Slashdot Mirror


OpenOffice.org 2.3 Review

Peace Frog writes passed us a link to an in-depth review of the newest version of OpenOffice. Instead of just the normal bug fixes, 2.3 has added several new features. Examples include: "A bunch of new and enhanced features like restoring the user-defined movement path in Impress and applying better default print settings in Calc. Check the release notes for complete information from OpenOffice.org. A significantly different chart tool. New extensions provided by Sun and other vendors. You will need to run 2.3 for the extensions to work. Read more about the new extensions on the OpenOffice.org web site." The general impression from the review is that the OO team is doing an excellent job of responding to feedback from previous releases.

6 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. Integration to 3rd party still nearly inexistant by arivanov · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The thing that made Microshaft Word the market winner was the integration. Regardless how much developers hate OLE, it did the job. You could take a data object from any other app and throw it in and it kind'a worked. It was not anywhere good enough from the perspective of a professional, but it was enough as far as Joe Average was concerned.
    What continues to make OO on non-windows platforms a losing proposition is the lack of such APIs. Even if the GUI and underlying libraries supports them OO continues to do things of its own (not surprising considering Sun's involvement). KDE embedding and full integration, gnome integration, etc. There are present in a very rudimentary fashion. As a result OO continues to be limited to a universe of its own. This hinders both its development and the development of third party aps like Dia. It also at the end of the day puts it firmly into the niche proposition area. Until this is resolved this is exactly where it will belong. Sad...

    --
    Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
    http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  2. Re:Incompatible rendering by SEMW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But it still falls short when it comes to rendering and printing docs and having them look the same as in MS Office. If it is essential that a document be rendered identically on different machines, a word processor -- any word processor -- is the wrong tool for the job. If something needs to be viewed only, export to pdf; if it needs to be edited as well, use DTP software.
    --
    What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
  3. All these changes and yet... by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... I still can't add a word to the dictionary with just one click. Try it for yourself, you'll see. Make a typo, right-click on the word once the squiggly red underline appears. It gives suggestions, and not an "Add" menu -- but a submenu. So me, the uncaring user, just wants to add this to the dictionary. I pick "Add" submenu, then I am faced with a choice. "soffice.dic", "standard.dic" and "sun.dic". Um... what? Why should I care? What happens if I pick the wrong one? Is there a wrong one? Why do I have to make this decision? Screw this, I'm going back to MS Office! (Okay, slight hyperbole with that last.)

    Unfortunately, this is a classic example of why open source software designed for mass use needs more contributors familiar with basic usability concepts. This way, end users could spend less time playing with their dics, and more time accomplishing their goals.

  4. Re:Incompatible rendering by DougWebb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Generally, I imagine that it has to do with the fact that word processing files don't carry fonts with them. Even if the file specification were 100% open and implementable, most fonts are licensed in a way that doesn't allow them to be redistributed. As a result, you can only print the document and send paper around, or export to PDF which renders the characters as lines and fills but doesn't include the font information itself.

    A desktop publishing package would have the same limitation, I would imagine, except the file formats might enable embedding the fonts (putting the license-compliance burden on the user), or a particular package might come with a standard set of fonts you can count on being available.

  5. Re:*sigh* ... still no outline mode in OOo Writer. by jvkjvk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...and for most people that's true too - they don't come near LaTeX either!

    It might be bizarre to many /.'ers, but not everyone wants to learn a programming language to be able to create a document.

  6. Re:New version, huh? by zurtle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Where I'm studying mathematics, we write our postgrad reports, essays, assignments in LaTeX.

    Word is inefficient for what I need to do. I reckon more university students should learnify it. Bibliographies, indices, TOCs... what more does one need? ;-)

    I admit it hasn't got the easiest learning curve, but if you're at a postgraduate level, I assume you've got some brains :D (though I somehow slipped in).

    --
    Couldn't stand the weather