Slashdot Mirror
OpenOffice Could Soon Become Web-Based Apps
An anonymous reader writes "Via Linuxtoday.com, a message from the OpenOffice Dev mailing list in which a new company is introducing the GravityZoo OpenOffice porting project. The unusually named group aims to bring OpenOffice to the Internet as a series of online apps. 'When OpenOffice.org is GravityZood, it will become a suite of productivity applications that are always available, online, via a broad range of devices. It will be possible to share and collaborate in real-time, to switch from one device (e.g. a PC) to another (Mobile) device. There will also be no need to save data, because everything you produce is saved automatically on the network. There is no need to download, install or update, the latest version is just available and accessible from any GravityZoo enabled client.'"
GravityZoo is NOT, I repeat NOT converting OpenOffice into a webapp. I don't really want to detract from their idea, so I'll try to be succinct. Basically, GravityZoo has a special client that interacts with the application running on the server. The application on the server is always available, and autostores your data in a GravityZoo Object Storage database.
Supposedly, it's an actual conversion of the application to a networked form rather than a simple remote desktop concept. If I were to make a W.A.G. of the Day, I'd say they're probably going to bus the normal IPC communications over the network. Not revolutionary by itself, but possibly nice if they have a good framework.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
I have an Axim, and its great for a lot of things. Calendar, tasks, note taking, note recording, some light web surfing. But document creation. No. Even using Powerpoint on it is just horrendous. I have no faith that these apps with be nearly as enjoyable across devices that are not desktops.
I like the internet, I use it an awful lot, but for most uses I cannot see needing an Office package to be online.
It will be nice as a compliment though for those very rare occasions.
liqbase
From www.gravityzoo.com: The GravityZoo Framework employs patent pending technology to achieve its goals. It can be divided into three major components, all fulfilling a special and important task:
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
As per "Open Source" at the GravityZoo website, [...]"this requires the involvement of a global community of Information Analysts, IT architects and Engineers from both the Open Source and Commercial environment. Open Source because to achieve an egalitarian development of tomorrow's information society requires the free flow of Data Information and Intelligence to those in need. Commercial because certain developments require upfront investments and thus risktaking, a step the Open Source community is not always willing or capable to take. In the latter case the risktaking should be rewarded by limiting the access on a for Pay basis.
It is therefore that The GravityZoo Company from day one decide to implement a Dual Licensing model.
More information about our Open Source projects and activities will be available at this page soon."
Until they clarify their licensing, I refuse to be interested, let alone excited.
There is also so far only a Windows client. They don't even have a beta for other platforms. So I'm not interested in that way, also.
Also: if it requires a special client, it is not (repeat not) a web-based app. I don't fucking care how it's delivered. The web is browsed with a web browser - see how that works?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
This has about a much chance of flying as your common or garden stone. Aside from the fact that the article appears to be fundamentally flawed who would really want this functionality? Networks are just too slow for this to really work well. Even dumb terminals have lag and they are generally connected via a high speed network with minimal hops. Factor in the Interweb and this is just another web 2.0 pipe dream. Why is there this obsession with putting everything on the network even when it's not suitable for it?
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
Another great Web 2.0 concept.
Some days I think the Web peaked at HTML 3.2.
You appear to be under the mistaken assumption that you are a serious user.
But anyone who would use any part of microsoft office but excel and perhaps outlook is by definition not a serious user.
Powerpoint has support only for crap low resolutions. Word is a pathetic joke in terms of layout and typesetting ability and publisher frankly is not noticeably better. Access? Don't fucking get me started.
If you want to do a presentation that anyone is going to care about, you're producing a video, not a powerpoint presentation. If you're trying to create a document for external release, like advertising or documentation, neither word nor publisher can help you. You must use something real, like Framemaker, InDesign, et cetera.
Office is a sad, pathetic Joke. OO.o does everything that office does well, but not as well as office does it in some cases. But in terms of casual use of an office suite, which is all office is good for anyway (again, with the exception of excel, IMO Microsoft's only worthwhile program period full stop) there is simply nothing significant missing from OO.o.
Anything office does that OO.o doesn't, office does a horrible job with.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
What I'm looking forward to is a web-based version of Firefox.
Dan East
Better known as 318230.
Ok, we all kind of understand that there will come a time when bandwidth allows profile concepts to be moved to a universally accessible secure location. But it will have to be a highly secured and trusted service or user created server service. (i.e. A home BSD box or even Windows Home Server for example for home users.)
However, I don't want my personal documents stored on their servers, and I know most business policies will not allow documents to be stored in this manner.
Also, why are they 'reinventing' the wheel with patented technology to do this? There are many known and secure remote app technologies that could be already put into place for something like this.
I'm open to ideas here, but I don't see how this is 'Open' or a good thing...
I just can't use a product associated with the name "GravityZoo." GravityZoo sounds too much like GravityGlue... which sounds too much like CavityGlue... which sounds just a little too close to CavityJew... which reminds me of the dentist (sorry for the anti-Semitism -- I needed this for the joke to work. I love you guys. Shalom!) Anyhoo, so... the dentist. I don't like the dentist, and so, logically, I don't like GravityZoo. QED.
sig: sauer
"Access? Don't fucking get me started"....sigh, why not get started, you did on most of the others.
I'm no fan of Office or of OO.o. Both are tools and as such open to personal opinion for their good and bad traits. However, when you slam something give me an alternative Ican review, test, and try as comparison. I've done well received presentation with Powerpoint. Not many have the time to create "video", not does video work for a teaching or instructional medium.
Do you know of a better tool then powerpoint that is simple to use, costs little, allows high res images, and wont take forever to create a result? Not busting, that is a serious question. Same thing with Word or Publisher. Cite other tools and I'll taste test to see if I have the same view.
Telling me it sucsk is only half the job, tell me the better solution and why; that give more cred to the statements.
Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
Ok, it seems to me that the single biggest draw for these online desktop-like apps is to have access to your files from anywhere. Assuming that is correct, they why aren't we seeing more traditional apps that are capable of drawing from a common network data store such as Amazone S3? I know Amazon provides an API. Seem like you could extend OpenOffice to talk to S3 (or similar) directly and you'd have your "documents just about anywhere" feature that everyone (on Slashdot) seems to think is so useful. Really, it is such a relatively simple solution considering compared to trying to coerce a web browser into doing things God never meant it to do.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
Putting a web app front-end on Open Office makes good sense, especially if the application server is already in your pocket. We currently tote around several electronic gadgets, and yet can only access "serious" applications through stationary desktops and bulky laptops. As electronics shrink, all of this must converge to a single platform. Since pretty much all applications require comms, and mobile phones provide this, they will probably end up being the platform that we converge onto. They will carry the files we're currently working with, like a level 1 cache, and swap out the ones we haven't touched for some time to server farms. They will give us dinky interfaces into their apps while we're on the move. When we need the big screen experience, they will deliver their apps to ubiquitous, big screen docking stations (a.k.a. browsers) via local wireless. So we will need to web-enable most of our important apps over time. See http://trevors-trinkets.blogspot.com/2007/02/after -desktop-what.html and http://trevors-trinkets.blogspot.com/2007/03/mobil izing-mobiles.html for how.
...when it was called ThinkFree Online. Oh wait, we have to hate ThinkFree because it's written in Java. Even though it works well, lets you use your own fonts and printer, opens and saves real MS Office docs, and installs into the JVM cache faster than an MS Office or OpenOffice install.
Oh well, trying to write an Office suite in Ajax has kept people busy for a few years, now they can try to get the native OO.o app working in a browser. Maybe next we can port it to Flash. That'll be fun.