something". They no longer ask where things are because the ribbons present them in a way that they find very organized.

Also, Office's new file format is a change of pace, but you can still save your files in Office 97-2003 formats just as easily.

I use OneNote to scribble down things on my tablet while I'm in meetings. I use Publisher when I don't have the time to dedicate to Adobe InDesign. Both of these applications have become better, and I love the fact that they're so polished. Granted, Microsoft probably stole OneNote and Publisher from someone else, but they're nice tools to have!

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[kosmosik]

Anyway what is this? Some marketing bot just posting same stuff anytime term *office* occurs? WTF.

> I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't be thrilled by the
> way Office 2007 looks.

I've seen how it looks. So what? First of all it looks different and that means that all those office-monkeys out there will need retraining since certain function is in other place. Secondly as I've already made an INVESTMENT in previous (2003) version of office so I would rather use the thing I have paid for in my business to the maximum. And the thing wasn't cheap (hell it costed like entire quite modern computer). So I don't get it - actually how does it benefits me to have spend yet another few hundreds of $$ for yet another MS Office version?

> I think it looks fantastic.

And how does it work? It looks different and that is the problem. :)

> I've been using it since Beta 2 was released

Some MS Junkie - beware.

> and I can't get enough of the little things that Microsoft
> has added to make using their software easier.

> The Equation Editor

Fuck Equation Editor - who uses that anyway? MS *Office* - noticed the office part? When was the last time you used equations in your business activities (like marketing, sales or smth.).

> The Themes

WTF themes? What for?

> The Ribbon menus are brilliant

Are different and trained office monkey will require retraining because it is different that what they now use.

> and they have made it easier for my parents to do common things in Word.
> They always complained that things were 'hidden' in the menus and they
> could never remember "where to go to do something".

This must be a fucking bot. It is just too fucking obvious. :)))

> They no longer ask where things are because the ribbons present
> them in a way that they find very organized.

And it also does breakfasts.

> Also, Office's new file format is a change of pace,

Like anybody cares about the format - yet another.

> but you can still save your files in Office 97-2003 formats just as easily.

So you actually need to do more to make your files be able to open in anybody else MS Office version? Cool. Not.

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[fermion]

As a person who sometimes writes a lot, one reason I love OO.org is the simple yet elegant master document feature. I am sure someone will tell me how to do such a thing in MS Office, but I used MS Office from the inception to MS Office 97, and was never able to get something like the master document to work. OTOH, the first time I used OO.org several years ago, I was able to immediately make the master document work.

MS Office is great for writing memos or doing spreadsheets that would be better done in perl or C, or creating gratuitous presentations, but for the kind of work that I do, MS Office as not been in the lead for many years now. All eye candy aside.

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[modmans2ndcoming]

If interface design were geared toward maintaining look and feel to avoid retraining of employees even if the old interface was horrible and hurt productivity, we would all still be using word perfect in dos.

Get over it... the new interface is more productive and not that hard to learn. Rather than treat your employees like morons, consider that all tehy need to know is how their knowledge about Office maps to the new interface.

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[Tweekster]

Because the average office worker needs to type stuff. that is all. that is 99% of their word processing, TYPING things. people tend to forget that.

How does themes matter to anyone? thta is a way to kill productivity because they are trying adjust the damned theme instead of using the application

PS the ribbons menu is beyond idiotic

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[Dielectric]

Hm, here I thought I was the only one who couldn't get the master doc thing working in MS Office. OO.o was just too easy to get it going, no fighting at all. I have been using the Beta 2.2 for a while, works fine, even pulls pivot tables in properly from Excel. I'm the office guinea pig, I'm heavily leaning toward giving it the thumbs up with this new release.

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[Anonymous Coward]

I will address your points in order.

Anyway what is this? Some marketing bot just posting same stuff anytime term *office* occurs? WTF.

Actually, I'm a high school math and computer science teacher with university degrees to show that I actually know what I'm talking about and not just teaching kids from a "manual" or "solutions book". We use WordPerfect at school as that's all we're licensed for. I've never worked for Microsoft, nor would I ever want to.

Just because I like a Microsoft product doesn't give you the right to rip on me. However, since this is Slashdot, I assumed some moron would come out of the woodwork to chime in eventually.

I've seen how it looks. So what? First of all it looks different and that means that all those office-monkeys out there will need retraining since certain function is in other place. Secondly as I've already made an INVESTMENT in previous (2003) version of office so I would rather use the thing I have paid for in my business to the maximum. And the thing wasn't cheap (hell it costed like entire quite modern computer). So I don't get it - actually how does it benefits me to have spend yet another few hundreds of $$ for yet another MS Office version?

Even though I'm a teacher, I still make great money. I could easily afford to buy Office 2007 Premium Edition without breaking a sweat. It helps to not be in debt by making smart investment choices with one's money.

You complain that users will need re-training. While this is true, the people who train the drones need to earn a living too. You also complain that Office 2007 is an new investment for you. Again, I used the demo of Office 2007 at Staples and really thought it was worth the money to upgrade. That's my personal choice and I thought I'd share it with you. If you're content with Office 2003, please stick with it. I'll be able to send you documents that are compatible with your version and I get to do it from an interface that I find to be more productive.

And how does it work? It looks different and that is the problem. :)

All commands on the ribbon work in exactly the same way they would if they were available through a menu. The fact that it looks different is the reason I bought the new version of Office. It does nothing new, but it looks good to me. As we've seen many times, if something looks good, it usually sells well and is talked about often (Apple's business plan, anyone?).

Fuck Equation Editor - who uses that anyway? MS *Office* - noticed the office part? When was the last time you used equations in your business activities (like marketing, sales or smth.).

No, fuck you and your narrow minded views. As previously stated, I teach math and computer science for a living, and I use the equation editor every time I use Word. I don't need to use MathType anymore. And yes, I do know LaTeX quite well. If AbiWord's LaTeX equation entry was as powerful as they advertise, I'd use that.. but it's not. Moreover, my business activities are different than what you've specified. Shocker: people other than 'office' drones use 'office'.

WTF themes? What for?

For fun.

Are different and trained office monkey will require retraining because it is different that what they now use.

Regarding the ribbon menus. I've recommended Office 2007 to several other teachers. We get a discount when we order through our school board. After installing Office 2007, the only question I was asked was "where do I save to Office 2003 format?" That's it. They were able to transition to the new interface just fine. Granted, office drones can't do that, but as I stated above, many of my students go on to make substantial amounts of money training people how to use new software. They have families and need the money from their job just like you and I.

This must be a fucking bot. It is just too fucking obvious. :)))

Your post looks pretty stupid right about now. I

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. When I first used Word and PowerPoint 2007, I was irritated because I didn't know where anything was. But for the average user, the learning curve really is only about 1 hour. The ribbon is fantastically designed in that, for most things, I just "knew" where to find them. Sure, there are a few things that seemed pretty well hidden, but that's what Help is for.

PowerPoint 2007 in particular is immensely more usable. And I like how Word 2007 really emphasizes the use of styles. Maybe the other 90% of the world will finally start to use them.

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[Anonymous Coward]

Bill? Is that you?

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[andrewbaldwin]

and was never able to get something like the master document to work

You are not alone.

I have yet to meet anyone who has got master document working in a "real life" situation [i.e. beyond the document equivalent of "Hello World"].

The general consensus from help forums and FAQs I have consulted is "don't even bother!"

I must confess I haven't tried it with OOo but after reading your post I'll give it a go.

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[masdog]

I've used quite a few versions of OpenOffice and Microsoft Office in my days, and I have to agree with the poster. Office 2007 is a superior product, and I purchased it for my small business. Before that, I used OpenOffice and MS Office 2000. The interface was what sold me on it. Not only was it different, but it was more powerful. I could do more in less time. Yeah, there was a learning curve, but it would be insane to think that a product with such a radical change wouldn't have one.

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[Anonymous Coward]

I smell a shill.

Re:In Defense of Microsoft Office 2007

[modmans2ndcoming]

no its not. none of the functions are hidden in menus any longer.

I disagree

[geek]

I think OpenOffice can do the plugin thing better than MS can. Just look how multi platform plugins work for Firefox. The OO team can make cross platform plugins that work pretty seamlessly if they tried. MS will be locked into doing it on Windows only. I could be wrong of course but I don't see how MS can do plugins better than the OO people, especially consider OO uses open API's and formats. I would find OO the much more appealing option if I were a developer.

Re:I disagree

[TheRaven64]

This is why the Sun team have been pushing more Java into OO.o; most of the exposed APIs are via Java so you can just distribute one binary for all OO.o platforms. Of course, any time there's news about this, the Slashdot crowd complains about how they're bloating it and making it slow by adding more Java...

Re:I disagree

[Mongoose Disciple]

I think OpenOffice can do the plugin thing better than MS can. Just look how multi platform plugins work for Firefox. The OO team can make cross platform plugins that work pretty seamlessly if they tried. MS will be locked into doing it on Windows only.

Multi-platform plugins don't get you anywhere in this context, because people who run recent versions of Office are pretty much running Windows already. I could be wrong of course but I don't see how MS can do plugins better than the OO people, especially consider OO uses open API's and formats. I would find OO the much more appealing option if I were a developer.

There's a couple different things to mention here:

1) In its heyday, (and I don't have numbers handy for this, so I may be wrong) there were more people programming in VBA than any programming language in the world. I have to use the word programming loosely here, because most of these people wouldn't identify themselves as programmers -- more, people just trying to use Excel or whatever to get some task done, automating or simplifying part of their job with little programs and VBA macros. There hasn't been a reasonable successor or update of VBA in probably near 10 years, and that kind of "hey, everyone's a programmer" mentality is something MS is trying to push again with Office '07.

Thankfully, security is way better on what they're exposing these days. I think a lot of us still have Word macro nightmares. But that being said, the sheer accessability of this kind of 'coding light' I think will get a lot of people hacking on Office 2007 stuff that would never dream of firing up a C/Java/etc. compiler even if they were using Open Office.

The APIs being exposed now in Office are both simple and powerful, relative to anything of the kind I can remember seeing for any mainstream app. Let's say you want to author a plug-in for Outlook for the salespeople at your manufacturing company; when they get an e-mail from one of their customers, it will bring up a panel that shows sales history information for that customer (from a pre-existing database that that sort of company almost always has) in a pretty little graph, along with information on who that customer's primary salesperson is, contact information, etc. Someone with a decent idea of what they're doing could reasonably author that in an hour or two. I just can't imagine that kind of rapid development for a similar plug-in for OO, especially if you wanted it to look half as nice.

2) On the other hand, if you're coming from the perspective of being a professional developer and wanting to author some kind of more generally useful plug-in to try to sell it, Office is the clear winner just because its installed user base is so massive.

3) Typically, Open Source software is more feature-rich, more powerful, and more secure than its closed-source counterparts -- but also less visually appealing, less well documented, and generally harder to use. This tends to be true in terms of how easy it is to add on to the software in these areas, too. When you've got a tool primarily aimed at developers like Subversion, giving up a lot of usability for a lot of stability/power is a pretty good trade; when you've got something aimed at Joe Business User, not so much.

There are lots of people out there that hate Windows and know about the alternatives, but still use it. Office is probably the most common reason why. I've worked with consultants from IBM who wouldn't touch .NET with a fifty foot pole, but nonetheless were using Office on their work machines and Outlook for their e-mail instead of Lotus notes (which IBM makes) or a free alternative. I can't imagine any stronger statement about the pervasiveness of Office than that.

Re:2.2 - It does have one outline mode

[Anonymous Coward]

It does have one outline mode and it's been there since the early versions.
Just double click on the page number on the botton of the screen and
select "Headings"; you will have buttons to show/hide levels and
promote/indent sections, move sections, etc.

Equations ROCK in Office 2007

[melted]

BIG improvement. Not quite LaTeX level yet, but it's at least usable now. And you can enter formulas entirely from the keyboard, no mouse involved.

Document exchange with Word 2003 and below...

[JimMarch(equalccw)]

I'm running the Ubuntu Feisty Beta with OO2.2 and I exchange fairly complex Word docs with others, including legal pleadings and other hairy stuff, and I'm having no problems whatsoever.

Re:Document exchange with Word 2003 and below...

[julesh]

I'm running the Ubuntu Feisty Beta with OO2.2 and I exchange fairly complex Word docs with others, including legal pleadings and other hairy stuff, and I'm having no problems whatsoever.

Legal documents aren't exactly what I'd call "hairy", to be honest. Try exchanging documents with someone who's using MS Word as a desktop publishing package to put together a community newsletter, complete with absolutely-positioned photographs with text wrap around and multi column formatting. That's where 2.0 fails for me -- although admittedly my copy of Office 97 frequently fails in this regard also.

son of a bitch

[Anonymous Coward]

I just downloaded this before the latest was released...

Disappointing - can't even install

[jginspace]

Glad this is finally available. I checked the website periodically and noticed the release date slip from 14th March to 24th March to 28th March ... and then a bit more.

Anyway I still haven't managed to install.

On running the install it complained there was no disc in my CD drive. I closed it - it had a Hiren's boot disk in there - installation proceeded. Why on earth is it insisting on the CD door being closed?

Then the install tried to clean up my OO 2.0 install. (I'm using 2.1) It asked for the location - in my temp folder - of the OO 2.0 install files. Of course they were deleted long ago - they were in temp folder - where OO 2.0 put them. I pressed cancel thinking the installation would handle this gracefully but ...

No, install was aborted. Still haven't checked out OpenOffice 2.2

Re:Disappointing - can't even install

[jginspace]

"I'm using 2.1"

Rather I was using OO 2.1. OpenOffice just uninstalled it for me. Now I'm left with an uninstallable OO 2.0. Welcome to the OpenOffice downgrade wizard!

'a real alternative to Office 2007' ... hum

Re:Disappointing - can't even install

[kb0hae]

Hi. You don't say what OS you are trying to install under, but in Linux you must un-install any previous version completely. I know that some programs in Windows leave bits of themselves in weird places, and these are not always uninstalled correctly. If you are trying to install in windows, try ununstalling any previous versions. If that don't help, you may have to make sure all OOo folders are deleted, amd you may even have to delete any registry entries related to OOo.

Re:Disappointing - can't even install

[Dunbal]

I know that some programs in Windows leave bits of themselves in weird places, and these are not always uninstalled correctly.

      This should be a capital offence, by the way...

Re:Disappointing - can't even install

[Anonymous Coward]

Learn the registry like real windows users.

Re:Disappointing - can't even install

[CharlieD]

This brings up two points I was thinking about recently when I downloaded the new version of OO, namely

WHEN I (or someone else) UPGRADE, rather than a install on a "clean", OO-less system,

1) Do I need to keep the temp files - if so, I would stash them where I could find them or remember the (obvious) directory name,

and

2) Should I uninstall the old and then install the new, or just install over the old?

The installation instructions say NOTHING about upgrading from an earlier version. If OpenOffice has gone anywhere in the past, there are a lot of people with older versions on their machines who are probably pondering the above two questions.

I don't know the answers. CLEAR UPGRADE INSTRUCTIONS WOULD HELP.

Thanks.

Java apps are great

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with OOo is not that it's Java-based. In fact they would do better if they would transition more of it to Java. The problem is, it's a huge and complicated piece of code. It's not easy to write an office app.

Java apps can be very fast. It's the best desktop software development system in existence right now, and would be ideal for writing an office suite.

Re:Java apps are great

[ClosedSource]

"Java apps can be very fast. It's the best desktop software development system in existence right now, and would be ideal for writing an office suite."

I'm not a big fan of Java and I don't recall seeing any high-performance Java apps, but I certainly wouldn't proclaim any other languages/libraries/frameworks as "the best desktop software development system in existence". You want to justify that conclusion a bit, or should we just take your word for it.

Re:Java apps are great

[butchtcougar]

You hear that wooosh?

Re:OOH, Kerning!

[Anonymous Coward]

You shutting the fuck up I would hope.

"Linux" category inaccurate

[massysett]

Come on Zonk, why is this categorized under "Linux" with a Tux icon? OOo is cross platform--runs on Linux, Windows, and OS X (even if it does take X11 to run under Mac.) I'd even be willing to bet that there are more Windows users of OOo than there are Linux users of OOo.

Re:"Linux" category inaccurate

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd even be willing to bet that there are more Windows users of OOo than there are Linux users of OOo.

I don't know that "user" is the right word, maybe victim is more appropriate. OOo is not a realistic replacement for Word. But never say such a thin at Slashbot...

Re:"Linux" category inaccurate

[Anonymous Coward]

In reply to:
http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=228831&c id=18552179

OOo is cross platform--runs on Linux, Windows, and OS X (even if it does take X11 to run under Mac.)

Weeell, this is an article about OOO 2.2, and 2.2 is not available yet for OS X, so adding an OS X icon wouldn't make much sense. Not really holding my breath for it either, since there are alternatives such as NeoOffice, ThinkFree Office, and Google Docs and Spreadsheets.

In reply to:
http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=228831&c id=18550959

Ya but is it 100% compatible with MS Office. Cause if its not I can see why a lot of companies would think twice about making the switch.

Microsoft Office versions aren't even 100% compatible with older versions of itself and vice versa. People get it with their new PCs because they're shoved down with a bundled Microsoft product already anyway (Windows), but maybe this attitude will change with Dell's Linux machines.

Following the same logic

[ClosedSource]

Q: Is that new version of Windows called Windows ME, 100% stable now or should I switch to Linux?
A: Why bother, Linux isn't 100% stable either.

The issue when deciding which to use is their relative compatibility.

Re:OOH, Kerning!

[Goaway]

No, seriously. Bragging that you've implemented kerning in 2007 is... just plain pathetic. Makes you wonder what other basics of text rendering it doesn't support yet.

Numeric keypad still unusable in Calc

[sgent]

Calc is the only spreadsheet EVER (since Visicalc) that doesn't allow the start of a formula entry using the + sign -- making numeric keyboard use for spreadsheet junkies almost impossible.

This has been a bug (submitted by myself and many, many others) since before 1.0 came out.

Re:Numeric keypad still unusable in Calc

[LaughingCoder]

And another thing ... it uses semicolons instead of commas to separate fields in things like IF statements. Very irritating. I use Excel quite a bit and the few times I've tried Calc it drives me crazy with its different syntax.

And don't get me started about the graphing function. Here's a fun parlor trick. Using Calc, make a couple of columns of about 2000 numbers each. Then highlight them and graph them as lines. Be prepared to wait awhile. Go get a coffee. Maybe read War and Peace. And no, your computer didn't crash even though the UI is frozen ... give it time. Voila ... you are now rewarded, after a looonnngggg time, with a crappy looking graph (the default Xaxis labels are "ROW ROW ROW ROW ..." - who thought that was a good idea?). Try the same thing on Excel. The graph appears instantly and you don't have to fiddle around with it to make it presentable. The graphing feature in Calc is pretty bad.

Another parlor trick with Calc. Save those two columns of numbers as a CSV file. Exit Calc. Change the CSV file to read only. Now open it with Calc. Try to graph it again. Note how it lets you highlight and select graph... and then .... nothing. It appears to ignore you. Try it again. Same thing. Try the same file in Excel. It will warn you the file is read only. Graphing works fine.

Re:Numeric keypad still unusable in Calc

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried the 2000 number column test and my experience was totally different - the graph rendered quickly and looked good.

Which version of OOo are you basing your comments on?

Re:Numeric keypad still unusable in Calc

[LaughingCoder]

I am running 2.0.3 This has been verified by several people. What version are you running? BTW, I have done this on a dual core machine with 2GB of RAM, running Windows XP, and nothing else of any consequence.

Re:Numeric keypad still unusable in Calc

[LaughingCoder]

OK, I downloaded 2.2 and redid my test. Guess what? It actually got a factor of two slower!!! Now it takes over a minute to display this graph and resume responding to user input. After clicking Create I get nothing for about 8 seconds, then I get an hourglass for about 20 more seconds, then I see the graph, but the application is not responding. 40 seconds later it again responds to mouse clicks. This is on a dual core with 2GB of RAM. What could they have done, with "minor bug fixes", to slow things down this much? My guess is it's the new JRE that was downloaded along with Oo. Which makes me think that anything else that depends on the JRE in Oo also got alot slower.

Out of curiosity I tried other graph types - all of the ones I tried were equally slow. Then I tried smaller data sets (I had observed in 2.0.3 that smaller data sets graphed faster, but still extremely slow by Excel standards). Anyhow, even a set one fourth the size (512 point pairs) took over 30 seconds (also a factor of 2 slower than Oo 2.0.3).

Re:OOH, Kerning!

[Dunbal]

Match point to the AC! (clap clap clap)

You're just playing with yourselves

[ClosedSource]

What's with all this talk about normal users needing a geek. There aren't enough geeks on the planet to support all the normal users. This is just geek ego masturbation, many normal users do just fine without our help.

Re:You're just playing with yourselves

[Anonymous Coward]

Try working in tech support.

http://www.techcomedy.com/

You'd realize that for every person that knows enough html to get into trouble on myspace there are about ten people that think their Operating system is Internet Explorer. These people don't know what a firewall is, the concept of viruses is pure magic. They call in because their email box is full and they can't get more mail (the same thing happens at the post office?). They will install weather bug and accuse you of selling their email to spammers. You can explain it to them all damn day and when things finally get fixed they think *you* finally fixed whatever the hell it was that *you* originally broke. You could compare this with people calling auto mechanics so the mechanic can walk them through an oil change, except mechanics get both paid and credit. Yes complex systems are significantly abstracted in everyday devices such as cars, but to say that "normal people" don't need professionals like mechanics is just asinine. Your only saying it because you THINK you've mastered your computer - not true by any means, just like no mechanic will ever completely master all cars you will NEVER master all software that runs on your system.

Yes "normal people" need nerds/geeks to install and uninstall software in fact that's exactly what I get paid to do every day all day long 40 hours a week, it pays shit and you support users at ALL levels of experience (trust me, I've talked to well respected slashdot interviewees on the phone). This attitude that my job is easy enough for some sixteen year old script kiddie (or less) to complete and that my value in life is just "ego masturbation" is the icing on the cake after being screamed at by some asshole that won't pay his regular tech support guy to fix his network (because the problem required physical access) and now the bank has frozen his funds. Seriously, it doesn't matter what you do but you're worthless, your job, your opinion mean nothing and no matter how hard you work or what you know will ever prove anything to these dip-shits that can't take sound advice from a professional when they ask for it.

Honestly Go Fuck yourself.

Try some humility.

Re:You're just playing with yourselves

[Planesdragon]

Hi, I work in tech support.

If your users don't know what's going on, it's YOUR fault. Your primary skill is not technical knowledge, it is communication... and, really, you seem pretty bad at it.

Re:You're just playing with yourselves

[Anonymous Coward]

Your primary skill is not technical knowledge, it is communication

This is simply not true, your skills are equally balanced between technical knowledge and communication. I work with people that have a primarily Customer Service background and they do pretty good most of the time. It's simple stuff they fail at though, they put the customer on hold while they ask everyone in the office what to do and it's always something simple or worse they think computers are "simple little machines" and they screw something up. The difference being that a CSR in tech support will hose someone's computer and leave them perfectly happy for it, while the technically inclined will deal with a customer that simply refuses to take responsibility for their computer/network. Yes communication is extremely important for a tech support person, but to say that communication is more important simply devalues the purpose of your field. People do not call just for someone polite to talk to, they call to get their support issue resolved.

If your users don't know what's going on, it's YOUR fault.

I know, and I do an excellent job at communicating to my customers what's going on. In fact I regularly complete my calls as %100 resolved in about 15-20 min. when the average is about 30-40 min. I also get very high marks on my customer relationship skills. This is because I have approximately equal skill levels in both. I don't know what demographic you're working with, but I work with every one from "Aunt Tilly" to "Mr. Interviewed by Slashdot" and I'll tell you right now that there's a whole lot of "unlicensed drivers" behind their computer screens.

This is just geek ego masturbation, many normal users do just fine without our help.

The fact that you work in tech support and defend this comment confounds me, maybe you got your job because of your phone skills, but people call you for the technical knowledge you have. It doesn't matter what skill level you are everyone needs help with their computer and debasing those that work supporting computers is just trolling. Frankly I couldn't care less about what you think of OSS, otherwise I find your comments generally agreeable, except for your insistence in defending this "ego masturbation" theory.

Re:You're just playing with yourselves

[ClosedSource]

Working in tech support, you're naturally going to encounter people with problems. This population isn't representative of typical users, so it doesn't make sense to draw broad conclusions based on your experience with them.

My "ego masterbation" comment was harsh, but I tire of the superior attitude some geeks have. If it wasn't for "Lusers" we'd all have to actually work for a living. Given that many of us don't have good people skills, or good selling skills, and are not particalarly coordinated, something like dishwashing seems like a feasible plan B.

Table of Authorities? Biliographic functions?

[colourmyeyes]

OpenOffice has no provision for making a table of authorities, and the bibliographic functions as a whole are practically nonexistent. The project does concede this. That said, I use OOo on linux and like it very much.

And don't worry, you can admit that MS Office 2007 looks good without being an "OMG MS Fanboy STFU!!"

For the "it looks different than word"

[Tweekster]

Everyone said that at my office when i replaced some office installations with open office...
i just told them it was the new version and they were satisfied.

like most people, they dont mind different and new, as long as they feel like its not too different and new.

Re:For the "it looks different than word"

[Virgil Tibbs]

i just told them it was the new version and they were satisfied.
people in your office must be thicker than those in mine.

Re:For the "it looks different than word"

[Tweekster]

If you told them that they will believe it, look at how much word changes every version as it is.

They are not small visual changes but usually pretty major. Every new version people need to adjust to it, it is no different than them adjusting to OO instead

Re:For the "it looks different than word"

[masdog]

Considering that the splash screen says "Open Office" when the program loads, I have a hard time believing anyone could be so dumb or gullible.

No. Wait. Scratch that. You're not a high school teacher or a cheerleading coach, are you? Cause maybe then I could believe it.

RMS

[ClosedSource]

RMS (channeling is inner Inigo): "I just work in Henry V's office pay to bills. There's not a lot of money in arrogance and self-righteous indignation."

And STILL no OpenType support on OS X

[Teilo]

I do not understand why this is. Freetype has supported OpenType for ages. The Windows version of OpenOffice supports OpenType fonts. Why is this so hard to implement universally in every port of the product?

I realize that the Windows port uses the Windows font API, and thus provides the ability that way. NeoOffice does the same on OS X. Yes, it's not so easy to use OS X Core services from X11, but why not switch to a decent type library like FreeType that already has the support? Not robust enough for typography? I just don't get it. You would think this would be a priority.

Re:And STILL no OpenType support on OS X

[jim3e8]

Is there a particular reason you prefer the regular X11 version over the native OS X version (NeoOffice)?

Re:And STILL no OpenType support on OS X

[Anonymous Coward]

NeoOffice uses Java. Not native.

Re:And STILL no OpenType support on OS X

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

The Windows version of OpenOffice supports OpenType fonts.

Not really. You can't use most of the advanced typesetting features at all, and there's also the killer PDF export bug I've mentioned elsewhere in this discussion.

Re:And STILL no OpenType support on OS X

[Teilo]

Yeah. NeoOffice on PowerPC is extremely slow, even on a 1.6Ghz G4. The X11 port is much faster, except for scrolling. On Intel, this seems to be a non-issue.

Re:And STILL no OpenType support on OS X

[jim3e8]

I see; I've only used it on Intel. I have a related but different perspective--Microsoft Office is slow on Intel due to the Rosetta layer, so NeoOffice is faster for me.

Re:And STILL no OpenType support on OS X

[jim3e8]

NeoOffice only uses a small amount of Java code for OS X look-and-feel. The guts are C++.

I suspect you won't read that page, Anonymous, but you should.

Re:OOH, Kerning!

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Makes you wonder what other basics of text rendering it doesn't support yet.

Most of OpenType, unfortunately, making all the nice typographical features available in Microsoft's new Vista fonts (not to mention pro fonts from sources like Adobe) effectively inaccessible. Then again, MS missed that boat with Word 2007 too. That seems odd to me, given the emphasis BillG had put on readability issues and the hype surrounding the new fonts shipping and Vista's swanky new UI, but there you go.

Oh, and a decent paragraph justification algorithm. Neither OO Writer nor MS Word have that yet, either. How is it that all these WP programs support double underlining, a typographical monstrosity that absolutely no-one sane ever uses for anything, yet none of them can render a fully justified paragraph neatly, even though that improves both objective reading comprehension in long documents and subjective reader satisfaction?

I could go on, but if it can't do text and it can't do white space, I think it's pretty much toast already!

why?

[nanosquid]

There is a Carbon port of OO.o in development.

Why this duplication of effort? NeoOffice works great, and it actually has more functionality than OOo.

Re:why?

[antonlacon]

NeoOffice's code cannot be used by OpenOffice due to licenses (and copyright assignment).

OpenOffice's take on it: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/FAQ_Openo ffice.org_and_NeoOffice

NeoOffice's: http://www.neooffice.org/neojava/en/faq.php#11

Re:why?

[nanosquid]

The question isn't why OpenOffice can't use NeoOffice code, the question is why there are two separate OOo efforts for Mac. That is, why is anybody else bothering to make a second, incompatible port?

Re:why?

[TheRaven64]

If you think NeoOffice 'works great' then you and I have very different definitions of 'works,' let alone 'great.' NeoOffice/J is (very) slow, and doesn't feel like a native application in any way. The carbon port is happening in order to address this, and build a proper OS X application. A few other reasons:

• As well as being slow, the Java/Cocoa (Mocha) bridge is now deprecated. No new APIs will be added to it. I believe this happened before 10.4, so you can't even get at things like Spotlight via Mocha. This will make it very difficult for NeoOffice/J to keep up.
• NeoOffice/J is a fork. It must keep re-syncing with the OO.o tree in order to get new features. These may well break existing modifications.
• A Carbon/Cocoa port is the 'correct' way of doing things. NeoOffice/J took a lot of shortcuts, which are likely to make the first 90% of the porting effort easier - but the second 90% much harder.

Of course, I am not an OpenOffice.org developer, so this is second (or third) hand information. If you're interested, I suggest you talk to the developers directly.

Re:why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Kind of disappointing is it that page to which you refer is discussed NeoOffice by person whose first language English is not clearly. Can page edited not by anglophone be?

Re:why?

[mrbcs]

Yoda?

Re:why?

[nanosquid]

NeoOffice/J is (very) slow

It's not. I'm using it on a low-end MacBook, and speed simply isn't an issue.

As well as being slow, the Java/Cocoa (Mocha) bridge is now deprecated.

Apple isn't continuing to support it, probably for strategic and political reasons, but providing Cocoa interfaces from other languages isn't hard.

No new APIs will be added to it. I believe this happened before 10.4, so you can't even get at things like Spotlight via Mocha. This will make it very difficult for NeoOffice/J to keep up.

Whatever APIs NeoOffice needs can be plugged into Java through JNI. Furthermore, NeoOffice does work with spotlight.

A Carbon/Cocoa port is the 'correct' way of doing things.

I disagree. I think the more things can be moved away from Objective-C and C++ to higher level languages, the better.

Of course, I am not an OpenOffice.org developer, so this is second (or third) hand information. If you're interested, I suggest you talk to the developers directly.

Well, you probably do a good job representing their views, since they are likely to be similar to yours.

I guess I can't get very excited about it: I think OpenOffice is enough of a mess already, but I'd prefer if the OOo folks focus on Linux and Windows and the OOo interested in Mac focus on one implementation.

I mean, it's not like these projects have a lot of useful life or development left in them anyway: I give big, bloated C/C++-based office suites like that another 10 years at most.

Re:why?

[TheRaven64]

I think the more things can be moved away from Objective-C and C++ to higher level languages, the better. I agree with some of what you say, but if you think Java is a higher-level language than Objective-C, then I think you need to spend a bit more time using Objective-C. The dynamic dispatch features of the language are far beyond anything that Java has.

It's an update, but not an improvement overall

[The Orange Mage]

I mean, just look at the "update." People who already have OO for Windows have to download a 90+ MB file that INSTALLS ITS OWN INSTALLER, putting a total of 200+ MB on your PC before installation is all said and done. The program is still as ugly and slow as usual. In summary, OpenOffice should rename itself OpenWorks, because it's more like Office's retarded little cousin than the fast, sleek Office.

Re:It's an update, but not an improvement overall

[miro f]

so MS Office is less than 200 MB after installation now?

Re:It's an update, but not an improvement overall

[howlingmadhowie]

one more reason not to use windows.
you know, i would possibly use windows and office too, if the barrier to entry wasn't so high. as it is, i would have to:

• give up my ultrasparc computers and buy something else
• give up my sun monitors and buy something else
• learn how to install and manage apache, mysql, postgresql, tomcat, zope, gcc, gcj, as, ld.. on a windows box
• find replacements for iptables, ssh, vsftp, passwd, rc.d, init, bash...

once microsoft has implemented these basic functionalities, i'll consider switching.
oh, and they can give me the source code at the same time. and do everything for free. and document all their data formats. and listen to me when i want a change.

Re:It's an update, but not an improvement overall

[Ash-Fox]

Microsoft Office Enterprise 2007 full install according to "Add or Remove programs" is 630MB.

Open Office Aqua

[javacowboy]

Open Office is working on a native (as opposed to X11) version of OpenOffice for OS X, but according to the latest project plan, the final release won't be out until the end of the year:

http://porting.openoffice.org/mac/news/index.html

In the meantime, Neooffice is a decent option, considering that the project is only maintained by two people, and part-time at that:

http://neooffice.org/neojava/en/download.php#downl oad

OOXML

[nileshbansal]

Is OpenOffice planning to include OOXML translator anytime soon. It is required, as more and more people are now using Office 2007 (and they are sharing their documents with us Linux users).

Family Guy

[Ctrl-Z]

"How do you turn a phrase?" -- Peter Griffin

NeoOffice not as bad as you suggest, IMO

[timothy]

I installed the latest freely downloadable version of NeoOffice (as of a month ago), which I think was version 2.0 beta 3 (though don't hold me to that), because my mom finally replaced her old iBook, and wanted a word processor with which to write her letters to the editor, etc.

It isn't crazy blinding fast, but I thought it ran at least snappily on her (lowest-tier) MacBook. Now, the MacBook's low end is still what I consider a very nice machine, but I saw nothing to complain about in NeoOffice's behavior. Perhaps next time I'm there I'll upgrade her to the newest version.

(Now, the last time I'd tried NeoOffice was IIRC 2 years back, and on a 500MHz G3 iBook, and it was SLOOOOOWWWW. So I was happy for the difference this time around.)

timothy

Re:NeoOffice not as bad as you suggest, IMO

[nine-times]

The truth is, it's not horribly slow once you get it going, but it can take 20 seconds to load up on even a high-end machine. It's not enough to make it unusable, but it's annoying when you're trying to do something quickly.

Re:NeoOffice not as bad as you suggest, IMO

[drjzzz]

My experience with NO has been positive. I used OO.o with X for about 9 months on a dual-core Macbook (and many years on linux). I loaded NeoOffice to use the mac remote for a presentation. It does seem a little slower but it is very usable. I like the ability to switch between apps with the apple-tab (can't do that with OO+X). It was absolutely solid for preparing and presenting a 3 hour lecture with 160 slides, including many data tables, figures, some ppt imports, and some animation. I think I'll stick with NO instead of going back to OO.

Re:It's nearly unusable.

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't notice any particular sloth on my 800MHz Duron box... ...but then I didn't leave 2.2 installed long enough to get a full impression.

When I type letters that fail to appear until I press return, or press return and get a line of graphical hash all the way across the page -- both of which happened within the first two minutes of experimentation -- I'm inclined to think there was insufficient product testing.

Back to 2.1!

Price doesn't matter

[ton1c]

I know for a fact that all of us have met people in our lives that don't care about price, they care about functionality and ease of use, and lucky enough for me my dad displays this trait very strongly.

This means that whenever we're buying anything new, he'll always want to make sure that it will work well, not just do what it's supposed to. In this regard, there is no comparison between OpenOffice and MS Office, as OO have yet to release a significant upgrade over several years, while MS has a 3-4 year cycle, sometimes less.

While some do carry the opinion that MS is only doing it to keep profits coming in, that's what most software companies do, so why single MS out for it? Granted it is true in minor cases, it isn't with office 2k7. I've been using it since it came out pretty much, and I find it about twice as productive as previous versions, and my friends are getting jealous of the documents it's able to produce. I don't know if it's the calibri font or what, but printing from office 2007 just looks better in every case, than both previous versions of office and OO.

The windows-linux battle may be raging, but I think this war is over.

Re:Price doesn't matter

[yoasif]

It was said earlier in the thread, but I think it bears repeating.

"You can't fight the future".

As OO.org or other, more nimble alternatives (like KOfice 2, which is coming to Windows) get better and better, it will approach (and perhaps even overtake) Microsoft's functionality.

Look at what happened with IE6; Firefox and Opera aren't just arguably better than IE6, they are a lot better. Obviously Microsoft put some money into making IE7 better, but Firefox and Opera are still better at rendering CSS web pages.

I'm sure as OpenOffice and KOffice get better, we'll see investment (in the form of code, or programmers, or money) from companies that are friendly to open source (IBM maybe?), which will increase features and code quality.

Would someone be willing to use a product that is better than a product that costs $351 (for the "Standard" version), and is free?

I'm sure they would.

Microsoft is already at it's peak, it has nowhere to go but down.

Give OpenOffice (or the lighter (but less feature filled, but prettier and more elegant feeling KOffice) out. Think of it as Firefox, back when it was called "Phoenix".

Office 2007 killer? Where's the video support?

[FredThompson]

There still isn't proper support for video in presentations. That's been in PowerPoint for years. OpenOffice still looks like a "prettified" PFS:Office to me.

Re:Office 2007 killer? Where's the video support?

[unapersson]

I can insert video in presentations in OpenOffice 2.0.4 in Linux. The video API it uses probably just isn't available on Windows yet.

OOo runs on Solaris as well

[calidoscope]

IIRC, one of the resons that Sun bought StarDivsion was to have an M$-Orifice compatible office wuite to run on Solaris. There were some office suites that ran on Solaris, Island Write, Draw & Paint (which had a much saner way of inserting graphics than I've seen in either M$-Orifice or OOo) and AplixWare are two that come to mind - both only had very limited Office compatibility and neither was cheap.

OOo runs on both Solaris/Sparc and Solaris/x86 - both Sparc and x86 versions will work on 32 bit or 64 bit kernals.

Excel sucks, it has no games.

[nbritton]

Umm yeah, does excel have space invaders? OpenOffice Calc meets my needs perfectly ... I mean, the last thing I want to do in a spreadsheet program is actual work.

Re: Excel sucks, it has no games.

[triso]

Umm yeah, does excel have space invaders? OpenOffice Calc meets my needs perfectly ... I mean, the last thing I want to do in a spreadsheet program is actual work. Amen! The excel version is here

Comma is the decimal separator in Europe

[MrBoombasticfantasti]

it uses semicolons instead of commas to separate fields in things like IF statements. Very irritating. I use Excel quite a bit and the few times I've tried Calc it drives me crazy with its different syntax.

In most European countries the comma is used as the decimal separator. Three thousand dollar and twenty-five cents would be $3.000,25 (not $3,000.25 you might be used to). In a locale that does this Excel uses the semi-colon too.

Re:Comma is the decimal separator in Europe

[dodongo]

In most European countries the comma is used as the decimal separator. Three thousand dollar and twenty-five cents would be $3.000,25 (not $3,000.25 you might be used to). In a locale that does this Excel uses the semi-colon too.

That's it. I'm not using Open Office until someone in their organization can explain to me why they hate America.

Re:Comma is the decimal separator in Europe

[Blakey Rat]

In most European countries the comma is used as the decimal separator. Three thousand dollar and twenty-five cents would be $3.000,25 (not $3,000.25 you might be used to). In a locale that does this Excel uses the semi-colon too.

And this is relevant to the bug in OpenOffice... how?

Re:Comma is the decimal separator in Europe

[MrBoombasticfantasti]

It is not a bug. It is designed that way.

Re:Comma is the decimal separator in Europe

[Blakey Rat]

It's designed to ignore the language setting of the computer? ... that sounds like a bug to me.

I see your point

[misanthrope101]

On a side note, I have plenty of co-workers who don't want to use computers at all. They hate email, hate MS Office, don't understand spreadsheets, and want to go back to "the way things were before". I'm wondering whether our workplace will accomdoate them, or just make them suck it up and get used to what we have to use today.

Seriously, I understand that people have preferences. But every time I hear that someone doesn't want to use OpenOffice, or Linux, or even LaTeX, and that this is a reason why they shouldn't be implemented, I think of all the workers who just have to use what they have to use, and they eventually got over it. I've seen people forcibly moved from Windows to Mac, from Mac to Windows, and all over the place, and people eventually just stop grumbling and get their work done. I hate using Windows, would much rather use Ubuntu and OpenOffice, but essentially no one cares, because my employer made a technology choice, and if I wish to continue my employment I have to abide by it.

MS Office is expensive, proprietary, closed-source, and has planned expensive upgrades built into the MS business model. OpenOffice isn't perfect (what is?) but if the secretary were told "well, this is what we're using" she just might get over it.

Re:I see your point

[Henry V .009]

As I said in my post, this is her home computer not her office computer. I don't see why she should be told to "get over it" if she's not satisfied with Open Office. For her, it's worth paying the money to get a better product.

Also, I don't like your idea of how to run an IT department. Where I work, we listen to what employees want and try to accommodate them, not the other way around. The price of software and computers is small compared to people costs. If buying software increases productivity, it's generally worth it.

Re:I see your point

[LWATCDR]

The real point is.
What makes OpenOffice better than Office? Forget about price because the cost of software compared to people is small. Forget about the file format because everyone uses Office. I use OpenOffice because it is free but I have an older version of MS Office on my computer at work. I hate to say it but OpenOffice really isn't any better. Office's help system is much better than OO.org's. Graphing in Office is much easier than in OO.org.
I recommend OO.org to everyone that has a choice between OO.org and a "free" copy of Office from a friend. I keep hoping that OO.org will do something better then Office someday. In other words I can see your point.

Options-- Uncheck Java

[Anonymous Coward]

Disable Java. It's only used for macros. Now it's much faster...

Supports Vista excellently!

[Anonymous Coward]

This new OpenOffice is especially good with Windows Vista! Thanks to OO developers, you have done a great job!

the war is indeed over

[misanthrope101]

Yes, the war is over, for me. MS Office's PDF output capability, with nested TOC and html links intact, really sold me and I don't see why I would ever go back. You can even copy/paste from a web page and all the hyperlinks in the text will be intact, and you can export your document to PDF and the links will STILL be intact, even with a TOC if you bothered to use headings. Way cool.

Add that to the fact that, even if I hose my HD, I can boot into a Knoppix|Kanotix|Ubuntu|whatever CD|DVD and use MS Office perfectly well without even needing to install an OS! Another thing I love about MS Office is that, if someone who doesn't own it needs to edit an MS Office file, I can legally hand them a copy for free, or point them to the free download page. There's also an MS Office page at Portable Apps, and they have a version (also free) you can run from a USB thumb drive, no installation needed! So the group of people I can share documents with isn't limited to people who have paid for (or pirated) a certain version of my office suite.

Except that all of that is untrue, and those advantages belong only to OpenOffice.

I'm sure that MS Office has some technical capabilities that Openoffice lacks. But I don't know what they are, and it appears that I don't need them. But I have just documented some advantages that Openoffice enjoys but MS Office lacks, and I need|want those advantages more than I need the unknown, unused advantages of MS Office. Ergo the war, as you say, is over.

Re:the war is indeed over

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I'm sure that MS Office has some technical capabilities that Openoffice lacks. But I don't know what they are, and it appears that I don't need them.

If you're genuinely interested, I've posted to various previous discussions on OpenOffice and MS Office with lists of specific things one product does better than the other. Most of these related to the suites' respective word processors, though I've mentioned Calc/Excel a few times too. A quick Google for my user name and OpenOffice on site:slashdot.org should find most of the relevant things.

Re:OOH, Kerning!

[Korin43]

It seems to me that OpenOffice isn't really aimed at people who are obsessed with how their word processor performs. I didn't even know what kerning was until this story, and I certainly can't tell the difference. Try using it for actually typing a document instead of doing weird tricks you're used to doing in Microsoft Office and you'll find that your problem is that you're used to another program, not that the alternative is flawed.

Binary packages

[vsavkin]

Why don't they release sane binary packages, like just about any other big project does?
How am I supposed to install it on generic x86-64 linux system, besides compiling from source?

Re:Binary packages

[Ash-Fox]

'apt-get install openoffice' works on my 64bit Linux system.

Re:Binary packages

[vsavkin]

Do you know any openoffice repo for Debian/stable?

Re:Binary packages

[vsavkin]

I mean unoffical sarge from amd64.debian.net of course

PDF Form Export Error

[Anonymous Coward]

When I create a Form in OOo 2.2 and export it to PDF, the resulting form cannot be read by Acrobat Reader or Foxit Reader. The reported bug 70143 was labelled invalid. Do we have to buy Acrobat Pro to be able to produce PDF forms?

http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7 0143

Thanks

Re:PDF Form Export Error

[MLease]

Reading through the comments in the bug report, it appears that they claim to be able to get Acrobat Reader (as well as Ghostview) to read the forms, so they're asserting that it's a Foxit problem. That said, I haven't tried it myself; I'll download 2.2 in the next few days and poke around with it to see what I can figure out.

If you have some sample forms created with 2.2 that aren't readable in AR, you might want to attach them to the bug and see if they will reopen it.

-Mike

Already an upgrade!?

[pizzach]

!@#$, I just finished emerging OpenOffice 2.1!

Main Computer: PII, 128ram, running Gentoo. (I have a large hard drive)

NNnnnnngggg!!!!!

[tsa]

Why o why do I ALWAYS have to learn OO all my settings again if there is a new version? This drives me utterly mad. Can somebody help me with this?

Re:NNnnnnngggg!!!!!

[tsa]

I found it out myself, at least on the Mac. OO makes a directory ~/Library/Application support/OpenOffice x.y for each version. Copy the directory user/ that you find in there to the new OpenOffice directory. And Bob's yer uncle!

This is the Dutch speaking

[hans8888]

Look for more on http://www.richarddemos.nl/

OpenOffice needs Mozilla-style updates BADLY

[smagruder]

These upgrades are freaking huge, and take too long to download, even over DSL.

Why can't we have partial updates, like with Firefox?

Fast on windows XP

[Patrick_Champion]

The new version seems as snappy as Word on windows XP. I get around 20 characters/second typing speed. Initial startup takes same time as 2.1, which is 19 seconds. After you kill the particular app (say writer) and just leave the quickstart running, starting a new app takes only 0.5 seconds if it was previously opened, or 4 seconds max, if it was a new sub app (spreadsheet).

I think they REALLY focus on speed on Windows, not on Linux. But also, it is very likely the way the program loads in Linux also. They don't seem to be assuming KDE or Gnome and so they load a huge library instead. IS THIS THE CASE???

Patrick

Re:OOH, Kerning!

[cyphercell]

I knew what it was, just didn't know what it was called.

here kerning

Rendering compatibility with Word improved

[Dan East]

I guess I'm just posting this for the sake of posterity, since this story is "old news" now.

I had previously posted that an Open Office Writer downside was the rendering difference between it and Word, which completely threw off the pagination in a handbook I had created in Word. I'm extremely pleased that, after installing Open Office 2.2, the Word-created document renders perfectly, and all pagination is correct!

Dan East

Open Office language support.

[fjin]

Never mind, I found it. The problem was that my open office version was in German and I don't know German.

Then I suggest of downloading language pack to it for your preferred language. http://www.openoffice.org/