Slashdot Mirror


Adobe May Launch Office Rival

Ulysees writes "According to Wired, Adobe may launch its own office-application suite, taking it into direct competition with Microsoft. Mike Downey, group manager for platform evangelism at Adobe, said: 'Though we have not yet announced any intentions to move into the office productivity-software market, considering that we have built this platform that makes it easy to build rich applications that run on both the desktop and the browser, I certainly wouldn't rule anything like that out.'" One example of what such Adobe Web-and-desktop apps could look like is provided by the Buzzword word processor, now in a closed beta. Adobe has invested in the startup developing this software.

311 comments

  1. Market isn't closed... by WED+Fan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The market isn't closed, but really, there is not a single office suite that seriously competes with MS Office. Any MAJOR company that has tried has BLED money...and lost.

    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
    1. Re:Market isn't closed... by WED+Fan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The market isn't closed, but really, there is not a single office suite that seriously competes with MS Office. Any MAJOR company that has tried has BLED money...and lost.

      Modded troll because the truth hurts? Name one that even approaches half the market penetration. There aren't. I'm not saying its right, I'm not saying Office, especially the new version, is good, I'm just saying that this is a very difficult market to enter, even for a major company.

      --
      Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
    2. Re:Market isn't closed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      guess it depends on what you mean.

      If in terms of quality/featues, I'd say OpenOffice is quite a valid competator. In terms of market penetration as in your reply, yeah, no competition yet.

      And given my experiences with Adobe products and their competition, I'd rather stick with MS Office, were I force to choose between the two.

      But, glad I have OpenOffice, so I don't have to.

    3. Re:Market isn't closed... by twistedcubic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, the Adobe brand itself could make such a product compete with MS office, IMO. If they use ODF and include compatibility with their other expensive office apps (PageMaker?), I bet they could take a huge chunk, even if their .doc converters are only as good as the ones in OOo. Obviously their office suite will include that curiously often withheld feature, export to PDF.

      Of course, they will never do this. But I bet it would work.

    4. Re:Market isn't closed... by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Name one that even approaches half the market penetration. There aren't. I'm not saying its right, I'm not saying Office, especially the new version, is good, I'm just saying that this is a very difficult market to enter, even for a major company.

      Just because one does not exist does not mean that one will not exist.

      Apple was once the established market leader for PC's. Not today. Sony Playstations once dominated the console market... yet there was Microsoft with the audacity to build and market something called the "X Box".

      I'm not saying that any old app suite will simply come in and stomp an established market leader, but I am saying that I wouldn't be so sure that what dominates today will dominate tomorrow. Even MS Word had to overcome Word Perfect's market penetration, and WP was pretty damned powerful for what it did back in the day.

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    5. Re:Market isn't closed... by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is this move anything more than an empty threat in response to Microsoft's very recent nasty surprise? Seriously.

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    6. Re:Market isn't closed... by WED+Fan · · Score: 1

      Even MS Word had to overcome Word Perfect's market penetration, and WP was pretty damned powerful for what it did back in the day.

      Microsoft isn't about to make the same mistake WP/Novell/Corel made. I was a WP user. But, the boys in Orem let the product lanquish and the Corel ignored it for too many years. They stayed in the pit stop while MS lapped them 50 times over.

      Now, if MS seriously falls down and ignores thier product, yes, a competitor will take over.

      --
      Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
    7. Re:Market isn't closed... by G+Fab · · Score: 1

      You're obviously right. Open Office, which is basically a great clone of pre-ribbon office, but is free, is a terrific bargain and no one could claim office is actually a comparatively good deal.

      But. People are paranoid about files being compatible and getting support, so a mere few hundred bucks really isn't that important when you pay your staff thirty thousand a year to use office 90% of the time they are working.

      Microsoft has a monopoly. Again. They know what they are doing. I wouldn't be surprised if MS started having XBOX 360s installed in TVs at a radical discount. This has been a great business model for them (and it's not always a bad thing).

      Oh, and wtf is with Office 2007? I just installed it ten minutes ago and it's crazy different. I hope I can fix the settings.

    8. Re:Market isn't closed... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sony Playstations once dominated the console market... yet there was Microsoft with the audacity to build and market something called the "X Box". Not to steal your thunder, but I think you've forgotten that the PS2 is STILL far and away the best selling console.
      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    9. Re:Market isn't closed... by lottameez · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's two reasons for this I think. First, MSOffice is generally perceived as "good enough". There's not enough pain for most users to look beyond what gets offered as part of a PC/Laptop package. Even if Adobe's package was available through Dell's website (for example), what would be the incentive? The second reason I see is issues of compatibility and collaboration. If I did choose Adobe, I'd need to know that I can share documents with MSOffice users. If there's *any* doubt on being able to share documents, it's easier for me to just pick what I know will be compatible - MSOffice.

      --
      Yeah? Well I think you're overrated too.
    10. Re:Market isn't closed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      there was Microsoft with the audacity to build and market something called the "X Box".

      And the Xbox bleeds money year after year. And the next-gen console sales are currently dominated by former market leader Nintendo. Were you trying to refute OP's point or support it?

    11. Re:Market isn't closed... by toolie · · Score: 1

      Oh, and wtf is with Office 2007? I just installed it ten minutes ago and it's crazy different. I hope I can fix the settings. Don't get your hopes up. I've been using it on and off for awhile and still haven't found any way to turn the ribbons off. It does get easier as you go, thankfully. It is one hell of a shock when you first start out though.
      --
      -- toolie
    12. Re:Market isn't closed... by gbjbaanb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ok then: Sega had the best selling console and dominated the market, but then they brought out the Saturn whilst upstart newcomer Sony the audacity to build and market something called the "playstation".

      Remember the Saturn... no? Exactly.

    13. Re:Market isn't closed... by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When Apple was the leader it had a market share closer to 15% because there were so many other strong competitors. IBM won just because their platform was the most open, allowing for PC Clones compete in the same software market space.

      Sony Playstation while dominate still wasn't invincible high Nentendo had a strong competitive advantage and even Sega was enough to be a threat, when the XBox came out it didn't beat sony until the 360 where Sony just royally screwed up.

      For replacing Office there is a major hurdle. First Microsoft Office became the dominate Office Suite and has been invested in my most companies... if a Company is going to use an other office suite it will need to be 100% compatible. Not this 99% compatability where 3 times a year you get a document which blowes up in your face and you need to put tail between your legs and beg your supplier or worse your customer to save it in a different format. For the 3 times a year that could cost the company far more then the cost of Office Professional.

      That being said Adobe has the best chance of doing this only because they are large enough to push this, have enough IP agreements with Microsoft to get a good compatibility of Office files. And mostly postive feeling from the public. Most people are indifferent or like Adobe not to many people (with the exception of Open Source Zealots) really dislike Adobe. But still it will be an uphill battle with no margin of error.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    14. Re:Market isn't closed... by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      PageMaker's been deprecated. It's been replaced by Adobe InDesign.

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    15. Re:Market isn't closed... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      It's a troll because it's wrong.

      Star Division thrived long enough to get bought by Sun. There are other regional players. It's also possible to be in the field if you are not depending on this for your bread and butter. Sun is a great example of this.

      Microsoft killed off the specialty vendors. That doesn't mean that someone else can't come along and buy their way into the market based on being dominant in something else.

      It worked well enough for MS.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    16. Re:Market isn't closed... by hazem · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apple was once the established market leader for PC's. Not today.

      Apple's not a good example here. Apple was a leader in a small immature market that was growing rapidly. It's easy to be displaced in such a market because there are so many new customers who don't need to switch from one product to another.

      The Office App market is pretty mature with well-entrenched players and anyone who wants a pretty good office app can get one (even legitimately for free). You would have quite a bit better than say, Open Office, since that's free and pretty good. And you'd have to be so astoundingly good that you could get a lot of people to actually make the effort to switch from MS Office to the point where Microsoft can't break your app by making you incompatible with them. And Microsoft has the huge advantage of being entrenched in many large corporations and governments, who are not likely to quickly change their infrastructure to try something hot and new. Many aren't even upgrading their version of Office for fear of breaking existing processes with slight incompatibilities and the huge expense and effort of retraining.

      I'm not saying it won't happen, but there's a lot working against a new Office App vendor in their efforts to become profitable. And even Word Perfect, as good as it was, was only dominating a market that was rapidly growing.

    17. Re:Market isn't closed... by Manchot · · Score: 1

      Sony Playstations once dominated the console market... yet there was Microsoft with the audacity to build and market something called the "X Box".

      Right...but the Xbox and Xbox 360 have cost Microsoft billions of dollars, not to mention the fact that neither console have ever been the market leader.

    18. Re:Market isn't closed... by Nossie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thats all we need...

      Lets swap one monopoly for another :-|

    19. Re:Market isn't closed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      excuse me, i remember the saturn you insensitive clod

    20. Re:Market isn't closed... by ShaggyIan · · Score: 1

      The curve was shortened drastically for me by using keyboard shortcuts. Most of the keyboard commands still work, and it saves you from digging through the menus. . . er, ribbon. . . to find stuff.

      Watch your file formats too. Microsoft did some damage to themselves on the compatibility front. . .

      --

      This sig was generated randomly by one million monkeys with Speak 'n Spells. . .
    21. Re:Market isn't closed... by jmyers · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I was a WP user. But, the boys in Orem let the product lanquish and the Corel ignored it for too many years."

      Even so that is not what killed WP. It was killed because of price. People want cheep/free (see previous ./ article). WP was ~$200 and you could buy MS Word "competitive upgrade" for $50. Everybody opted for Word because it was cheap. Once they had 50%+ market share they removed WP compatibility from the default install and the rest of the holdouts switched to Word so they cold exchange documents.

      The other one was Lotus 123. Lotus was $200-300 and you could buy Quattro Pro for $50 competitive upgrade. People started going to Quattro in droves and then Lotus won a lawsuit over look and feel and basically put Quattro Pro out of business. By then excel was available for $50 upgrade and everyone went to it rather than back to Lotus.

      Then the deal was sealed and MS owns the desktop productivity market.

      When/if MS makes Office hard/impossible to pirate people will download OO in droves.

    22. Re:Market isn't closed... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      One way to get away from the dependency of Office is to pick something else right from the start.

      Since I switched to OS X about two years ago, I made the decision not to be locked into MS-only products, so I'm using iWork. If you think I just replaced a monopoly and closed format with another, you're right. But I can also export my files into quite a number of formats from each iWork application, so switching again (to, say, Linux) shouldn't be a problem.

      As for Adobe being recognized as a brand to help push their Office suite, I'd say Apple would have a much better chance at that if they were to make iWork available for Windows, like they already did with iTunes and Safari.

    23. Re:Market isn't closed... by rgravina · · Score: 1

      Modded troll because the truth hurts? Name one that even approaches half the market penetration. How does market penetration have anything to do with seriously completing with Microsoft? By "seriously compete" I take that to mean "is in the same leauge as", in which case there are several, and they would have higher market share if it wasn't for Microsoft keeping their formats closed and users not knowing about this. "But Product X changed the formatting on my Word Document! This Office suite is crap!".

      Few things annoy me more than someone sending me .doc attachments, and few things are more amusing than seeing someone try and write a 100 page structured document like a thesis, technical report or a user manual in Word! If it eats their file, all the better!
    24. Re:Market isn't closed... by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1

      Actually, the Adobe brand itself could make such a product compete with MS office, IMO.

      Only if they reduce their prices.

      If they come out with an office suite that uses a pricing model similar to what they're using for the CS3 suites, nobody will be able to afford it.

      --

      I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    25. Re:Market isn't closed... by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Obviously their office suite will include that curiously often withheld feature, export to PDF.

      I'm not sure what you mean by that. OpenOffice, WordPerfect, Everything on OS X, KWord, Google Docs, and AbiWord all support PDF export and more than half of them support PDF import. MS Word is the only one that does not support PDF export natively (because of antitrust issues).

    26. Re:Market isn't closed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because, while "Build a clone and use your OS to destroy the competition" may work for Office productivity software, it doesn't tend to work as well with entertainment software.

    27. Re:Market isn't closed... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Sega never dominated the market. For one generation, the Genesis managed to pull within hailing distance of the SNES, but even then the SNES outsold it. Then Sony waded in and owned the market.

    28. Re:Market isn't closed... by Blue+Stone · · Score: 1
      >excuse me, i remember the saturn you insensitive clod

      And I remember the Oric 1, what's your point? :-)

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    29. Re:Market isn't closed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple was once the established market leader for PC's. Not today.


      apple's "market" 20 years ago may well not even be one day's worth of microsoft sales today. this is a totally craptastic and irrelevant example.

      Sony Playstations once dominated the console market... yet there was Microsoft with the audacity to build and market something called the "X Box".


      ahhhh, and msft has DONATED BILLIONS in the effort to compete with playstation. not to mention that every xbox game need not reasonably play nice with every playstation while the playstation engineers work overtime to make playstation incompatible with the xbox.

      although this is another craptasticly bad example, it does more to prove out the bleed money theme of attack a sizeable market leader - even if the market leader doesn't have 5% the foothold that msft currently maintains.
    30. Re:Market isn't closed... by Bombula · · Score: 1
      Yeah, I think they're getting in over their heads - especially with claims like this:

      considering that we have built this platform that makes it easy to build rich applications

      I don't know about anyone else, but my experience with Adobe Acrobat (now Adobe Reader) is that while it certainly looks pretty it's slow and stuttery, tends to cause Firefox to hang, has a poor interface, and doesn't "play nice" with other company's software any more than M$ Office - and maybe even less. Just my 2 cents.

      --
      A-Bomb
    31. Re:Market isn't closed... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      correction: playstation was NINTENDO's folly, Sony built up samples that became PS to be the manufacture at N64 time and nintendo backed out.

    32. Re:Market isn't closed... by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 1

      Now, if MS seriously falls down and ignores thier product, yes, a competitor will take over.


      I'm guessing they're not that stupid. The Office-related line of products is their single point of strength and major revenue source. On the Windows side things are getting wobbly. The Xbox is a money eater and it's all they can do to keep it in the market against fierce competition. They let Internet Explorer fester and when they finally came up with 7 it didn't impress anybody. I do believe that they learned something from all this.

      In order to challenge MS Office you don't need to make a good product. There are plenty of good office products out there that can give it a run for its money in many respects. The problem is that people are addicted to MS Office. They won't stop using it out of fear that they won't be able to fully use the .doc's and .xls's and whatnot.

      And they won't, because MS plays on that strength. Why do you think they oppose a truly open document standard with everything they've got? It's their bread and butter, that's why. As long as people can't let go MS will have plenty of suckers to bleed. Give them an open format and let them take their pick of office suites and the whole thing goes to pieces. Nuh-huh, they're not that dumb.
      --
      i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
    33. Re:Market isn't closed... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2, Informative

      "correction: playstation was NINTENDO's folly, Sony built up samples that became PS to be the manufacture at N64 time and nintendo backed out"

      Correction: It would have been Nintendo's folly to have continued with the Playstation. They backed out because Sony got greedy over licesning and branding. The CD-ROM deal with Sony would have been very destructive to Nintendo. They backed out and lost market-share, but they remained very profitable. The PS would have come out either way, at least in this case they didn't lose their brand over it.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    34. Re:Market isn't closed... by lymond01 · · Score: 1

      I wonder what people expect to improve or be particularly innovative in software to make documents, spreadsheets, and presentations? The MS Office suite does it all and very well. A new document format that's more web and/or database friendly (ie XML)? A better user interface? More collaborative tools (like a checkout and versioning server included)?

    35. Re:Market isn't closed... by slocan · · Score: 1

      It doesn't compete?

      I now use OpenOffice.org at work, on a Windows IBM ThinkCentre PC. (And many other coworkers.)

      And at home I also use OpenOffice.org, on Linux.

      Before I used MS Office on Windows, both at home and work.

    36. Re:Market isn't closed... by rinkjustice · · Score: 1

      Adobe needs to leverage their software suites and create a very real interoperability between their many products if they want their office substitute to survive. Their office must somehow integrate seamlessly with their flash, pdf and imaging software.

      Adobe has a good brand, there's no denying that, but they'll have to bring all their capabilities to bear to give their office software the benefits consumers want and differenciate themselves in the market.

    37. Re:Market isn't closed... by Warbothong · · Score: 1
      The difference is that these days it's a choice between Microsoft Office or Something Else. If the decision to not use Microsoft is taken then chances are OpenOffice or some other FOSS program will be used, therefore trying to run a business based on selling an office suite is pretty much limited to Microsoft, even if everything is done right (support and other things are of course possible, but that is not the discussion here).

      Online office applications are new territory, and I think that any product that can be installed on a company server and accessed by any number of machines for one price will stand a chance of getting off the ground if they get everything else right (which probably means making it behave as much like 'classic' Microsoft Office as physically possible). Isn't this what Google is doing?

    38. Re:Market isn't closed... by doktor-hladnjak · · Score: 1

      Actually, Word 2007 does support Save As PDF, although you do have to download an add-in from Microsoft before it works.

    39. Re:Market isn't closed... by Frenchy_2001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apple was once the established market leader for PC's. Not today. Sony Playstations once dominated the console market... yet there was Microsoft with the audacity to build and market something called the "X Box".
      And that audacity has cost them 2 Billions of dollars per iterations ($4B so far...).
      The fact that you can buy market share in an established procedure, the problem is to actually create a product that is competitive enough and cheaper enough to displace the entrenched competition. I would not use the xbox as such an example. So far, they are trading market space for money. In the same vein, Nintendo did the opposite: their last 2 generations have been told to have "lost" the console war, yet Nintendo made money hand over fist. They traded a bit of market share for a lot of profit.

      How will Adobe's try act? Who knows? They certainly have the know-how and the mind share for office programs. Will they be ready to "invest" heavily and trade dollars for market share? Or will they get such a product that it can succeed on its own merit?

    40. Re:Market isn't closed... by 644bd346996 · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be so sure about the Adobe brand. Consider that no office suite will be able to catch on in the enterprise market unless the regular employees are already familiar with it. That means that Adobe absolutely must market to regular consumers, even if their main target is business users.

      Think about what the average consumer knows about Adobe. They know Adobe mostly as the company that does PDFs, and mostly for producing the infuriatingly bloated and slow Adobe Reader. Some, but not all, also know that Adobe is the company behind Photoshop (an expensive, powerful application that has nothing to do with an office suite). I don't see how they could do significantly better than StarOffice (which is now free).

    41. Re:Market isn't closed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It won't use ODF, I bet it'll use Mars format. Oh, and PageMaker is long dead, and it isn't an office app, it is a design / layout app.

    42. Re:Market isn't closed... by wytcld · · Score: 1

      MSOffice is generally perceived as "good enough".
      Yeah, at the moment. I remember when WordStar was "good enough," then when WordPerfect was. What did Word for Windows bring? It brought the easiest way to have most of our staff quickly producing business letters and memos in proportional type. If you were a law office, you still wanted WordPerfect as a more powerful tool, but for standard office stuff, Word was your tool. That only happened because it was the first out that ran well on Windows. It allowed a whole lot of junior execs to get their job done without assistants to pretty up the correspondence. It was a no-brain purchase.

      Where are we now? We're at a place where standard office printers have gone from fixed-space type (the WordPerfect on DOS era), to proportional type (the Word era), to full-color, fully illustrated, brochure-like output. That means that your junior executives have to either have assistants again, or shop their stuff out to expensive graphics shops. And for anything that really needs to be well laid out, those more expert hands are going to be translating the Word documents into ... tada ... Adobe products.

      So if Adobe produces an office suite, its first advantage will be that it can move its content into higher-end Adobe products with much more ease than going from Microsoft-formatted intermediate steps. Its second advantage will be that it can inherit already-proven features of the higher-end Adobe products, so that some of those junior execs can now do their own brochures, just as they have learned to do memos and letters. Plus, you have easier translation of their work to the Web. The number of jobs that currently exist just to hand-tune the bad results of trying to automatically pour Word into Web pages must number in the tens or hundreds of thousands. And they aren't adding anything to the worth of the business's output that better software couldn't do without them.
      --
      "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
    43. Re:Market isn't closed... by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      If they come out with an office suite that uses a pricing model similar to what they're using for the CS3 suites, nobody will be able to afford it. Maybe they could sell it to the US DoD if they skip an aircraft carrier or two.
      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    44. Re:Market isn't closed... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Star Division was a German company, and I wonder if their strong support for internationalisation helped them. I loved using StarOffice for French and German work, because you could set the spell checker language at an incredibly fine granularity (per word, sentence, paragraph, or document).

      If you're going to compete with Microsoft Office, you need to do something much better than them, and for StarOffice it was support multiple languages (I seem to recall you needed to pay if you wanted more than three installed at once).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    45. Re:Market isn't closed... by ChatHuant · · Score: 1

      "I was a WP user. But, the boys in Orem let the product lanquish and the Corel ignored it for too many years."

      Even so that is not what killed WP. It was killed because of price. People want cheep/free (see previous ./ article)


      Actually, I was a fanatical WP user back then, having gone through 4.2, 5.0 and 5.1, and I knew and used all the F-key combinations. The DOS versions of WP used all modifier keys with all 12 function keys, so you had to learn what F1 - F12 did by themselves, and what they did with Shift/Alt/Ctrl. Then came Windows. I tried Word for Windows, and it had a compatibility mode for WP users that mapped equivalent functions to the same key combinations. While the mapping wasn't always perfect, since the functionality didn't overlap perfectly, it allowed me to continue using my muscle memory for text editing. When WP for windows finally came out (I believe it was 6.0), I got it immediately. It was slow, bulky and buggy, but I was horrified to see that the key combinations didn't work anymore! That completely broke it for me; instead of pressing the keyboard I had to reach for the mouse, open some menu and do something there. At this point, ironically, Word was a better WP 5.x than WP 6.0. So, I had to switch to Word because I liked WP too much :(

    46. Re:Market isn't closed... by timpaton · · Score: 1

      if a Company is going to use an other office suite it will need to be 100% compatible. Not this 99% compatability where 3 times a year you get a document which blowes up in your face and you need to put tail between your legs and beg your supplier or worse your customer to save it in a different format. For the 3 times a year that could cost the company far more then the cost of Office Professional

      I think this is less of a problem than you make out. It's not uncommon to be forced into work-arounds for bone-headed IT policies causing incompatibilities between companies.

      A classic case of this is one of my customers - an international automotive manufacturer that will remain nameless. Their mail system is set to reject files bigger than 5(?)MB and ".zip" files (for security reasons...?!). Their engineers advise that the best way to send them big spreadsheets is in a zip file, with the extension re-named to ".piz". Piz files get through the email filters, zip files don't. They've associated the .piz extension with their unzipping application, so it's seamless at their end.

      Of course, at first they're apologetic about their idiot IT department, but once the system is known it works fine. Everybody working on that project has set up a .piz association. No need for an international incident. There's no loss of face, it's just a bone-head corporate policy thing.

      If I was using $_generic Office and somebody sent me a document that I couldn't open, I'd call them, blame our IT department, and ask for the file to be saved as something different and re-sent. No different.

      A more important aspect of 100% compatibility is for the "advance guard" to be able to use the software in breach of company policy.

      I work in a 100% Microsoft site. The IT guys trust me enough to have given me admin rights over my own computers, and they turn a blind eye when I install Firefox, OO.o and whatever other non-policy software I choose. I'm sure this is a pretty common scenario for geeks who work outside of IT.

      At the moment I don't use OO.o because it doesn't run the macro-laden Excel spreadsheets I need - it's not 100% compatible. If it did everything I needed and I used it exclusively, the IT guys might consider me as an alpha-trial, demonstrating that the alternate software could be viable, and might be worth consideration for site-wide implementation. Because it doesn't work for me, I can give that feedback, and it's killed off as an option before it's even considered.

      If Adobe office was ever considered for my workplace, there's a fair chance I'd be used as a test pilot. If it works for me (and others in different functional areas), they might build a case for making the change. If it doesn't work because it's not compatible with what we already have, it would be killed off and we'd stay with MS.

    47. Re:Market isn't closed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      you get a document which blowes up in your face and you need to put tail between your legs and beg your supplier or worse your customer to save it in a different format.

      Whoa.. you're letting suppliers and customers send you executable scripts, which you then give to the program loader from MS called "Office" and then, you execute the scripts?

      Just how many botnets is your company now participating in?

      Using MS Office save formats for inter-company communication, is total madness.

      "But everyone's doing it," you say. Well, if everyone loaded and executed a virus, would you do it too? Oh wait, I think we know the answer.

      Damn, sometimes I realize just what a sitting duck this world is. The internet is an absolutely clean and benevolent place, compared to what is possible, if only someone were actually out to make a mess of things.

    48. Re:Market isn't closed... by G-funk · · Score: 1

      I believe you misspelled Gameboy. The PS1 also sold more than PS2 IIRC

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    49. Re:Market isn't closed... by McFadden · · Score: 1

      Only if they reduce their prices.
      and the time it takes their applications to start up.
    50. Re:Market isn't closed... by breeze95 · · Score: 1

      When Apple was the leader it had a market share closer to 15% because there were so many other strong competitors. IBM won just because their platform was the most open, allowing for PC Clones compete in the same software market space.


      Actually IBM was the dominant PC maker long before they opened up their hardware. IBM was a monopoly in office products especially typewriters where they had about 95% of the market. They used that office monopoly to convince office managers to buy the IBM PC as a replacement for their trusty typewriters. It took IBM one year of entering the pc market to become the leader and by 1985 the IBM PC was the default office standard, and Apple was regulated to schools for the most part. IBM opened up their hard ware after they got a good look at the Apple Macintosh SE.
    51. Re:Market isn't closed... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      if a Company is going to use an other office suite it will need to be 100% compatible.


      More likely, if significant businesses are going to use another office suite that alternative will need truly compelling advantages over MS Office that make less than 100% compatibility worth accepting.
    52. Re:Market isn't closed... by aichpvee · · Score: 1

      I think that Genesis was ahead for a little while but SNES outlasted it and came out ahead in the end. But Sega has never dominated the market. I sure do miss the days when there were two consoles breaking about even, though. Not enough to wish for a split between microsoft and anyone else, but a ~50/50 split between Sony and Nintendo wouldn't be too bad.

      --
      The Farewell Tour II
    53. Re:Market isn't closed... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      I'm guessing they're not that stupid.

      You're joking, right?

      There hasn't been a significant upgrade to Office in nearly a decade.

      All that's changed between Office 2000 and 2007 is cosmetics. There's been nothing to improve productivity for users in that whole time.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    54. Re:Market isn't closed... by WED+Fan · · Score: 1

      And, you are representitive of what percentage of the computer using population? Small. Very small. If you don't thinks, you are seriously deluded. Much like those in the Green Party that believe they have a serious shot at grabbing the White House (there's a higher chance of Jenna Bush getting the presidency and she's not eligible and she is not even running.)

      --
      Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
    55. Re:Market isn't closed... by immerrath · · Score: 1

      Have you used Office 2007? Atleast Excel, which is the product I use most often, is quite incredible. Lots of productivity improvements. Perhaps superficial, ie. the basic spreadsheet paradigm remains the same, but it certainly has tons of features I find myself missing with OpenOffice or the previous versions of MS Office.

    56. Re:Market isn't closed... by westlake · · Score: 1
      Just because one does not exist does not mean that one will not exist.

      How many millions or tens of millions has Sun put into StarOffice and OpenOffice? That would be entry level for this market segment.

      StarOffice was #20 in Windows Office Suite sales at Amazon.
      #655 overall - a piss-poor showing for its investment no matter how you choose to look at it.

      StarOffice is now a free download from Google.

      Sales through Amazon have - predictably - sunk like a rock in less than a week. What I find more interesting is the persistence of the stand-alone office suite. That there is no rush to a web-based solution.

    57. Re:Market isn't closed... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Really bad analogies.

      First the Personal Computer market as we know it today, didn't exist back when the Apple 2 was dominating. Then it was considered (outside the graphic design arena) an expensive toy. The consumer PC market was created when IBM clones started appearing everywhere. IBM clones were mainly driven by demand from the business market which saw the usefulness of a cheap computer system that could go on everyone's desk. The Apple 2 never had that kind of demand. This analogy is useless as Apple never managed to create a monopoly that was difficult to compete with.

      As for video game consoles, the market leader fluctuates as each new generation is released. First it was Atari (who had little competition) and then Nintendo held the lead for two generations (NES and SNES) then Sony managed to take it with the Playstation and held it with the Playstation 2 now the Wii is the clear winner of the current gen. It is quiet possible that Microsoft could take the lead next generation with the XBox 720 or what ever they call it (I sincerely hope this doesn't happen). This is a bad analogy because the console market has always got a clear leader it never has a true monopoly.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    58. Re:Market isn't closed... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      Have you used Office 2007?

      I have used it, and still do with some of my client-supplied computers.

      As you say, any improvements are superficial, and once you get past the glitz there's next to nothing that can't be done as effectively in Office 2000.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    59. Re:Market isn't closed... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      If they come out with an office suite that uses a pricing model similar to what they're using for the CS3 suites, nobody will be able to afford it.

      And I can't imagine them doing anything else. The one "natural" path Adobe could create would be seamless integration into Creative Suite. Text, spreadsheet and database are really the only thing that CS doesn't do. But I don't see a huge market for that. Certainly big Creative Suite shops could benefit, but that is not the typical 9-5 business that runs MS office.

      And damned, it would likely be expensive (unless they pull some crazy stunt like giving it away for CS users).

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    60. Re:Market isn't closed... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      That means that your junior executives have to either have assistants again, or shop their stuff out to expensive graphics shops. And for anything that really needs to be well laid out, those more expert hands are going to be translating the Word documents into ... tada ... Adobe products.

      Perhaps, but those same Adobe products, while arguably powerful and polished are anything easy to use. If you want real graphics design, you need a real graphics designer. If you want to plug a picture into Word, well, you can do that now.

      It is the obvious road for Adobe to take but I would wonder how lucrative it would be. How much fancy formating do you need to do to a spreadsheet? Do you want Junior executives to have Flash production capabilities. It would be 1999 all over again.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    61. Re:Market isn't closed... by notthe9 · · Score: 1

      PDF is an open standard, so it plays nice as much as people want it to.

      It is rather complex. I don't know that it is any more complex than it needs to be to do what it does. For quicker-loading stuff, HTML/CSS presentations make a lot of sense. For camera-ready print-style documents, PDF does its job pretty well. It's more designed to be perfect than to be fast.

      Are there problems with it? I'll buy that. Are there additional problems in the Adobe Reader implementation? Plenty (though I very rarely use it to find out.) But all-in-all, I think it does what it is supposed to pretty well.

    62. Re:Market isn't closed... by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Segata Sanshiro says, "Sega Saturn shiro!"*



      *Literally, "You must play Sega Saturn!"

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    63. Re:Market isn't closed... by PhoenixAtlantios · · Score: 1

      A web based solution seems fairly unwise at this point. Browsers can be prone to crashing with less document recovery options, data would need to be stored on a (secure) server for the most part, so if the server had hard disk failures potentially hundreds of people would lose all work since their last backup (or the last server backup). What happens when a website is inaccessible and you want your documents? What about if the company has to shut down without warning, all your documents would be lost?

      In theory, with infallible servers it'd be fantastic to be able to use web-based editors, but not everybody wants to be connected to the Internet when they process documents. The hassle of having to upload documents to convert them, upload images, etc. would cause a reduction in productivity wouldn't it? People like things being snappy, I'm not seeing that occurring with web applications. Even GMail can be incredibly slow sometimes.

    64. Re:Market isn't closed... by kripkenstein · · Score: 1

      The market isn't closed, but really, there is not a single office suite that seriously competes with MS Office. Any MAJOR company that has tried has BLED money...and lost.
      Sure, but times change.

      Once, you could have said the same about operating systems. Today, anybody can take a fully-functional BSD kernel as the basis for their OS, free of charge (Apple more or less did that). Even better, they can take a complete Linux distro and have a complete system - if they comply with the licenses, but still, proprietary stuff can be added on top (Linspire do it).

      So, entering the operating system market is different these days. You don't need to bleed money on development of millions of lines of code before you see a single dollar in profit; you can get the code for free (or Free).

      The same is becoming true for office suites. Anyone can take OpenOffice and add some functionality; the functionality can be in proprietary plugins if that is a concern. And even if they don't want to use all of OpenOffice, they can still take parts of it. Say, import plugins; they can remain GPL while the office suite itself is proprietary. Presto, you can now import .DOC files. In fact, I strongly suspect that OpenOffice code was of use (even if only to be looked at) by the various other office competitors.
    65. Re:Market isn't closed... by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Switching for yourself is one thing switching companies is an other...
      For me I could switch from Word to Text Edit, and ill be fine with it. But when it comes for a business setting I kinda need office, and I need it to be 100% compatible.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    66. Re:Market isn't closed... by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 1
      I seriously doubt that price is the critical factor for office productivity suites. It might help in getting some initial market share, but a 150 buck difference in price will not convince a company to change. That's at most the cost of a couple hours of work per user. Even paying this annually is a negligible cost. You would need distinctive features for that. Word's distinctive feature over WP was that it ran under windows, while WP was still a DOS app. WP never caught up and lost. Lotus 123 was a piece of crap and Excel was really much better. Next to that, the integration between Excel, Word and Powerpoint was very distinctive from what was offered in the marketplace at that time. People liked that.

      If the price theory was correct, Open Office would have taken over from MS Office quite a while ago. It can't get much cheaper than that. The problem is however that there's no distinctive feature for Open Office, apart from the feature of 'openness', which has dubious value for corporations. Same goes for Google and Adobe's effort. As far as I can see, from the perspective of office suites, being able to run it in a web-browser doesn't really let the user's/corporation's heartbeat run faster, unless the entire world moves away from desktop applications. For an office suite to displace MS, it would need distinctive features, and a good price level. The latter is easy, the former is not. Cross-platformness could be such a feature, but only if the customer would move away from Windows first. Collaboration could be such a feature, but only if people value that enough, the secrecy issues are resolved, and MS drops the ball on that. Openness of standards could be such a feature, but only if governments start mandating that (and Microsoft drops the ball on that one as well).

      The only way to break MS Office would be to solve the problem of office productivity disruptively differently, and better. Having a word processor on the web isn't that.

    67. Re:Market isn't closed... by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 1

      You might be right that all improvements are superficial, cosmetic and only marginally improving. However, point to a single competitor that has developed improvements that are significantly greater. If not, they're doomed to failure, as MS Office is entrenched and cheap enough to stay there. I personally think that the only way to best MS Office is to enable office productivity in a radically different and better way. Or hope that MS will stop development on MS Office. Both I deem unlikely.

    68. Re:Market isn't closed... by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 1
      Having the app run from the company server only solves the upgrade (deployment) problem. It merely helps IT, and does not offer anything new to the user or to the business types that run the corporation. So it will fail if that's all.

      What's needed is a new set of features that help productivity enormously, and which is something MS cannot easily copy. One such feature set could be fully integrated 'knowledge management', i.e., all relevant documents of the business at the fingertips of the user (e.g., it looks like you're making a product comparison presentation, here are 10 relevant slides from your collegues).

      This is a massive open problem, and if tackled correctly, could bring a real boost. Google might be able to pull this off with very smart search, but it's going to be tough (and Microsoft is watching).

    69. Re:Market isn't closed... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      However, point to a single competitor that has developed improvements that are significantly greater.

      I believe it's significant that so many competitors are appearing as soon as there's potential for a genuinely interoperable document format (ODF) to become ubiquitous.

      As far as competitors go, KOffice is more complete than MS Office, and has more momentum. When it appears for Windows, I suspect it will give Microsoft a shake up.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    70. Re:Market isn't closed... by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 1

      Once, you could have said the same about operating systems ...
      Everything you say after that is true, yet the argument stands almost unaltered: "The market isn't closed, but really, there is not a single operating system that seriously competes with MS Windows."

      All your argument about BSD shows that you don't need to bleed money anymore in order to lose.

    71. Re:Market isn't closed... by kripkenstein · · Score: 1

      Well actually there is an operating system that competes with Windows, and very successfully: Linux, on servers. I presume you were talking about the desktop, then.

      Yes, you may be right that despite BSD and GPL foundations on which to start a rival OS there is no real competition for Windows on the desktop. I still claim, however, that to compete with Windows is far easier today than a decade ago, and I think that Apple's rise in market share, as well as things like Dell offering Ubuntu and Lenovo offering SUSE, indicate this. But that might be wishful thinking on my part.

    72. Re:Market isn't closed... by JCSoRocks · · Score: 1

      Yeah... and, as far as I know, Microsoft is still bleeding money on the Xbox's...
      Office is Microsoft's bread and butter. If you think they work hard to get into new markets, you better believe they'll fight like a rabid dog to protect their Office dominance.

      --
      You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
    73. Re:Market isn't closed... by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 1
      Given that windows was never really entrenched in the server room, yes, it was the desktop I was talking about. Linux greatest accomplishment is that it effectively sabotaged Microsoft's attack on the server room exactly on time. Without Linux, the situation would have been far, far worse.

      And yes, I definitely concede that it is easier to compete with windows than a decade ago, it is just that it doesn't matter; unless there is unique additional value in the proposition, windows will not be beat. Doing some things slightly better (price, stability) and some slightly worse (interoperability with windows, being able to run windows applications), is not going to move things much. Same goes for office.

    74. Re:Market isn't closed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All that's changed between Office 2000 and 2007 is cosmetics.
      You're joking, right?

      Go read a "What's new" page about Office 2007. Pay attention to the parts that discuss the whole-new products of Word Server, Excel Server, etc. Also, SharePoint is now part of Office, and the changes in this version of SharePoint are so immense it's almost a new product.

      Now, maybe you don't *use* the new features. But they're mostly intended for enterprises. Don't knock what you aren't the target audience for.

    75. Re:Market isn't closed... by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 1

      Yes, ODF might be a killing feature. We will however need government (or actually the public) to step in and force the issue.

    76. Re:Market isn't closed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For replacing Office there is a major hurdle. First Microsoft Office became the dominate Office Suite and has been invested in my most companies... if a Company is going to use an other office suite it will need to be 100% compatible. Not this 99% compatability where 3 times a year you get a document which blowes up in your face and you need to put tail between your legs and beg your supplier or worse your customer to save it in a different format. For the 3 times a year that could cost the company far more then the cost of Office Professional."

      Hahahaha! Hilarious! I man the helldesk for a large law firm, and let me tell you, Office is not compatible with Office documents @ 100% either. We get 3 documents that blow up in our face every week at least.

    77. Re:Market isn't closed... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      Pay attention to the parts that discuss the whole-new products of Word Server, Excel Server, etc.

      There is no such thing as Excel server, Word server, etc.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    78. Re:Market isn't closed... by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

      Blatant inaccuracies notwithstanding, vgchartz.com says there is a split, between 360 and Wii.

      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    79. Re:Market isn't closed... by aichpvee · · Score: 1

      That's really too bad if that's how it is right now. Hopefully it won't stay that way.

      --
      The Farewell Tour II
  2. If they are really smart. by AltGrendel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They will have a version for Window, Mac OS-X, and Linux.

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

    1. Re:If they are really smart. by abigor · · Score: 1

      It's a Flash web app, so I think that's a safe call.

    2. Re:If they are really smart. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's written in Flash, so that's pretty much a given especially considering that Adobe expects to have a version of Adobe Integrated Runtime (AIR) for Linux in the coming months.

      The real questions are 1) Will it support OpenDocument Format, and if so, how good will its support be? and 2) Will it support OOXML, and if so, how good will its support be?

      If these two questions are answered in the affirmative, then Adobe's office suite may be at least an OpenOffice.org or StarOffice killer, and possibly a Microsoft Office killer.

    3. Re:If they are really smart. by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      How could anybody but Microsoft adequately support OOXML?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:If they are really smart. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      The spec is open. It just can't be used in free/libre software due to patent restrictions.

    5. Re:If they are really smart. by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The spec can be as open as it likes. It's so badly written, and missing crucial information, that I defy anyone to actually make a functioning third-party shop that could actually write a comprehensive OOXML-compliant office suite. That is, after all, precisely what Microsoft wants; all the appearances of an open spec, with none of the inconvenience of anyone being able to write a competing program that could use OOXML.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    6. Re:If they are really smart. by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      f they are really smart... They will have a version for Window, Mac OS-X, and Linux.

      If they are really smart they'll focus on Windows and OS X with support for MSOffice formats, but with the default format being ODF. Linux support would be a plus, but it will not make or break them and companies looking at the benefits of Linux are probably also looking at the cost benefits of Open Office. Any company looking at the office suite market has to decide how big of gamble to take. They can try to go for a proprietary lock-in and become the new MS of the market, or they can try to kill MS's stranglehold and have a chunk of the now healthy and competitive market. The latter is a lot easier to pull off and capitalizes on the help of other players, like Sun, Apple, Google, IBM, and Corel. It is also not going to net them as large of profits. If Adobe gambles big on this one, they might pull it off, but I doubt it.

    7. Re:If they are really smart. by sricetx · · Score: 1

      And if they are really, really smart they will have a 64-bit version too!

    8. Re:If they are really smart. by Mattintosh · · Score: 1

      So nobody can write a compatible office suite with OOXML? Funny, I swear I just heard about someone that did it.

    9. Re:If they are really smart. by addicted4444 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. However, I would not be too quick to point Apple out as an example. There are a couple of problems with that. a) Apple is using iWork as a way to protect sales of Mac OS X if MS decides to abandon office for it (or at least make it completely suck, like they did when they removed VBA from Office 08). They do not need to recover money from sales of iWork to make it worth it. So the cost of figuring out OOXML could be too great to make a profitable product, which would prevent any 3rd party that does not sell its own OS from deciphering OOXML. b) Apple has all sorts of patent and information sharing agreements with MS, that no other company in the world does. They could very well have got inside information and documents from them (not saying that it happened, but it is a possibility, which is why I would not read too much about the ease of implementing OOXML from the fact that Apple implemented it).

    10. Re:If they are really smart. by nine-times · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Right. People have a tendency to think that Microsoft and Apple are the big competitors because Apple is producing an OS, but I think Adobe is in many ways a potential competitor to both Apple and Microsoft. If I were running Adobe, one of my big fears would be Apple and Microsoft developing their own in-house competitors to my software. It's already happened in some cases, with Apple producing Final Cut, and Microsoft trying to produce competitors to Photoshop, Dreamweaver, and the PDF file format.

      Of course, it can be hard to compete with an application that is somehow tied to the OS. I also have seen many situations where people would be willing to switch to Linux except for the fact that they needed a particular Adobe application. Therefore, if I were running Adobe, I would probably have a top-secret project for making my own OS and DE, perhaps based on Linux/Gnome. If Adobe could produce their own platform that offered Adobe apps, an office suite, e-mail, and other generic stuff that people need, it would provide them with an independence from Apple/Microsoft that they don't currently have.

    11. Re:If they are really smart. by turgid · · Score: 1

      It's written in Flash

      *cough*?!

    12. Re:If they are really smart. by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 1

      iWork '08 supports OOXML. The idea that OOXML isn't documented well enough to be supported is FUD. Too bad you swallowed it. Then again, as a MS-hater, you were predispsposed to swallow it. Here's an idea: Whenever you see any story regarding MS, replace the word "Microsoft" with whatever your favorite tech company is, and see if you feel the same way about it, just to see if your bias is getting in the way of understanding the issues at hand or not.

      --
      -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
    13. Re:If they are really smart. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually try it out with any non-trivial document -- especially documents imported from previous versions of Word. You won't like the results. It's "compatible" in the sense that it can read and write OOXML documents, but not with more than 90% accuracy.

      I wouldn't recommend it for sending out resumes where first impressions count.

    14. Re:If they are really smart. by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      but apple has a LICENSE to do this with inside info. I'd guess Adobe probably does as well from years of making Acrobat from Word since 6.0 or so.

    15. Re:If they are really smart. by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      And that's precisely my point. OOXML is a broken (deliberately-so I say) standard whose sole purpose is to try to get one of Microsoft's crappy, proprietary file formats passed any legislative or corporate requirements for an open document standard. I'm sure that you can get some sort of OOXML compatibility into any given third-party software, but the point of an open file format is that you don't have to be privy to Microsoft's real specs (as opposed to the monstrous and still incomplete specs provided for OOXML). What we're really left here with is for any third party developer looking to write an office suite that can read an OOXML document is to reverse engineer things like "Office97 justification". That defeats the entire purpose of an open document standard.

      Not that any of the Microsoft shills around here would ever admit that.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    16. Re:If they are really smart. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yay, we have an ignorant flash hater in the house (check out flex builder 2 little man) but only one...

      on the whole things are really looking up; definite signs of maturity =)

    17. Re:If they are really smart. by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      And how well does it support OOXML? Pray tell how, short of insider information, one could actually get a program to support anything but the most simplistic Word-generated documents?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    18. Re:If they are really smart. by turgid · · Score: 1

      yay, we have an ignorant flash hater in the house (check out flex builder 2 little man) but only one...

      I don't hate Flash, just as long as it's not on my web browser.

      I thought it was for making simple "flashy" animations and menus on web pages? Also, isn't there only one vendor of the compiler/interpreter? Isn't that a bit dangerous and generally a Bad Idea when developing serious software?

      Why didn't they use Java? *sigh*

    19. Re:If they are really smart. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      people are sometimes so clueless on technical matters that its not easy to judge whether they're joking or not. from your previous comments i'll assume that you're serious about Java. would it be true to say that you are, ahem, on the wrong side of 50? would it be safe to say that in the last ten years you've had little or no experience of web applications, from a user or developer point of view?

      as for - I thought it was for making simple "flashy" animations and menus on web pages? Also, isn't there only one vendor of the compiler/interpreter? Isn't that a bit dangerous and generally a Bad Idea when developing serious software?

      hey its cool man, it was already obvious that you don't know what you're talking about, and now you've come clean.

      anyhow, blinkers back on and back to the sidelines of the web where you can mumble and cuss. best of luck guy.

    20. Re:If they are really smart. by mattmcm · · Score: 1

      Almost everyone has some version of Flash installed. That means most people could use the Adobe office products without having to install additional software. That's a major bonus.

    21. Re:If they are really smart. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Heh. Flash is full-blown application platform these days, though seeing as how people tend to use it, you'd almost never know that. But think about all these newer Flash games and Flash media players (think Youtube, only I've seen better) and you might get an inkling of how powerful an application platform that Flash can be.

      Now check out the screenshots from Buzzword and read their page. This is likely what the Adobe Office suite will look like, since Adobe is a major investor in Virtual Ubiquity, the company that created it. Yes, that's Flash. There's an Adobe runtime called AIR which will even allow Flash apps to have the look and feel of native apps and run them locally on the box whilst offline.

    22. Re:If they are really smart. by turgid · · Score: 1

      from your previous comments i'll assume that you're serious about Java. would it be true to say that you are, ahem, on the wrong side of 50?

      I know a bit about Java, and yes, I'm on the wrong side of 50: the "youthful" side rather than the "wise" side. If I were starting a cross-platform project to run over the network, I'd use Java. As a platform, it's second to none, the Java language is pretty good, it's stable and mature and there is a big choice of vendors (Free, free and commercial). There are some other serious language implementations being developed for the platform, such as Python, Ruby, Eiffel, lisps of various kinds, you name it. Some one even has a C compiler that spits out Java bytecode.

      hey its cool man, it was already obvious that you don't know what you're talking about, and now you've come clean.

      Arguing with trolls is great fun when you're in the right mood.

      anyhow, blinkers back on and back to the sidelines of the web where you can mumble and cuss. best of luck guy.

      Thanks, I'll crawl back to my embedded Linux, 3D graphics, Java and SIMD programming, bash scripting and Ruby.

      You can keep your "cross-platform" Flash on your Internet Explorer on all three versions of Windows (XP, 2003 and Vista) where it belongs. Say "Hi" to .NET and C# for me while you're there too.

  3. Adobe says they'll support Linux ... by xmas2003 · · Score: 5, Informative
    From the Wired article:

    Perhaps even more important is that AIR applications are platform-agnostic. They operate almost exactly the same on both Windows and Mac platforms with only small differences, keyboard shortcuts being the most obvious. Adobe expects a Linux version of the AIR runtime to be completed in the coming months.

    --
    Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
    1. Re:Adobe says they'll support Linux ... by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Adobe expects a Linux version of the AIR runtime to be completed in the coming months.

      Adobe's always limped along when it came to linux development. From what I've seen of their flash support, I'm not expecting anything much when it comes to air compatibility. Flash 9 for linux has been in beta how long now, and this is after a huge wait with no flash 8 and a buggy flash 7. Given that air's already available for windows and osx, but not linux, I don't see much reason to believe anything's changed.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    2. Re:Adobe says they'll support Linux ... by riskeetee · · Score: 1

      Running on AIR? That officially makes it vaporware!

    3. Re:Adobe says they'll support Linux ... by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 2, Informative

      Flash 9 Linux is NOT beta.

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    4. Re:Adobe says they'll support Linux ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flash was late to ship for linux because of Macromedia, not Adobe. In fact, long ago, Macromedia stated that flash 7 was the last flash for linux.
      Things got A LOT better when Adobe bought Macromedia. The results, of course, couldn't show in just one week.

    5. Re:Adobe says they'll support Linux ... by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      Flash9 Linux is still only x86 though. If you run Linux on any other of the dozens of supported platforms, no Flash for you.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
  4. Then again ... by UncleWilly · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "According to Wired, Adobe may launch its own office-application suite,
    they may not.
    1. Re:Then again ... by MajinBlayze · · Score: 1

      And a ballistic missile may follow the trajectory from Redmond, WA to San Jose, CA.

      Or, it may not.

      (s/missile/chair/g)

      --
      "Hate is baggage. Life's too short to be pissed off all the time." Danny Vinyard -American History X
  5. Press Release from the DoRD by xmarkd400x · · Score: 3, Funny

    Adobe's Office Product Suite will include the following applications: -Buzzword Word Processor -Internet Net Browser -SlideShow Slide Maker

  6. Good luck to them by HumanSockPuppet · · Score: 1

    I don't see this as a viable marketing strategy. Unless Adobe can secure a good contract with a large-scale hardware retailer like Dell to have their program pre-installed on new desktops/laptops, "Adobe Office" will go the way of Netscape, like the many other pieces of software that have tried to provide competition for Microsoft's pack-ins.

    --
    Inserting [insert witty signature here] here does not constitute a witty signature.
    1. Re:Good luck to them by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      Don't they do that already? Lord knows I've seen Photshop LE (or elements or whatever their bargain basement photo editor is) preinstalled on many a PC. And let's not forget the Acrobat reader, which has to be the most redistributed piece of software ever.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    2. Re:Good luck to them by HumanSockPuppet · · Score: 1

      Acrobat introduced a means of translating documents into image files which was not previously available, hence the reason it caught on. With Microsoft Office the issue is a little different - here Adobe is trying to create a competitor for a program which is already in existence and widely distributed and widely used. Imagine another software company trying to make a program to compete with Adobe Acrobat in the face of its own ubiquity and you'll see what I'm getting at.

      Most desktops and laptops which are sold, either to individual home clients or en masse to businesses, come shipped with Microsoft Office pre-installed (since most people want to have the convenience of hooking up the computer and using it right away. Why would someone buy Adobe Office if Microsoft Office was already installed on their computer? This is exactly how Netscape Navigator bit the dust against Microsoft's Internet Explorer - Microsoft simply packed IE in so that people had no incentive to buy from a competitor.

      --
      Inserting [insert witty signature here] here does not constitute a witty signature.
    3. Re:Good luck to them by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 1
      Depends on what your marketing strategy is. If your strategy is to service the office needs of the consumer business, yes, you would need Dell, and even if you succeed, Microsoft will eat you alive. Thing is: people will install what they use at work. If work uses MS Office, it's MS they will install, on top of your Dell pre-install.

      However, if your marketing strategy is to convert whole businesses to your software, Dell is immaterial, and your marketing dollars are better spent on marketing and sales. This will have a higher chance of success. Consumer demands for office productivity is minimal. Office demand for office is, eh, there.

  7. It would be nice... by voislav98 · · Score: 1

    It would be nice to see Adobe, which does have a wide reputation through the Acrobat brand, give it a crack. MS Office has become stale and overblown, so anyone else is welcome to try. Hey, they might even release a Linux version and bundle it with those Dell Ubuntu PCs.

    1. Re:It would be nice... by toolie · · Score: 1

      MS Office is stale? They just revamped the entire UI with 2007. Some of the new suites are including a new application aimed at helping collaboration. How is that being stale?

      --
      -- toolie
    2. Re:It would be nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we're going to cite Adobe's wide reputation from Acrobat, we should also consider the "reputation" they've built up by acquiring Flash and bloating the crap out of it, acquiring Cool Edit and bloating the crap out of it, the fact that RAM chips have nightmares about Photoshop and Illustrator, etc..

    3. Re:It would be nice... by addicted4444 · · Score: 1

      I am not sure about the new UI. It is really nothing more than graphical menus. I really liked it starting off, but as my usage of it increased, it has started getting on my nerves. The main problem for me has been that it distracts me from my data. I generally keep it in the closed state, but it is this overload of information everytime i display it to pick an option that hurts my thought process. While I thought that it was a major improvement over the old system, I think the law of unforeseen consequences is coming to bite me in the behind...

    4. Re:It would be nice... by toolie · · Score: 1

      I find myself using the help system a lot to figure out how to find stuff that I knew how to get to in the old menu setup. Information overload was there at the beginning, but now its just a matter of sorting out where the hell everything is.

      --
      -- toolie
  8. Makes sense by penp · · Score: 1

    Microsoft's trying to take out Adobe with Silverlight, so why not try and compete with Microsoft in other ways? I have no doubt that a full fledged suite of Office software from Adobe would be great.

    1. Re:Makes sense by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Well, good luck to 'em. The market seriously needs some competition, but busting in on what really amounts to the left testicle of Microsoft's reigning gonad trilogy of monopolism is going to be one helluva task.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but wait there's more......Adobe trying to compete is a great thing. What would be better is all of the people on here slamming MS (myself being one of them) actually supporting Adobe's efforts by using the software. The only way it works is if people buy/use it. I hope Adobe will not be so short sighted and only produce MS/OSX versions and think the Adobe name is enough.

  9. Interesting stuff... by egyptiankarim · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Especially considering that a few weeks ago there was an article here on /. talking about Microsoft making a go at the graphics tool market (putting it in competition with the Adobe CS products). I wonder if this is like an "F.U." from Adobe. A corporate pissing contest of sorts?

    --
    Eek!
    1. Re:Interesting stuff... by Dancindan84 · · Score: 1

      People here constantly say MS is full of shit. If you're right, we'll get to see if they're full of piss too.

      --
      "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
  10. Yuk it's flash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Still, as much as I hate flash, I don't want to see Microsoft proprietize the web. An office suite would be a smart reply to Microsoft targeting both pdf and flash.

  11. Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by tsbiscaro · · Score: 2, Funny

    It will take 25 minutes to start and will ask if you wanna update evry time you uses it.

    1. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hold SHIFT when you start Acrobat and it skips loading the plugins. It loads MUCH faster that way. Also, if you have Acrobat set to show the splash screen, turn that off. It's well known that there is like a 10x performance hit for startup when using the splash screen. AFAIK, you can also turn off the auto update notifications.

    2. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >It will take 25 minutes to start and will ask if you wanna update evry time you uses it.

      And the question will appear in a modal pop-UNDER... (And for a while back in the late 90's I thought that PDFs would crash the browser... HA! I really did think nobody could be that stupid.)

    3. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by Xcott+Craver · · Score: 1

      And, if you write a program to make your documents printable, they'll have you arrested by the FBI.

    4. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by G+Fab · · Score: 1

      And this crap software is supposed to compete with MS Office and a huge monpoly in the industry? It's going to be a big waste of investment. When Adobe can't even make a damn pdf reader correctly, they suck. You load the idiosynchratic things... only when you need them. Jeez.

      I'm sure the parent knows how to delete those components or not load them. The point is that adobe is still using a dumb process that all the competent people work around.

    5. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by tsbiscaro · · Score: 1

      >The point is that adobe is still using a dumb process that all the competent people work around. Yes, that's exactly what I think.

    6. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by bot24 · · Score: 1

      An ActiveX control will be required to install it. The download will be slow and fail often, requiring a restart each time. Installation will take an hour after the files have been downloaded. You will not be given the option to save the installer for use on another machine. The basic installation will require three gigabytes of space. A "quick launch" application will be added to your startup list. The ability to read documents will be free, but involve advertisements and bundled software. The ability to write documents will cost an arm and a leg. It will be hard to type properly without that arm.

      Adobe will tell you that Adobe Office is the ONLY office software that reads Word Documents, however the Word Document support won't be as complete as the support in Open Office.

    7. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do agree that a product should only load the extra stuff when you need them, but you're forgetting one key thing: Adobe's market isn't the consumer. Want proof? Just look at their product page. Search for the word "consumer". It doens't exist. Their products are mostly for businesses and professionals. If you just want to write your resume in pdf format, then open source is the way to go, but if you need the enterprise tools that they provide, then shelling out $450 (for Acrobat Professional) may be your best bet.

      The point is that you may not need all of the extra crap that Acrobat loads, but the people paying retail price for it do. You have the option of trimming it down if your needs are less. It is because you are the minority in this situation.

      As far as a "dumb process" is concerned, I have no idea what you are talking about so I cannot give an intelligible reply. Maybe I'm not one of those "competent people" who "work around" this "dumb process".

    8. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by initdeep · · Score: 1

      the parent you are replying to is for Adobe Reader. not a full version of Acrobat. And yes, loading plugins that are very rarely used in day to day reading of pdf files when opening READER is moronic and wasteful of system resources. I immediately remove the plugins from the standard folder to stop their being loaded at startup, and magically, Reader starts in about 1/10th the time.

    9. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And, if you write a program to make your documents printable, they'll have you arrested by the FBI. Printing a document you paid for is morally equivalent to attacking a ship.
    10. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by Renaissance+2K · · Score: 1

      Still better than that damn paperclip...

    11. Re:Reader sucks, can you imagine Adobe Office? by G+Fab · · Score: 1

      I love this dismissive and arrogant tone from someone who admits he doesn't understand what I'm talking about (while seeing that a lot of people share my opinion).

      I'm not in the minority. If you aren't familiar with constant gripes about how long acrobat takes to load a normal pdf (by folks who haven't learns to work around this issue) you are simply out of touch.

      Adobe, in the eyes of John Q Public, makes shoddy and slow software because of Adobe's bloat obsession. Is it true that some of this stuff helps some people that Adobe cares more about? Perhaps, but there is a reason that people avoid .pdf files at all cost. Does that helps the "enterprise clients?"

      There will always be some cool feature you can add to virtually any program. The secret is to not load the unused stuff on startup. You load them when they are called for. Adobe fundamentally misunderstands how .pdf files are usually used (briefly).

  12. Not there. Yet? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If in terms of quality/featues, I'd say OpenOffice is quite a valid competator.

    Maybe for home / school / small business users. But not large "enterprise" users. OpenOffice's spreadsheet application has a lot of ground to cover before it even approaces Excell for power users.

    OpenOffice has a lot of potential, but also a lot of issues. It's convienent for OSS proponents to ignore / gloss over / minimize OpenOffice's flaws, but this doesn't work in business.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Not there. Yet? by hswerdfe · · Score: 1

      May I ask what features are missing?

      I consider myself a speadsheet power user, using both OO.org and Excel when each is better.

      I have only found 2 things I use that can't be done in
      OO.org Text To Columns
      and VB.

      --
      --meh--
    2. Re:Not there. Yet? by everphilski · · Score: 1

      Try making a chart with 2 separate sets of independent and dependant variables.

      At least as of 4 months ago, last I used it, could not be done.

      The charting UI system and click context interface is pretty gay too, if I can say so.

    3. Re:Not there. Yet? by aaronl · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hopefully I can knock one of those right off your list. I use this to do the "Text to Columns" feature that OO doesn't come with stock.

      http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group _id=87718&package_id=104183

      OpenOffice does have VBA support, but it doesn't work for everything. Most sane scripts should run... anything an Excel "Wizzard" did probably is going to have a problem, though. There's a bunch of info on the OO site about what parts of the language they do support, and what's planned. Info on that at: http://vba.openoffice.org/

    4. Re:Not there. Yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      May I ask what features are missing?

      In my case, as a linguist and an English teacher for second-language English speakers, the ability to easily, without macro hacks, assign keyboard shortcuts to special symbols. In my case, IPA symbols so I can show my students what an English word sounds like.

      Yes, there are ugly hacks for doing this involving special macros, but I would rather OO had a more direct method.

      Microsoft Office 2000 has this feature; the oowriter included in Ubuntu 7.04 (2006-2007 time frame) doesn't.

      And, the bug where changing back and forth from italics causes the entire previous word to gain or lose italics is downright annoying.

    5. Re:Not there. Yet? by aaronl · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Out of curiosity, will the upcoming Chart module for 2.3 fix that for you? They completely redesigned the charting UI. I didn't see anything that specifically mentioned variable use, though.

      http://graphics.openoffice.org/chart/chart.html

    6. Re:Not there. Yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      power users

      You mean like politicians?

    7. Re:Not there. Yet? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Actually, I've preferred the charting module in Star Office to Excel for a number of years. Excel has a nasty habit of mangling even the simple datasets.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:Not there. Yet? by everphilski · · Score: 1

      Doesn't look like it. Basically, if I want to plot, say X vs. time coincident on the same chart with Y vs. distance, I can't do that now.

    9. Re:Not there. Yet? by greginnj · · Score: 1

      OpenOffice has a lot of potential, but also a lot of issues. It's convienent for OSS proponents to ignore / gloss over / minimize OpenOffice's flaws, but this doesn't work in business.
      OIC, so you're saying that Microsoft has locked up the business/enterprise office software market because they never ignore / gloss over / minimize the flaws of Word, Excel, Powerpoint, or ... Access?

      I'll agree with you that Excel is the best app to take a stand on for MS, but what percentage of Excel users make use of features unavailable in OO?

      A further question, what percentage of the remaining users of those features are only 'users' in the sense that their jobs require them to interact with one or two kludgy Excel VBA (or Access) apps that they'd gladly give up a limb or two to leave behind? The productivity that has been lost on some of those monstrosities would be more than enough to pay for the development of a reasonable replacement...
      --
      Read the best of all of Slash: seenonslash.com
    10. Re:Not there. Yet? by Assassin+bug · · Score: 1

      Actually, if your using Excel for making charts, you are not using the best software for the task. I use Excel for data organization and quick rough analysis, SAS for heavy hitting data managment, sorting, and analysis, and SigmaPlot for presentation of data.

    11. Re:Not there. Yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a macro that does Text to Columns in Calc

      http://www.ooomacros.org/user.php

    12. Re:Not there. Yet? by everphilski · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Excel we just use for a quick run at the numbers. But sometimes you need to compare 2 data sets :)

      We have an internal tool we use for presentation quality plots.

    13. Re:Not there. Yet? by greginnj · · Score: 1

      Doesn't look like it. Basically, if I want to plot, say X vs. time coincident on the same chart with Y vs. distance, I can't do that now.
      And that's a feature, not a bug, of OO. If you've actually tried to do this, you need to surf over to http://www.edwardtufte.com/, buy all the man's books, and read them. Then you'll have some better ideas about how to use charts to communicate information rather than muddle. My brain hurts just thinking about what that chart must look like...
      --
      Read the best of all of Slash: seenonslash.com
    14. Re:Not there. Yet? by xra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, but that's the kind of stuff big execs like to see..

    15. Re:Not there. Yet? by imcclell · · Score: 0

      Yup, and VB is the killer. Should it be? probably not. It is though.

      I am the first one to admit there are a million better ways to do things than VB macro's in excel. However, when you have enterprise reports that have to go out, and the person who runs them is a twit who likes to fiddle because "they know IT", you'll know why excel macros are beautiful. Management should put restrictions on these people, but when they won't, a solution must be found.

    16. Re:Not there. Yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "ActuallY"? Of course it's FUCKING "actually". It's "actually" your FUCKING opinion. "You know"?

    17. Re:Not there. Yet? by ascendant · · Score: 1

      OpenOffice's spreadsheet application has a lot of ground to cover before it even approaces Excell for power users.
      Well, I think all they need to do is add Asterisk, but yeah; they'd need to hire a lot of call center employees =P
      --
      Do not attribute to malice that which can be easily explained by incompetence.
    18. Re:Not there. Yet? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I admit, I haven't yet found a use-case for a spreadsheet in my own work, but when I need to do this kind of thing I use GNUplot. It lets me abstract my formulae away from my data, which reduces the kind of errors you see in a lot of spreadsheets.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    19. Re:Not there. Yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Text to columns is a known issue. OpenOffice.org will get support for this soon.

      http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Calc/To-D os/Usability

      It is in the todo list for OOo 2.4

    20. Re:Not there. Yet? by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 1

      May I ask what features are missing?
      What is missing? A reason to switch away from MS Office! Price is not it, 400 bucks per seat is nothing compared with the cost of the employees themselves. Where's the killer feature?
    21. Re:Not there. Yet? by uradu · · Score: 1

      > Maybe for home / school / small business users. But not large "enterprise" users.

      Actually, I would say the exact opposite is true. The need for sophisticated data analysis and graphing is fairly niche and more typical of academic or research work than what goes on in a large enterprise. I've worked at two large companies so far, and I would say 99% of users simply use a spreadsheet as a convenient way to tabulate stuff and apply some formatting, more as a specialized word processor than anything else. In fact, much of what most people do in Excel could almost as easily be done in Word with its table feature. Given that, I would say that Excel's power is serious overkill for most users, and a lesser tool would work equally well. Those with serious data analysis needs tend to use different tools anyway, such as SPSS or perhaps even Mathematica. While just about anything is doable in Excel, once you move beyond the built-in functionality into the realm of custom VBA data processing, there are more specialized and convenient tools around.

  13. Best Damn thing... by gmac63 · · Score: 1

    Ok, for what its worth, I think Adobe is the biggest monopoly in computer history (Image editing with Photoshop, PostScript which has been freely emulated without fear of reprisal). Mind you, they do not seem to practice monopolistic power, so therefor I really like Adobe. The compete in an apparent, honest fashion: They have fantastic products.

    That said, got it Adobe. I would consider buying Adobe Office, even over OOo (which I know is free). Adobe makes good stuff and in most cases is the de facto standard.

    --

    INSERT INTO comment VALUE('Doh!') WHERE user='you';
    1. Re:Best Damn thing... by G+Fab · · Score: 1

      Photoshop, from a UI perspective isn't very good at all.

      Acrobat is unbelievably bloated for such a simple thing that is barely more than viewing a fucking image.

      Adobe isn't ready for prime time. Could they hope to create something as good as word perfect? OF course not, and word perfect was stomped into oblivion by Office.

    2. Re:Best Damn thing... by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      re: interface

      Have you used CS3? They fixed a LOT of problems.

    3. Re:Best Damn thing... by fourtyonederful · · Score: 1

      CS3 premium version for $1800 is not a practice of monopolistic power?

    4. Re:Best Damn thing... by G+Fab · · Score: 1

      To be fair, no I have not. I didn't want to pay for this (I can overlook UI issues if I need to, but I can't overlook my light wallet).

      I'm probably going to have to look at it eventually, so I appreciate the suggestion. Adobe makes software that I need, and it would be nice if they made it well. But it's pretty easy to create a bad reputation, and they can't wait ten years to fix their office competitor as they perhaps have done with photoshop.

    5. Re:Best Damn thing... by gmac63 · · Score: 1

      "CS3 premium version for $1800 is not a practice of monopolistic power?"

      Mmmmmm price is not an indicator of monopolistic power. Its when you prevent the competition an equal opportunity in the marketplace as an effect of your market dominance. See Microsoft.

      --

      INSERT INTO comment VALUE('Doh!') WHERE user='you';
    6. Re:Best Damn thing... by gmac63 · · Score: 1

      "Photoshop, from a UI perspective isn't very good at all."

      Its UI tho, has been copied by the GIMP and others. Again, de facto standard.

      --

      INSERT INTO comment VALUE('Doh!') WHERE user='you';
    7. Re:Best Damn thing... by cerelib · · Score: 1

      Wow, I think that is the first time I have ever seen someone state that GIMP actually copied Photoshop's GUI. The UI approach in GIMP is very unique and is one of the most innovative parts of GIMP. Most people complain in the complete opposite direction and think the GIMP UI is too foreign and that they should just copy Photoshop (giving us projects like GIMPshop).

    8. Re:Best Damn thing... by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      Probably the biggest improvement (for a graphic designer like me) is not only the stability between apps (Illustrator saw a major improvement) but cache between sessions. On a stock 2ghz Core Duo (not Core 2 Duo which is the current generation - but hey - mine's BLACK - um - because I'm a consumer fashion whore) it takes less than 20 seconds to get into Photoshop on the first session from shutdown. Subsequent sessions take less than 6 seconds (feels like 4). Since I put my machine to sleep most of the time for a week or so (shutdown on the weekends mostly), it makes dialing up a Photoshop session utterly painless and I do it far more often than I did for years before.

      The biggest UI improvement (for me) is done by making the screen real-estate favored by default. With a widescreen monitor (got a vintage ACD for 600 bucks off Craigslist a year ago - newer ones can be found already for the same price on CL) it makes "palette monitors" and the like, obsolete. It's heavily customizable as well, and of course those customizations can be saved for multiple users or displays. The nicest thing was - after 17 years - getting the tools palette reduced from it's double column orientation by default. You can toggle it back if you're nostaligic, but it's a big help. Everything can be shuffled out of the way easily and I'm sure if I used more key commands it'd be less effort.

      My wallet's not the heaviest, but if applied against taxes, it's not as much a burden as you'd think. My billings paid for it in 25 hours (one client among others). The joys of "business expense".

      Now if only Microsoft would get off it's ass and Intelize their apps I'd be complete. But if Adobe wants to step up to the plate and steal their thunder much like they did when Quark foot-dragged forever. Count me in. I use InDesign exclusively now - and I even worked FOR QUARK for 2 years in one of their in-house design groups (not support - don't blame me for that mess).

    9. Re:Best Damn thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have fantastic products.

      What are they?

      - Adobe Reader -- so good at reading PDFs that GNOME, KDE, and Apple built their own PDF viewers, and Microsoft is trying to kill PDF itself
      - Photoshop and Illustrator -- were some of the last products to be Intel-native, require "product activation", and don't even follow platform guidelines (quick, open up Illustrator 10 and hit cmd-H and guess what happened)

      Adobe *used* to have good products. I think the last new thing I saw out of Adobe was InDesign, in 1999. Apart from that, all I've seen is them updating their apps for new OSs, as slowly as possible.

      If anything, this is why Adobe *needs* to launch a new product. Maybe an office suite isn't the smartest move. But at some point they need to convince people they still know how to write software.

    10. Re:Best Damn thing... by danpsmith · · Score: 1

      Ok, for what its worth, I think Adobe is the biggest monopoly in computer history (Image editing with Photoshop, PostScript which has been freely emulated without fear of reprisal). Mind you, they do not seem to practice monopolistic power, so therefor I really like Adobe. The compete in an apparent, honest fashion: They have fantastic products. That said, got it Adobe. I would consider buying Adobe Office, even over OOo (which I know is free). Adobe makes good stuff and in most cases is the de facto standard.

      Have you ever even used their PDF Viewer lately? It's such a sad piece of trash that it has problems doing simple tasks like printing properly and takes minutes to load on older hardware. I've recommended that everyone that has a problem with the viewer, which is a lot of people, use another PDF viewer and it alleviates a great deal of their headaches.

      --
      Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    11. Re:Best Damn thing... by gmac63 · · Score: 1

      "The UI approach in GIMP is very unique and is one of the most innovative parts of GIMP."

      You HAVE used Photoshop before, right? Here's a few that you might have missed:

      The Blur tool (icon)
      The sharpen tool (icon)
      To simplify, most of the tool buttons, not only in look, but concept.
      Foreground/Background on the toolbar
      Layers/Channels
      "Flatten Image"
      "Merge Visible Layers"
      Background layer
      The indication of a layer transparency (checkerboard) ...

      I could go on, but there is a text limit to post.

      --

      INSERT INTO comment VALUE('Doh!') WHERE user='you';
    12. Re:Best Damn thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used regularly (with ease) every item you have there on your list in GIMP. I never understood the UI complaints with GIMP since I've used it exclusively since 99 or so. On occasion when I have access to Photoshop, sure, I piss and moan about Photoshop's UI as well. But what are people really complaining about anyways? Why, lack of experience with either? Why, yes, yes we are. And that's why I don't use Photoshop.

  14. Not a Quick Little Task by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    Writing a competitive office suite is not a quick little task you can knock out over the weekend. Nor is MS the only target. You've also got to compete with free in Open Office/Google Star Office. This is not an easy market to enter even if you are Adobe. Word Perfect Office failed in there a while back.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  15. Hey Rocky... by netglen · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bullwinkle: Hey Rocky, watch me pull an Office suite rival out of my Hat.
    Rocky: "gain? that trick never works
    Bullwinkle: This time for sure. Nothing up my sleeves...PRESTO!
    Adobe_Killer_Office_App:
    Bullwinkle: Guess I should have stuck to bloatware readers, Google taskbar and Kinkos.
    Rocky: Now here's something you'll really like.

  16. Because it worked SO well for Novell 10 years ago by iguana · · Score: 4, Informative

    Anyone remember Novell's office suite?

    Bought WordPerfect.
    Bought Quatro Pro.
    Bought UNIX.
    Bought Digital Research (DR DOS).

    Ruined them all.

    Rumor at the time was Ray Noorda was actually a shill for Microsoft. In the span of a few years Noorda/Novell managed to buy up all reasonably credible competition to MS. And ruined them all.

    Learn from history, Adobe. Don't try to bag the bear in its own den. That's just stupid.

  17. Clippy v 2.0? by Critical+Facilities · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Buzzword can import and export Microsoft Word documents, it boasts built-in sharing and collaboration features, and it has a rich, animated user interface

    Great, an animated user interface. As if work doesn't suck enough.
    1. Re:Clippy v 2.0? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Great, an animated user interface. As if work doesn't suck enough.

      I wouldn't be so negative. There are many trendy user interface elements — animation and use of 3D effects perhaps the most obvious among them — that can still be very effective when used for a good reason. It's just that Flash ads on web sites or the likes of Clippy in Office are the way most people have seen animation used in practice, and thus people tend to associate them with tacky, unhelpful rubbish. Simple animations that inform the user can be great usability aids, though.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  18. They can win! by Bullfish · · Score: 4, Funny

    If anyone can make a more bloated, resource-hogging, and system buggering piece of software than MS, it's Adobe.

    Could be the best thing to ever happen to open office!

    1. Re:They can win! by initdeep · · Score: 1

      and the winner is........

      this parent.

    2. Re:They can win! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My initial thought:

      Quality of Photoshop, cost of Acrobat Reader...sweet!
      Quality of Acrobat Reader, cost of Photoshop...doh! <-- More Likely

  19. Document format by sxltrex · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Personally, I'm not as concerned with the platform as I am with the document format. MS Office's proprietary binary formats are such a drag. If only they'd use some sort of "open document" format. You know, where the details of the format had been decided upon by a committee of experts, the implementation was human readable, and it wasn't owned by a single corporate entity. One where you wouldn't have to be worried about broken compatibility every time the app was revved, one where any other enterprising developer(s) could create a competing product without having to reverse engineer anything. What a nice world that would be. What are the odds?

    1. Re:Document format by ThosLives · · Score: 1

      Why is "human readable" an important aspect of document formats? Are MP3s human readable? What about video?

      I think if you get rid of that single caveat, I'd be all over an "open" format.

      I don't know why it bothers me so much that people think that formats have to be human readable - I think that's an unnecessary restriction.

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    2. Re:Document format by EpsCylonB · · Score: 1

      I think he meant that "if the spec was human readable".

    3. Re:Document format by j-pimp · · Score: 1

      I don't know why it bothers me so much that people think that formats have to be human readable - I think that's an unnecessary restriction.

      I can send an email and get a web page with telnet. The web page thing is not especially beneficial, but talking to a SMTP server is.

      Having an plain text format, or the option to convert to/from said format is a good idea when the data lends itself to it.

      --
      --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
    4. Re:Document format by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      because "human readable" is what keeps data locked up. If your files are in XML format, in 5 years any bloke can pick them apart with a simple text manipulator and put the DATA in whatever format they wish. The key is access to the DATA. with openoffice if worse happens you can open the entire file in a TEXT editor and dig in that way... point is you have options that aren't reverse engineering binary formats.

    5. Re:Document format by ThosLives · · Score: 1

      when the data lends itself to it.

      And that is my point exactly. Certain things are fitting for human-readable form. Instructions for drawing borders and selecting a font are not appropriate for human readable forms, unless you're actually telling a person to draw a border or pick a font (reading a document that says "font Serif 32 bold" doesn't do me any good when I can't see the result of that instruction! It might as well just say "Graphical Formatting Information Deleted" and I'd be fine with that).

      I do like your idea of having a conversion to human-readable form; that would preserve some of that "useful" information, but in the form of presentation rather than the form of instruction (the latter is what XML-like things are; not human-readable even though it "looks" that way, to my mind...)

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    6. Re:Document format by Steve001 · · Score: 1

      ThosLives wrote:

      Why is "human readable" an important aspect of document formats? Are MP3s human readable? What about video?

      I think if you get rid of that single caveat, I'd be all over an "open" format.

      I don't know why it bothers me so much that people think that formats have to be human readable - I think that's an unnecessary restriction.

      When it comes to document formats (word processing, spreadsheets, and presentation) formats, one of the most important reasons for a human readable format is that the user is able to see all of the information actually contained in the document, including the hidden information. You are not limited to just the information the application will show you. This will allow you to see if the document contains information that you'd rather not release, and to strip it out (if the application will allow you).

      With non-human readable formats, especially non-publically documented formats, you can't be sure what information is actually contained in your document. It is similar to buying a car where the hood is sealed, the only vehicle information you are allowed to have access to on the internal workings of your car is via the dashboard indicators.

  20. WHY???? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

    Why create applications for Microsoft OSes?

    Why create any application that has any level of market penetration, on a platform created by a company that is in direct competition with your product, or at least can enter into competition at any time.

    Seriously! We've seen how it works. Mozilla - IE, Word Perfect - Word, 123 - Excel, Quicken - Money, Notes - Exchange, NDS - ADS.

    While the lure of 95% market share OS is strong, I would think that in the long run, it is futile; The Borg will assimilate your customers.

    If I were an application developer, I wouldn't even try to make a Windows version.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    1. Re:WHY???? by penp · · Score: 1
      Moot. If you read TFA, it's a web application that is designed to be able to run whether or not you're connected to the internet. It will be cross platform, as it runs on Flash and Flex.

      Perhaps even more important is that AIR applications are platform-agnostic. They operate almost exactly the same on both Windows and Mac platforms with only small differences, keyboard shortcuts being the most obvious. Adobe expects a Linux version of the AIR runtime to be completed in the coming months.
    2. Re:WHY???? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      In that case, why not support Open Office, which is already (mostly) cross platform? I mean besides the fact that it is open source and isn't actually sold.

      Or Google Apps?

      And I don't use Flash.

      My point wasn't about OFFICE applications, but application development in general.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    3. Re:WHY???? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Wow, you are a complete moron! Say you were to own a company... Just because you don't like Microsoft, you'd sentence your company to bankruptcy and your employees to homelessness.

      Real smart.

      Here's a tip: any company that were to deliberately ignore a 95% market penetration just because they didn't like the vendor of that 95%'s operating system would be in some serious trouble from it's shareholders. Being obligated to protect their financial interests and all that.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    4. Re:WHY???? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I'm not a moron.

      It isn't about not liking Microsoft, it is self preservation. What is Lotus today? What is Novell? Where is Netscape?

      What financial interest are you protecting when you create a novel piece of software on a platform made by a company that can compete directly with you, and even give their version of a product away, just so you lose?

      And there are plenty of companies making software that does not run on any version of Microsoft, and doing quite well. Apple ???

      And the fact that Microsoft wants to compete with iPod and iTunes with its crappy version is proof that they don't really care about your business, even if your stuff runs on theirs.

      The moron is people who think that Microsoft with its 90% of the market in OS isn't really a competitor for the stuff they make, and by shear force of will could wipe out any software company they desire. It isn't like this hasn't happened before.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  21. No no no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is the last thing the world needs.

    What people should really be looking for is quality of typesetting. We need beautiful documents more than we need beautiful interfaces...which isn't to say that the monstrosity in TFA is beautiful.

    I did a comparison recently between Word and InDesign. 187 words. First two paragraphs of A Tale of Two Cities. Two column 8.5x11. InDesign was two full lines tighter than Word. That's ridiculous. And that was _after_ I tweaked Word's leading and column width, the defaults for which are pretty ridiculous.

    I have so little patience for the typical Word doc. There's no way to rationalize such poor typesetting. Word handles orphans and widows very poorly too.

    People don't know to look for this stuff, which is why they put up with it

    1. Re:No no no by Volante3192 · · Score: 3, Funny

      We need beautiful documents more than we need beautiful interfaces...

      The unwashed masses tend to confuse beautiful with lots of clipart, font styles and colors, bolding and italicizing rather than functional and effective though.

    2. Re:No no no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LaTeX

    3. Re:No no no by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      If you're ever interviewing for an office assistant, the following question is often entertaining:

      "Please describe the purpose of widow and orphan control"

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    4. Re:No no no by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      What people should really be looking for is quality of typesetting. We need beautiful documents more than we need beautiful interfaces...


      Beautiful (that is, in the "productive" rather than "eye candy" sense; the two are at best orthogonal, and perhaps actually opposed) UIs get more done. Better typography makes things look better. I'd say the former is far more important than the latter, really.

      People don't know to look for this stuff, which is why they put up with it.


      Yes, for some reason people aren't concerned about aesthetic details that neither they nor most consumers of their documents will notice.

      This seems fairly rational.

    5. Re:No no no by SEMW · · Score: 1

      If you're looking for high quality typesetting, you're never going to find it in WYSIWYG word processors. Example: a good typesetting system, such as TeX, will take into account the whole document when it lays out the text, when deciding for example where to put line breaks, analysing what effect each break has on the rest of the text. Word processors, by necessity, use "a first-fit approach, where the breakpoints for each line are determined one after the other, and no breakpoint is changed after it has been chosen"; since otherwise it would either have to constantly reanalyse, adjust, and refit your text as you type, which most word processor users would find utterly unacceptable (the cursor jumping all over the place, etc.; not to mention the constant CPU usage); or it would have to do the text fitting just before printing/outputting, which would by definition make it no longer a WYSIWYG word processor.

      If you're looking for the best typesetting, I suggest TeX; if you're looking for a more generalised desktop publishing solution, get a DTP program. No use complaining that Word doesn't make a good typesetting solution or DTP app, since it's not designed to be either. It's a word processor.

      --
      What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
    6. Re:No no no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      omg, somebody used the words "best typesetting" near the word "TeX". TeX documents are total eyesores.

  22. File Format? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The most important question for any word processor is "what file formats can it read/write?"

    Word processors all have to read/write at least MS Word .doc format. Because most documents we exchange are in that format. They usually add their own format, for the same reasons MS invented its own: to lock you in to that app, even years after the reasons you originally used it might not have any value at all.

    They'll all claim that their own new app features can be stored only in their own new format. But that's a bunch of crap. They should all read/write both .doc and XML (with a public DTD and descriptive specs). Postscript/PDF would be nice, especially if Adobe lets people import PDF for editing.

    But PDF is just another bell/whistle. What we need is a standard, open storage/exchange format. If Adobe commits to that, they just might have a winner. Otherwise, they shouldn't waste our time with yet another format we'll need to interconvert all the time, instead of productive work.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:File Format? by G+Fab · · Score: 1

      They might have a winner for you if they do this, but that would not make them as much money as the lock-in idea.

      No reasonable company is about to do this well (in such a way that Microsoft would also support the new format, and the format is really flexible). We need MIT or some other academic institution to create a document file format that will get the job done well, and encourage Office and others to come to support it. Even this is far fetched. But it's all about the upgrades for adobe and MS. They can't let you move on easily with hippy file formats.

    2. Re:File Format? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      They usually add their own format, for the same reasons MS invented its own: to lock you in to that app, even years after the reasons you originally used it might not have any value at all.

      A lot of companies do this and Adobe may do it too. Or they could go with the ODF standard and capitalize upon all the other software that is already compatible with ODF.

      They should all read/write both .doc and XML (with a public DTD and descriptive specs). Postscript/PDF would be nice, especially if Adobe lets people import PDF for editing.

      I've never seen anything that forbids you writing a program that edits PDF files. The problem is, PDF is a format designed for print and portability, so it does not contain a lot of the information that is really, really useful for editing. PDF is a lot closer to a vector image than a word processing file and was not designed to be edited.

      What we need is a standard, open storage/exchange format.

      It's called ODF. It's supported by OpenOffice, IBM's Lotus suite, Apple's TextEdit, Google Docs and dozens of others. If Adobe is smart, they'll capitalize upon the popularity and make it the default format. If they insist upon a proprietary format, they probably will fail and even if they succeed we're not really a lot better off than we were.

    3. Re:File Format? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      ODF, the XML format derived (not by MIT) from the OpenOffice.org format.

      Not at all far fetched. But not nearly a done deal, either.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  23. Re:Because it worked SO well for Novell 10 years a by vonFinkelstien · · Score: 1

    I really miss Word Perfect. It was much more intuitive than Word.

  24. Good luck! by siyavash · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I don't say competition is bad, I would never touch this thing. I remove their PDF reader and use Foxit for my family members, I won't if they'll make it as bloated as their PDF reader. Not even Open Office comes close to Microsoft Office for power users. I worked with two businesses doing VERY complex stuff inside Microsoft Office and I tell you, Say whatever you want about Microsoft but that is no easy task to compete with Microsoft Office.

    1. Re:Good luck! by G+Fab · · Score: 1

      foxit reader sucks! I hate that program. It's so poorly made.

      But I do use it! Because acrobat is even worse.

    2. Re:Good luck! by Tatsh · · Score: 1

      Uh, Adobe Reader 7 and 8 are both fast when you disable all the unnecessary programs. I've used a number of PDF viewers on Windows, and the best one as far as speed I've tried is SumatraPDF (a free GPL viewer). The problem is that not all the viewers, especially Foxit, view EVERYTHING correctly and I like to think you are guaranteed a correct viewing with Adobe's software since they own the specification. I much prefer to use Adobe Reader 8 with almost all plugins disabled, and I disable the Speed Launcher. It still loads very quickly and is much more reliable than using anything else. On Linux, my favourite viewer is KPDF, not Adobe's.

  25. SWEET! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I can put Flash movies into my midterm paper!

  26. Adobe, shmadobey by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 2, Interesting
    How about Adobe just tries to get Adobe Reader to work halfway decently?

    If they can't get a simple page renderer to work well, what are the odds they can do a whole slew of apps that don't totally suck?

    1. Re:Adobe, shmadobey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Totally agree about Reader - bloaty and buggy.

      ....what are the odds they can do a whole slew of apps that don't totally suck? They alreay do a whole slew of apps that don't totally suck, and in fact are the best of breed in their class. It's called Creative Suite and has crushed everything that competes (or competed) against it.

  27. Rich Platform? Then port Photoshop by Cryophallion · · Score: 0

    Instead of working on an office suite, why not use the aforementioned "Rich" client to bring Creative Suite, Premiere, etc over to Linux? They seem to imply that Linux is a viable market since the platform is "agnostic". Yes, I know you can use the GIMP, but Photoshop is industry standard, and a lot of companies require it, so no fighting about which is better. It may just help those companies move to Linux that much faster, and isn't THAT a good thing?

    1. Re:Rich Platform? Then port Photoshop by east+coast · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know you can use the GIMP, but Photoshop is industry standard

      And anyone who uses both of these products knows why too. Don't get me wrong, I use GIMP and for a free application it's actually very nice but at the same time it's certainly no Photoshop.

      It may just help those companies move to Linux that much faster, and isn't THAT a good thing?

      For whom? Adobe probably doesn't give a damn. In fact, given their lack of support for Linux my guess is that they don't give a damn at all. It's pretty obvious that Adobe either doesn't feel that they have anything to gain by supporting Linux or they're hoping to move to more of a web style app that will allow them to not worry about the who OS war wasteland.

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    2. Re:Rich Platform? Then port Photoshop by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      >> it's certainly no Photoshop.

      That can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on your individual requirements.

      Yes Virginia, individual users have their own requirements.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:Rich Platform? Then port Photoshop by gmac63 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Funny that you mentioned porting to Linux.

      Back in '97 I used Photoshop AND Illustrator on an SGI running IRIX.

      Its portable. They've done it. Just not for Linux. :-(

      --

      INSERT INTO comment VALUE('Doh!') WHERE user='you';
    4. Re:Rich Platform? Then port Photoshop by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      Back in about 15 minutes ago I used Photoshop on OSX.

      So yeah, it appears to be possible to get it to work on OSs other than Windows.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    5. Re:Rich Platform? Then port Photoshop by ascendant · · Score: 1

      Last time i heard, photoshop was ported to Windows, not the other way around. It's OSX native. It would be easier to port it to *nix than it would be to port it to Winblows.

      --
      Do not attribute to malice that which can be easily explained by incompetence.
  28. Buzzword word processor by MobyDisk · · Score: 1
    Looks like they used the Buzzword word processor to make the press release:

    Though we have not yet announced any intentions to move into the office productivity-software market, considering that we have built this platform that makes it easy to build rich applications that run on both the desktop and the browser, I certainly wouldn't rule anything like that out.'" After running it through my "buzzword" processor, it comes out to:

    We might make a word processing program. Most annoying buzzword of the year:
        platform
    Previously meant:
        A combination of hardware + OS + tools that could produce interoperable applications.
    Now means:
      Any two pieces of software that work together or have the same look and feel
  29. Re:Because it worked SO well for Novell 10 years a by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wordperfect, Quattro Pro and DR DOS were already essentially dead when Novell bought them. I remember hoping that Novell could bring them back from the dead when I first heard that they had bought them, but it was too late/Novell didn't have a clue how to make it happen. I am not sure which of those two was the bigger issue, but Novell didn't destroy those products, their original creators had already done so (with a lot of help from MS).

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  30. Not sure I care... by dasspunk · · Score: 1

    The reason I don't like Office is it's buggy, counter-intuitive and expensive. The same might be said for any Adobe app. If another company were to jump into this market, I'd be way more interested. IMHO, Apple is doing a pretty good job along these lines with iWork.

    1. Re:Not sure I care... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open Office it's all those things except the expensive part...

  31. A contrarian view by Just+some+bastard · · Score: 1

    I hope they don't support .doc or blob-in-XML. That would really dint Microsoft format lock-in, even with a moderate user base.

    1. Re:A contrarian view by Jeremy_Bee · · Score: 1

      What he is saying makes sense though. The real issue is the document format issue.

      There can be as many Office competitors as there are software vendors and MS Office will always win as long as the standard document format is *.doc (or the new equivalent).

      If the document standard can be changed to an open one, then whether it's the next day or the next year, MS Office is history because the product itself is just not that good technically.

      PS - IMO Adobe makes horrible crap, the only thing that's even half good is PhotoShop which, like everyone else, I use because there are simply no alternatives.

    2. Re:A contrarian view by Just+some+bastard · · Score: 1

      MS Office will always win as long as the standard document format is *.doc (or the new equivalent).

      That's what I mean, you don't change the de-facto file format of a monopoly by supporting it.

      If the document standard can be changed to an open one, then whether it's the next day or the next year, MS Office is history because the product itself is just not that good technically.

      +1

  32. not if this was your money by G+Fab · · Score: 1

    If I were a shareholder in Aobe, I'd be ticked at them wasting money fighting Microsoft. Microsoft's monopoly cannot be reasonably defeated by better products.

  33. Simple deal coming soon by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    MSFT will decide to softpedal Silverlight. And Adobe will let the "office suite" remain a vaporware. Like some underhanded deal that must have happened between Intuit and MSFT about Quicken.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  34. Deployment is the secret by goombah99 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What programis on more computers than any other? No it's not Windows OS, or MS office. it's Acrobat and Flash. These are big binaries. For all you know Adobe might have already deployed their word processor to your computer in the last Flash release.

    Thus overnight Adobe could activate a word processing suite on nearly every computer and it would be cross platform, running natively.

    They could succeed where others have failed.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Deployment is the secret by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 1

      So Adobe leverages its monopoly on rich web plugins and/or documents to gain access to the Office market? Maybe. Theres a few problems though:
      1. Your scenario assumes Adobe would gives its stuff away for free. They won't.

      2. OSes already come with basic word processors (e.g. Windows has WordPad, Mac has TextEdit) which are already powerful enough for most users anyway. So Adobe bundling something into Flash/Acrobat wouldn't achieive higher penetration than what OSes already provide. Why use some Flash-Wordprocessor rather than WordPad/TextEdit?

      Anyway, Adobe is no threat to MS Office. It may be a threat to OO.o and Google Docs/Spreadheets.

      --
      -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
    2. Re:Deployment is the secret by hax0r_this · · Score: 1

      Is it possible to print from a flash app? Its an interesting idea, but one way or another I really don't see it happening. Anyway, flash isn't that big, I would definitely notice if they stuck an office suite in with it.

    3. Re:Deployment is the secret by trcooper · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and they might quietly give everyone Photoshop while they're at it.

      If Adobe produces an office suite it isn't going to be free as in beer or speech.

    4. Re:Deployment is the secret by goldglovecb · · Score: 1

      Flash can print... unless you want to get to the nitty gritty details of the technology. Technically, ActionScript (the language for all Flash apps) can leverage print drivers on a user's system, which of course prints content.

      As for releasing apps, if they do, nothing would be bundled as Flash. Adobe is considering the release of a lightweight version of Photoshop though... kind of a SaaS model. I'm sure the idea is to get people hooked to increase purchases.

    5. Re:Deployment is the secret by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      Adobe is considering the release of a lightweight version of Photoshop though... kind of a SaaS model. I'm sure the idea is to get people hooked to increase purchases. What a very strange idea. All of the Windows users I know are hooked already. And run the full version. Almost none of them (at 1000 € a pop) bought it though.
      Since it doesn't even run natively on my system it wasn't much of an issue for me.
      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    6. Re:Deployment is the secret by HeWhoMustNotBeNamed · · Score: 1

      If the footprint of Acrobat and Flash are indicators of what an Adobe Office product would consume, it will make MS Office look efficient. (Acrobat needs 31 mb of ram to show a 100k PDF, Outlook uses 21mb and I have a 60mb mail store with 800mb in a local pst)

    7. Re:Deployment is the secret by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could succeed where others have failed.
      What are trying to tell me? That Adobe can dodge bullets?
  35. Wired = Wrong. Adobe = Crashes. by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 0

    According to Wired...


    In other words, it's dead wrong then?

    Adobe may launch its own office-application suite...


    Yeah, that would be fun.

    "Loading document...(screen goes white)...CRASH"

    How about working on making the free PDF writer stable enough for daily browser use first? (I've given up trying to launch PDFs on most browsers; I always download them to disk and then use a local reader that I can kill when it freezes rather than have to nuke my browser.)
  36. Ugh...please not another Adobe monster by TheDarkener · · Score: 1

    The very few Adobe products I have dealt with (Acrobat/Reader, Flash) are just, for lack of a better word, crap. Adobe Downloader? Why, oh God why??

    Seriously though, they seem to be an incredibly irresponsible company. I *do* give them major props for porting Flash to Linux, but there is still much to be desired with that, and they seem to have done it and merely let it alone, with no future improvements until Flash 12 is out most likely. Flash 9 is still the one thing that crashes my browser in Linux. And it crashes often.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    1. Re:Ugh...please not another Adobe monster by nyctopterus · · Score: 1

      Which are of course (curiously) their worst products. Photoshop and Illustrator on the other hand are damn good. Not perfect, but about as good as software gets. InDesign seemed to be pretty good to while I used it. After Effects is in a bit of a class of it's own: there's a lot of things I'd change, but there's no real competitor, and it too is stable, mature, and powerful.
      Adobe has made good software. Whether a newly-built office app would be any good remains to be seen of course.

  37. No... by stonedcat · · Score: 0

    The world does not need another bloated word processor. Enough is e-fucking-nough OMFG.

    --
    You can't take the sky from me.
  38. How about including a competitor to MS Project by russ1337 · · Score: 1

    I've had a discussion with my boss yesterday over the seeming lack of alternatives to MS Project. For a start, I've used Project on and off over the last 5 years for various small tasks and always found it was not that user friendly and not very intuitive, (like not being able to drag the Gant chart around, or drag and drop resources into tasks. AJAX style)

    ah fuck, i'm a tard. While looking up info for the rest of my hate for MS Project, I came across a list of other project applications here

    I'm off to try these out. But I can say it would be nice if a simple and user friendly project tool was bundled as part of the office suite....

    1. Re:How about including a competitor to MS Project by Cryophallion · · Score: 0

      If using Gnome, also try planner. live.gnome.org/Planner. One listed on the wikipedia article is Windows only, the other two are KDE.

    2. Re:How about including a competitor to MS Project by WPIDalamar · · Score: 1

      Shameless plug...

      http://www.agileagenda.com/

    3. Re:How about including a competitor to MS Project by WPIDalamar · · Score: 1

      Meant to put more info in, but got distracted.

      Actually, I lied... it won't be a competitor. I want to do something different than what project wants you to do. I don't believe in ever setting the start or end date of tasks. You should be able to enter them all in, set up rules for how they behave, and the software should do it all for you. It's similar to the MS Project concept of leveling resources, but it actually understands what "today" is, and knows when things are late or ahead of schedule and adjusts automatically. If you like MS Project, you'll probably hate this. If you hate project, you might like this tool.

      Here's some earlier info on it from when we were just starting out:
      http://www.rogue-development.com/blog/2007/07/i-ha te-microsoft-project.html
      http://www.rogue-development.com/blog/2007/07/proj ect-planning.html

      http://www.agileagenda.com/

    4. Re:How about including a competitor to MS Project by kanweg · · Score: 1

      That is interesting. From the little I just learned about AIR, I believe that it could be integrated in web-applications (like the one that runs in my company). If we can get a project like yours to talk to mine (v.v.), then that could get very interesting.

      Bert

    5. Re:How about including a competitor to MS Project by WPIDalamar · · Score: 1

      Yup... AIR was kind of "meant" to go from web app -> desktop app easily. I'm doing the reverse, coming out with the desktop app first. But there will definitely be a web version soon after that.

  39. That's not a product name, it's a warning label by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 1

    I know Web 2.0 is full of buzzwords, but actually naming a product Buzzword is brilliant. Finally truth in advertising.

  40. They can bundle it with flash... by catbutt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In fact they don't really have to bundle much at all, just include a minimal app that mostly runs off the net.

    I'm usually not a fan of bundling, but I'd forgive them for this since it's about time someone hits microsoft with their own tricks.

  41. Just what I always wanted... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    A way to have the intuitive easy to use GUI of Photoshop spread to applications I use more often.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  42. Companies smell blood in the water by GnarlyDoug · · Score: 1
    Google is trying to get into the office suite application space. Apple is moving there as well. The just released IWork 08 now includes a very nice spreadsheet program for example. Now Adobe declares that they are wanting to create an office suite program. All these companies would not be doing this at basically the same time if they didn't think that the time to tackle Microsoft in this area isn't coming soon.

    What I'm saying is that the timing is not coincidental. Office is getting long in the tooth and Microsoft does not seem to be ready to make a serious rewrite of it. I think these companies have all decided that the time to begin to attack Office is near and they're gearing up to fight Microsoft on the productivity software front. I think we're about to enter a new era productivity software application wars.

  43. Motivations by pinkocommie · · Score: 1

    Depending on their motivation, as someone else said is this a big FU to Microsoft? If so wouldn't it make much more sense to start investing in Open Office to cover the deficiencies. Significantly cheaper and more effective then starting something up from scratch. OTOH if they have the resources to do it ground up and not die in the process more power to them

  44. Power users != enterprise users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe for home / school / small business users. But not large "enterprise" users. OpenOffice's spreadsheet application has a lot of ground to cover before it even approaces Excell for power users.

    I used it at a Fortune-100 company -- you've heard of us, and almost certainly used our products. The spreadsheet and word processor worked fine, even for fairly big documents. I it the default, so opening files from Outlook or off a Sharepoint used OOo. The only problem was there were a lot of Visio diagrams floating around which it was useless to open.

    Most people used MS Office, but apart from Visio diagrams, I never came across anything that OpenOffice couldn't do. Corporations are big in volume, but not necessarily complexity. When I was in academia, the scientists I worked with were 10x harder on their spreadsheets than anything I saw in corporate America.

    There are things that OOo can't do. There are even things OOo can't do that MS Office can. But "enterprise" is not one of them.

    1. Re:Power users != enterprise users by temcat · · Score: 1

      http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=17593&comm ent_id=226219 [osnews.com]
      http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=17593&comm ent_id=226313 [osnews.com]
      http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=17593&comm ent_id=226315 [osnews.com]

      Note that format compatibility is rarely mentioned here if at all. It's the features, big and small, that make you productive or just allow you to get the job done.

    2. Re:Power users != enterprise users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, you found a dozen specific features of MS Word that OOo doesn't have. That's nice, dear. Doesn't matter to my point: "corporate users" are not the same as "power users". I worked at a big company in a Microsoft-only house for years, and never saw anybody use annotations, or merging changes, or VBA, or any of the rest of this crap.

      Maybe there are power users who work at "enterprise" companies. There certainly are power home users. There are also gobs of non-power corporate (and home) users. (They're disjoint sets. Get it?) The only reason we used MS Office is because it was a MS-only shop. If OOo had sales reps there, we could have switched and saved a bunch of money.

      Yes, in some places there are corporate power users. They're not the ones holding back "enterprise" OOo installations. "Enterprise user" != "Power user".

    3. Re:Power users != enterprise users by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      So, basically, you're saying it's "just good enough" to pass. That's great. I'll pass.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  45. Everyone wannabe Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with a lot of these companies is they seem to think the market leader just tripped and fell into that position. Except for extremely rare cases, nobody accidentally grabs the top spot... and the only exceptions are when someone recognizes a need which isn't being met.

    Actually, MS Office is kind of a mix of both superior product which won all it's respective fields (word processor, spreadsheet, slide show, email), and recognized the need to integrate all these disparate applications onto a unified platform. But MS's success has always been taking an idea and creating a superior product, while at the same time leveraging it in a new and innovative way.

    Another funny example of people thinking in the "trip and fall into first" mindset is MMOGs. Nobody thinks back a few short years ago about the fragmented mess MMOGs were, all they see now is that World of Warcraft is making tons of money for Blizzard. Nobody thinks of the hard work, planning, and new ideas it took to get there... they are simply blinded by the idea of making that much money.

    You always need to watch out for people who think success is an accident. It generally implies a "moral flexibility" which will eventually allow them to justify ripping people off. Instead, look for people with good ideas, a work ethic, and solid business ability.

  46. Bloat? by Chicken04GTO · · Score: 1

    Adobe reader is the slowest, most bloated thing ive ever seen. Never.

  47. MS Office Rival Welcomed by CtrlShiftEsc · · Score: 1

    I would love to see a viable Office rival. It would only help stimulate what is a pretty much closed shop and it would keep the innovation train moving. It's going to take a massive R&D budget to even scratch the surface of the domination that MS Office has. I have a horrible feeling that Adobe will try and build some Flash-based memory hogging monster that will be drenched in eye-candy and probably require a browser to make work - urrrgh. But if they could improve on Acrobat and make it more Office-like, who knows, we might only need .pdf for reading and creating documents in the future.

    Microsoft's biggest problem in trying to market Office 2007 is of course, Office 2003, XP and 2000. All of the previous versions following Office '97 are simply 'good enough' for most people. And yet, 2007 has raised the bar in terms of UI, features and intuitiveness that everybody else will be playing catch-up for years to come. Even Google has saddled up with Sun in their latest GooglePack.

    Adobe will have to make some key decisions if it attempts to enter this space like:- will they make their products work across other platforms other than Windows/Mac? Infact, how do they win over OpenOffice fans who get their kicks for free? And given that the free, similarly featured OpenOffice product has not yet made a dent in the enterprise market space, how are they going to do better? They could always start by offering the Creative Suite for 1/4 price when purchased with their Office product. That would temp me to take a look at least.
    1. Re:MS Office Rival Welcomed by Pop69 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And yet, 2007 has raised the bar in terms of UI, features and intuitiveness that everybody else will be playing catch-up for years to come.

      If 2007 has raised the bar then the bar is set so low I'd have to limbo dance to get under it.

      The new UI is the least intuitive I've seen in a long time, 97-2003 might not have been brilliant but at least people know where everything is after 6 and more years of training on it and using it.

    2. Re:MS Office Rival Welcomed by nogginthenog · · Score: 0

      Couldn't agree more. I've been using 2007 for 6 months or so and I still don't 'get' the Office Ribbon. If I want to do something out of the ordinary (say, mail merge) the only quick way is to try and remember the Office 2003 keystrokes because it's impossible to quickly find anything on those stupid toolbars. Did Microsoft ever read their own style guides? Obviously the Office 2007 programmers didn't.

    3. Re:MS Office Rival Welcomed by SEMW · · Score: 2, Informative

      If I want to do something out of the ordinary (say, mail merge) the only quick way is to try and remember the Office 2003 keystrokes because it's impossible to quickly find anything on those stupid toolbars. Ummm... Seriously? Of the seven toolbars in Word 2007, one is labelled "Mailings". Sure enough, mail merge is the third icon on that toolbar. If you seriously think that having mail merge under "Mailings" is more intuitive than having under "Tools" (aka "miscellaneous"), then, well... You're entitled to your opinion...
      --
      What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
  48. Hooray! by boristdog · · Score: 1

    Now every time I open a document I will get 15 second pause then a screen asking me to upgrade to the latest version!

  49. Linux angle by Lust · · Score: 1

    I fought the good fight for a decade, defending linux as a grad student and for the first couple years of my first real job.

    My experience was that there was rarely a perfect compatibility between MS Office applications and StarOffice etc. in linux, and that was enough for me to finally abandon in favor of XP + Office. It was a sad day but was definitely the right business decision for me at the time.

    I have many friends that use MacOS and run the Mac version of Office, but even that has displayed some quirky behavior at inopportune times (PowerPoint presentations).

    In conclusion, I wouldn't use the Linux angle as a winning angle for Adobe's new application. Especially given the bloated applications like Acrobat and Illustrator that I've abandoned in frustration years ago.

    -- Lust

  50. Bloated, buggy, and overpriced. by Radon360 · · Score: 1

    <rant>

    And each suite license will cost $3,000

    Mod me troll if you like, but if Adobe's latest releases of Acrobat reader are any indication of how this conceptual suite will be released, I'd rather take my chances with MS, or even better, open office.

    Using Acrobat Reader 8 as a benchmark: Acrobat Reader 8 takes too long to launch, pesters you with some update that usually just adds to the program's bloat of unnecessary features, and to top it off, 8 sometimes "page tears" when you scroll -- a bug that keeps reappearing that prevents things from being displayed properly on several of my machines. Switching tasks or minimize/restore is the only fix I've found so far.

    Aside from this any full-blown software from them just seems to be way overpriced to begin with.

    No thanks, Adobe

    </rant>

    1. Re:Bloated, buggy, and overpriced. by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Aside from this any full-blown software from them just seems to be way overpriced to begin with.

      Yep. I'm thinking about starting a significant writing project, which may wind up turning into a published book a few years down the line. If I do it, I want some proper software to design it with, so I'm looking into what's available.

      Word processors aren't really up to the job, so I'm on to DTP software. As much as I admire the OSS community, Scribus isn't even in the running on account of its buginess on Windows for a start. Cheapo DTP like Publisher is out for lack of power. Now I'm on to looking at the big names like InDesign. That actually looks like it would be good enough: the typography isn't perfect but at least it will use pro-grade OpenType fonts, the writing tools aren't great but at least they are usable, etc.

      But then I look at the price tag. I'm a guy at home, talking about starting a personal project. I have no magic budget for this. I won't rip off someone else's software, and I'll pay a fair price for something I think would be useful. I have paid for those pro-grade fonts, for example, and they aren't cheap. But hundreds for a product like InDesign for a one-off project that I'm not even sure I'll take anywhere is just too much.

      The irony, of course, is that the big companies that could afford to pay the silly prices for things like this (and Office, and Windows, and...) actually don't, because they get volume licensing agreements instead. Meanwhile, all that's happened here is that I don't have any tool good enough to do the job I want to do, and Adobe don't have any money at all from me. So their pricing policy isn't just annoying for me, it seems it's actually counter-productive for them. :-(

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  51. Adobe track record by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anybody remember FrameMaker?
    That was a very nice product before Adobe killed it.
    I'm still waiting for its equivalent to come along.

    1. Re:Adobe track record by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I had it for the NeXT. We also used it at the book publishing division on Sparcstations. Powerfull application for building ubber complex docs and books. Horrible at anything else. There's a great tale when NeXT tried to sell a bunch of computers to Target in Minn., and they couldn't touch Quark. The challege was to build a 10 page - graphic heavy - weekend insert (the whole point of the program). With a Framemaker EXPERT - they couldn't get it done in 4 hours. This is something you can do in an hour or less (depending on source-content prep) in Quark or Indesign.

      Oh did I mention that FrameMaker had an interface that emerged from the 7th circle of hell after a late-night incantation in a graveyard? You should have seen the sacrafical virgins. Not slashdotters - I'm talking WOMEN!

    2. Re:Adobe track record by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FrameMaker and Quark have never been in the same category of applications.
      That's kind of like comparing Quark to Photoshop, or FrameMaker to MySQL.

      Try these comparisons: FrameMaker vs Word vs OpenOffice
      Compare them on these tasks: High School Paper, Graduate Thesis, Publishing Harry Potter, Publishing their own User Manuals, letter to Grandma

      Oh, and compare them in 1990 before Adobe swallowed Frame.

      I hear that KWord has some of the frame handling abilities of FrameMaker ca 1990, but I don't know.

    3. Re:Adobe track record by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      LOL compare them before Adobe swallowed Frame? NeXTSTATION? Sparcstation? These are not late 90s platforms. I'm talking circa 1991-1992.

      They were too niche for their applications. Granted it wasn't until the mid to late 90s before Quark could handle indexing on an ubber scale, but geez. You LIKED that god-awful interface?

  52. Re:Wired = Wrong. Adobe = Crashes. by ChrisA90278 · · Score: 1

    "How about working on making the free PDF writer stable enough for daily browser use first?"

    I'll bet all the people who gripe about this are running MS Windows versions. I never have such problems but then, I'm using Safari on Mac OS X and Firefox on Linux.

  53. Too much attention paid to a non-announcement. by Seor+Jojoba · · Score: 1

    Reread the quote this whole article is based on again. The Adobe guy said, "...we have not yet announced any intentions to move into the office-productivity software market." Everything else in the article is the Wired writer fantasizing with one hand down his pants about how it might happen. Let's all pull up our chairs in a circle and join him.

  54. Of all companies by fortyonejb · · Score: 1

    Yay an even slower loading version of office!

  55. Fuck Adobe by pinchhazard · · Score: 1

    So Adobe, a company known for bloatware, is going to enter a field dominated by bloatware?? Why?

    --
    Do you love freedom??? Do you love freedom!!! DO YOU LOVE FREEDOM!!!!!!!!
  56. Pricing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Word Processor: FrameMaker -> $900
    Spreadsheet: ?? -> $???
    Presentation: Presenter -> $???
                                    InDesign -> $700
                                    PageMaker -> $500
    Drawing: Illustrator -> $600
    Photo Editing: Photoshop -> $650
    Web Design: Dreamweaver -> $400

    Suite: $3000 marked down to $2000
    Suite Pro: $5000 (includes Premiere, Encore, Fireworks, and Flash)

  57. There's only one way to beat MS Office by edmicman · · Score: 1

    And that is to *beat MS Office*. Really, everything else so far has only *imitated* Office, and usually it's been Office 2000 at that. Why would you want an alternative when you could have the real thing? The only solution is to make something better. Take all the complaints about Office (Word, Excel, Outlook), and fix them. Improve on it. Make it lightweight, with a small footprint. Make it compatible with everything, but have it offer more, or do something better or faster. Make the interface better so it's easier to do what you need to do. You're never going to kill Office by imitating it.

    So there ya go. Now where's my venture capital?

    1. Re:There's only one way to beat MS Office by kanweg · · Score: 1

      Well, there is a new twist. While I'm not exactly happy in the way the OO is a copy of MS Office, OO does two things. Level the barrier of switching over, and writing stuff in a format that is open. I have a small company, and to run it more efficiently, that open nature is very appealing to improve my business processes. Now ODF is an ISO standard, that gives me credence to justify my choice of the format when dealing with other companies (OK, OO does another thing: Being free, I can tell other companies to get a copy too).

      Bert

    2. Re:There's only one way to beat MS Office by SEMW · · Score: 1

      While I'm not exactly happy in the way the OO is a copy of MS Office, OO does two things. Level the barrier of switching over, and writing stuff in a format that is open. Neither of those really address the grandparent's point. "Level[ing] the barrier of switching over" is all very well, but it doesn't provide an active reason to switch for a business which is currently using MS Office. Ditto with your second point: if a business decides it wants to use an open format, there are many to choose from which their current installation of MS Office will write to perfectly happily, including several ODF plugins for Office. Again, there is no active reason to switch, apart from price, which, considering the cost of a lot of enterprise level software in use, most medium to large business would probably consider negligible (esp. with volume license agreements).

      The GP is right: if you want to beat MS Office, you have to make something that is tangibly better than it. Not just free, not just 'easy to switch to': better.
      --
      What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
  58. also by edmicman · · Score: 1

    Oh yeah, on top of beating MS Office, that includes Outlook and Exchange. And solid integration between ALL of the apps. Just making a replacement for Word won't work, even if it's better. You need to replace and improve Word, Excel, Outlook, and Powerpoint. And Exchange.

    Yeah, Adobe has their work cut out for them. My money would be on Apple, especially if they come out with an Exchange alternative. Why aren't they doing this?

    1. Re:also by Arimus · · Score: 1

      And love it or loathe it Access.

      (I'm in the mostly hate it until I need to let someone have access to our defect tracking system so they can generate custom reports... I give the odbc access to the MySQL server (via a select only account) and off they go - no hand-holding while I teach them how to run reports or use sql...)

      --
      --- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
    2. Re:also by nogginthenog · · Score: 1

      In what way do Office apps integrate? They don't. OK, so I can do a Word mail merge from an Excel sheet, but I can do that with any data source. Embed Excel sheets in my Word doc? It's only OLE/ActiveX.

      Maybe you mean the fact that Outlook can use Word to write emails. Big deal.

  59. Text-to-columns is done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Coincidentally enough, Text-to-columns is now fixed, and was confirmed today. It'll be in 2.4.

    http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4 040

  60. iWork 08 vs. MS Office by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

    Actually try it out with any non-trivial document -- especially documents imported from previous versions of Word. You won't like the results. It's "compatible" in the sense that it can read and write OOXML documents, but not with more than 90% accuracy. Comparing the iWork suite to Office and actually being disappointed that it's neither as powerful as MS Office nor 100% compatible and doesn't contain all of MS Office's legion of power user features is pretty silly. I did not have high hopes for the iWork 08 suite when I downloaded the trial but it performed a lot better than I had expected. I tried importing considerably complicated PowerPoint and Word documents. Both Pages and Keynote did surprisingly well considering both documents were in the old Office formats. The only thing Keynote screwed up was the slide numbers, while Pages imported in 14 seconds (including 2 seconds wasted to click away the demo notification nag screen) a 130+ page tech manual I wrote with lots of diagrams and auto-generated crap a table of content and an index. Pages showed no glitches in image placement and only had a minor issues with a missing horizontal line in the page header. Numbers still has quite a ways to go before it can replace Excel but it does moderately complex Excel documents well enough. I'm not going to dump on Apple for not having included prime power user stuff like VB since that would be unreasonable so all in all I'm rather pleased with iWork 08. Basically I wouldn't recommend iWork as an MS Office replacement for power users but it can handle most of the Office documents I get at work and it will be more than adequate until the next iteration of MS Office for Mac arrives at the end of the year or the OO.o Mac port matures. Hopefully iWork 08 will improve with the next few point releases and, dare one hope, gain small but useful features like custom date and numerical formats in Numbers.
    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
  61. all i can say is.... by inzy · · Score: 1

    ....i hope it uses a proprietrary, closed standard for the default file type, incompatible with oasis odf and all ms formats

  62. The office angle by kanweg · · Score: 1

    I've been working for an office for many years, running Office on PCs. We echanged Word documents with other companies, also running PCs. When talking to a client on the phone, it turned out that they layout had gone haywire anyway. What's on my page 8 at the bottom, is at their top page 9. That is just from opening, not from messing with the document. Word is not compatible with itself, be it due to different versions of Word, or perhaps due to different versions of Windows. I've my own company now, use Word (aarghh), and know that these situations don't happen just because I use Word on a Mac.

    For my company, I'll take a look at what Adobe comes up with, but if they use a proprietary format instead of ODF or (editable) PDF, it is unlikely to get much further attention.

    Bert

  63. Nah by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 2, Informative

    We are a billion dollar a year company. We looked at Star Office and Open Office. We are not going to switch to this to save $100,000 because it doesn't open the Excel spreadsheets our customers make us fill out to get their business.

    We are definitely not going to switch to any other competitor if this problem remains. We will spend $100,000 to upgrade from Office 2003 to 2007 just because one decent sized customer has switched and we can't open their documents.

    It all comes down to the bottom line.

    That being said, I use Open Office personally on several of my own computers and don't use Word/Excel/PowerPoint. With the license we have of Office, I am granted the right to install it at home also. For me, the security vulnerabilities don't make it worth it. Open Office patches are much fewer.

    1. Re:Nah by wmaster · · Score: 1

      Well, welcome to the Dinosaur Club! With your point of view and the decision making process you mention your "billion dollar a year company" will not be alive in 5 years. Go on hunting the "one single costumer" who is abusing Excel. "It all comes down to the bottom line." Exactly. The bottom line is: Earth is rotating and the business world has changed. If your business still depends that desperately on the "one costumer", and does not have a communication base with him where different formats can be discussed, then your shares are worthless shortly. Greetings, Chris

      --
      "An operating system must operate."
    2. Re:Nah by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 1

      >>then your shares are worthless

      We're not public, so...

      Why would we not spend $100,000 to get $100,000+++ worth of business? We have few customers who spend lots of money each.

      I didn't say "any" customer. Just "one" customer. It's not going to be the one doing $3000 worth of business. The fact is large customers do require us to use the latest version of Excel to get millions of dollars of business.

      I counter with we would be dead in 5 years if we didn't accommodate our customers.

  64. The problem is .... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    that you want them to be smart. They keep trying to limit themselves to MS's backyard and then are surprised when MS comes after their revenue stream. Adobe has not shown themselves to be smart.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  65. office suite os limitations by icu2 · · Score: 1

    would this be only limited to microsloth OS or would it also include unix based OS as well?

  66. Um... no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They will have a version for Window, Mac OS-X, and Linux.


    I'm guessing Adobe will support non-Windows platforms just as well as PhotoShop does. Which is... not at all.

    They know where the market is at... and it's not on Apple or Lunix.
  67. Does this make Adobe the next Novell or Corel? by notaprguy · · Score: 1

    Seriously...how many companies have tried to take on Microsoft in word processing/spreadsheets etc? What makes Adobe think they have a better chance of success than Novell, Corel etal? Flash? AIR? Yeah...right. Seriously, Adobe is doing a halfway decent job of competing with Microsoft as the platform level with Flex/Flash and maybe AIR. Why not stick to that knitting before they decide to expand their ambitions? Maybe it's because they know something the rest of us don't regarding their ability to seriously compete as a platform provider.

  68. Steve Carell can't be beat by SethJohnson · · Score: 1



    How many workplace comedies are they going to throw out on the airwaves? First there was the British version, then the yanks adopted it with their own cast and stories. Now AMC has an 'office' set in the early sixties called "Madmen." What does Adobe think they're going to bring to the table? Will Ferrell, perhaps? That, I think, is the only thing that could establish Adobe's Office as a competitor to the Steve Carell show.

    Seth

  69. GoBe Productive by vprasad · · Score: 1

    How about something like the GoBe Productive suite which has been sitting on shelves of its most recent owners for the last few years now?

  70. Ha! I'm only on /. right now because DW is HANGED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ironically the only reason I've surfed over here onto the Internet right now (and of course slashdot is often the first place I come to kill time) is because Adobe Dreamweaver CS3 is currently HANGED. UNRESPONSIVE! For going on 18 minutes now! Now I must "force quit" it. Pathetic.

    Pfffft. Yeah, I can't WAIT for their office suite....

    Seriously, WTF? Office applications from Adobe? LOL, they'd crash incessantly, take 20 minutes to LOAD, force you MULTIPLE TIMES through some hopelessly cumbersome (and temporary -- see below) activation procedure, and cost 1200 dollars!

    Like the guy said above, Adobe's bread and butter -- Acrobat -- it isn't even freaking stable yet! Mine completely crashes Safari EVERY TIME it loads a PDF because it can't handle the exception that occurs when it has LOST its activation code after its 'suite' has been upgraded to CS3! YES, even though the CS3 Adobe developers in their CS3 installer asked specifically, "Adobe Creative Suite 3 Premium install has detected a previous installation of Acrobat 8 Professional... Click here to keep your existing version". Those Idiots!

    And by the way, Dreamweaver is UNCHANGED in CS3.. Not even the bugs I encountered on a regular basis in DW 8 have been fixed, WTF did are people paying $700 for?

  71. Worse than MS ? you bet! by billcopc · · Score: 0, Troll

    Raise your hand if you think Adobe software is even more buggy and temperamental than Microsoft ?

    Raise your hand if every new version of Photoshop and Acrobat is sigificantly slower and weirder than the last.

    Raise your hand if you'd rather donate your money to one of the many open-source suites in existence, that will inevitably be more reliable and enjoyable than anything to come out of Adobe.

    (those of you with 3 hands in the air, umm... I love you!)

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  72. You must not work in an office... by IANAAC · · Score: 1

    Not this 99% compatability where 3 times a year you get a document which blowes up in your face and you need to put tail between your legs and beg your supplier or worse your customer to save it in a different format. For the 3 times a year that could cost the company far more then the cost of Office Professional.

    Those three times a year are most likely you using either O2K or 2003 and are sent documents from Office 2007. And if you worked in an office you would realize that that happens far more often than 3 times a year.

    So how is contacting your supplier/customer and asking them to resave in O2K format any different than asking them to save in something a bit more universal?

    Seriously, if you can't realize it's the same thing, different programs, you really don't have much experience with document exchange.

    1. Re:You must not work in an office... by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Because microsoft has conned their userbase into thinking this is normal... So users simply accept it.
      When you introduce an unknown third party into the mix, they receive the blame regardless of wether it's deserved or not.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  73. I like Office 2007... by MasaMuneCyrus · · Score: 1

    I like the new layout, as well as the new features, as compared to 2003. I suppose I'm not an Office power user, so I'm not particularly privy to any drawbacks to 2007, but from an average-user perspective, I really like Office 2007, which is more than I can say for Vista.

  74. But has anybody ever beat msft on the desktop? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    I am asking about marketshare, not quality.

    Maybe dreamweaver has over-taken frontpage?

  75. Slightly OT: Alternate PDF reader by cbhacking · · Score: 1

    Apologies for the OT, but a lot of people seem to be upset about the (lack of) quality in Adobe Reader, so I thought I'd quickly mention my favorite alternative: Foxit Reader. Works with embedded and desktop versions of Windows and Linux (no sign of a Mac port, sorry) and doesn't require rebooting or anything when installing or updating. It starts instantly and has a much lower footprint. It doesn't have a browser plugin in the usual sense (.pdf files open in another window, which is fine with me at least) but embedded PDFs will display correctly. For the icing on the cake, according to Secunia it doesn't seem like anybody has found any vulnerabilities in its rendering or Javascript support yet (such vulnerabilities are one of the biggest driving forces behind Adobe Reader updates).

    --
    There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  76. More Adobe CRAP by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    I've spent the entire day trying to find out why Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 on one of my client's machines hangs at random points while rendering. And they constantly have problems with Adobe Premiere crashes when doing video and film conversion projects.

    It's ridiculous. Now I'm doing a defrag and if that doesn't help, we have to uninstall every frickin' application on the box to see what might be interfering. If that doesn't work, it's reinstall the whole goddamn box - which will take another day, given that we have to put that QuickBooks crap on the box which is more bloated shit.

    Adobe software is unmitigated SHIT. Anybody who'd buy an office suite from them deserves to.

    And don't even get me started on their (or Macrovision's) fucked up license management software that dumps randomly-named services in your Services list, triggering Windows Defender messages to the Event Log suggesting "spyware".

    Adobe is like every other stupid-ass application company in existence today - selling "featuritis" software loaded with crap nobody wants that doesn't work and makes you jump through hoops to use it, while charging you an arm and a leg for this shit. Adobe, Intuit, Symantec, Microsoft, HP and their 750MB of printer software - all a bunch of fucking morons who need to be put out of business so people with computers can get some fucking work done rather than debugging their shit all day.

    Can you tell I'm slightly irritated?

    Adobe - that's what their brains are made of.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  77. Microsoft Office Compatibility Pack by SEMW · · Score: 1

    We will spend $100,000 to upgrade from Office 2003 to 2007 just because one decent sized customer has switched and we can't open their documents. That would be a bit of a waste of $100,000...
    --
    What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
    1. Re:Microsoft Office Compatibility Pack by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 1

      While I haven't tried this iteration, these have always not worked just right in the past.

      Usually these are complex Excel workbooks with macro's and formulas and thousands of rows.

      Thank you for the link, though.

  78. I think everyone should keep in mind by Almahtar · · Score: 1

    that nobody ever changed the world by saying "nothing ever changes". I wish Adobe well. I get annoyed to no end with Microsoft Office - and people pay a lot of money for that annoying pile.

  79. Anyone remember Page Mill? by beetle496 · · Score: 1

    Adobe had a much better product than Front Page. They didn't like the heat from MS, so they just abandoned it. I wish it were possible to sue companies to post source code when they walk away from a product.

    --
    I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
  80. Win-win outcome by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    With any luck Adobe and Microsoft will put each other out of business.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  81. Yay! by EddyPearson · · Score: 1

    Look at the story title! Have the Eds finally got bored of the oh so tacky "[Company] releases [Product] Killer!!" line?

    I like to think so!

    Goodnight London.

    --
    You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
  82. ohgodno says it best by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

    i don't need to learn ANOTHER office suite, or worse yet, teach and repair it. My Lusers are very smart people (laser engineers) and they can barely handle Word.

    Get an open document format that doesn't lose formatting from one platform to another. Then we can have infinite office suites that are compliant with one standard. That would be fine with me. But ohgodno, not another office suite!

    --
    Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
  83. s/more/less in above comment by SEMW · · Score: 1
    Sorry about that. Post should, of course, have read:

    Ummm... Seriously? Of the seven toolbars in Word 2007, one is labelled "Mailings". Sure enough, mail merge is the third icon on that toolbar. If you seriously think that having mail merge under "Mailings" is less intuitive than having under "Tools" (aka "miscellaneous"), then, well... You're entitled to your opinion...
    --
    What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
  84. In this case... by martrootamm · · Score: 1

    In such a case, it's usually best to install converters, if Office 2007 is not yet deployed. I think many people (and perhaps IT departments) forget this.

    Buying one retail Office 2007 for converting documents in-house in one of the computers dedicated for this is also a solution.