Slashdot Mirror


OpenOffice.org 3.0 Wants to Compete with Outlook

jason writes "At the OpenOffice.org 2007 conference about a month ago there was a presentation on what to expect in the next major milestone for their Microsoft Office competitor. "The presentation mentions bundling Thunderbird with their Office Suite, and refers to it as an 'Outlook replacement.' This is all assuming that Thunderbird recently losing two of its main developers doesn't affect the decision, because I'm sure OpenOffice wants to ensure that Thunderbird will continue to progress before including it." This probably won't sway large corporations away from using Microsoft Office, but it could make it more intriguing for the smaller businesses that are looking to cut some costs."

14 of 464 comments (clear)

  1. Compete? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Because Outlook doesn't spread enough viruses as is?

  2. You gotta be kidding. by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Jesus. How about they compete with Word first, eh? Calling Thunderbird an "Outlook Replacement" just shows they have no idea what people use Outlook for. Outlook Express replacement, sure.

    The great thing about Office is all the damn pieces work together. Excel is friendly with Access, Access is friendly with Word, Everything is friendly with Outlook. To beat Office, you have to have an Office suite that works like that. Not just all the pieces in one package.

    There is not one single thing in OO that doesn't have an OSS equivalent stand-alone application that is at least as good. Bundling a mail client with the rest of your apps doesn't suddenly make you competitive, especially when your whole user base could have already installed that mail client if they wanted it.

    There are OSS projects that are actually making a push toward doing the things that Outlook does (like Kontact). But Thunderbird is still lagging behind Evolution imho, and neither of them play all that great with any of the groupware servers out there, open or closed.

    I used to try and push OO on people, but I've completely lost faith in it. I keep thinking, maybe they'll get their crap together, but then they do stuff like this.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    1. Re:You gotta be kidding. by SerpentMage · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wish I had mod points left over...

      I know exactly how you feel. I used to use Office 2000 since about 1999. Since then I have been waiting for Open Office to serve as an Microsoft Office replacement. What happened? I upgraded to Office 2007 a month ago. I as well have given up on OO. Maybe one day, but then I will be ready for retirement and won't care.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    2. Re:You gotta be kidding. by niiler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First, let me say that your experience with OO will depend on what you use it for. As I use it mostly for writing papers for publication in scientific journals, quick spreadsheet applications (usually for classroom illustrations), and for "powerpoint" presentations at conferences, it works just dandy for me.

      I do have to respond to your comment that "There is not one single thing in OO that doesn't have an OSS equivalent stand-alone application that is at least as good." I like the concepts of KOffice, and Gnome Office, but KOffice really isn't as functional as OO in any way, shape or form. It used to open faster than OO, but recently, OO has taken just three seconds from click to start on my computer, so I can't complain about that. Gnome Office is not integrated. Abiword is great for very small documents of limited functionality, but is no where near the abilities of swriter. Gnumeric is arguably equal with scalc, but then it doesn't have the same sort of interapplication communication with documents as scalc shares with swriter. As a long time simpress user, I have yet to find either a problem with it interoperating with powerpoint, or another opensource program that holds a candle to it.

      So to finish, you are probably right in that OpenOffice has a long way to go in matching every type of functionality as MS Office, but I still can't say it has any real competitors in the OSS world at the current time. [Note to KOffice users: I have seen quite an improvement in functionality over the last couple of years, but you all need another couple of Google Summers of Code to catch up. - No flames intended, it's just my humble opinion.]

    3. Re:You gotta be kidding. by SerpentMage · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Have you tried using OO for anything related to earning money? I use Office for two purposes; writing manuscripts, and investing. And in these two respects OO fails miserably! (And I have tried to use OO)

      WRT to manuscripts I can't keep comments, styles, formating etc straight.

      WRT to investing the OO spreadsheet is way to limited, and to extend the spreadsheet with custom functionality is absolutely painful! OOBasic bites, and their component architecture is anything but simple. OO extensions are a joke when compared to Microsoft Office.

      So in the end OO is not usable except for extremely simple things. I am complaining because after eight years of using Microsoft Office 2000 OO is not close to the capabilities of 2000. Yet I have and use Office 2007, and that is the sad part.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    4. Re:You gotta be kidding. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Right.... GNU Cash is for investing... Right.... Ok, so I ask how am I supposed to calculate the price of an option based on its implied volatility with GNU Cash? Oops, you mean its not an investment tool? Or how about calculating the cost of a hedge where I buy X calls, and Y puts? Ooops...
      Just because GnuCash doesn't have some things built in does not mean it isn't an investment tool. Excel doesn't have them built in either. Like Excel, GnuCash is not a unitasker & can be extended. It is no harder to calculate a price for a commodity using whatever scheme you wish to in GnuCash than it is in Excel. You can build an external calculator in either case (or use an already existing third party calculator & to copy the results in).

      These examples are further trivial in Gnumeric, OO.o Calc, and nearly any other spreadsheet if you don't want to use pre-existing third-party tools. I fail to see any ingrained advantages of Excel for these scenarios, other than your personal familiarity for the tool. That's not an insignificant factor, but it underminds the universality that you try to imbue your personal gripes with.

      OO.o writer is not usable for manuscripts because comments and edits get buggered up. If you want to write without edits, and comments, sure Writer is fine...
      I use comments and change tracking (which is what I assume you mean by "edits") in OO.o Writer. They never get "buggered up" (whatever you mean by that). As before: the only downside with commenting in Writer is that you must either hover over the comments or see ALL comments in a separate pane, which is not as good as MS's interface that has the documents and comments side-by-side (and visually linked to the section they comment on). But OO.o Writer will be getting even this "real soon now."
  3. Exchange by sc0ob5 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When it can sync with exchange servers without having to use webdav I think it will be a contender, until then I don't think so. Still, nice to have it included in the office package I guess, but does it really make a difference?

    1. Re:Exchange by jimicus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But Thunderbird is not a replacement for Outlook.

      Outlook's shared calendar integration, while being a minor thing to most geeks, is one of the major features which get Exchange installed in businesses.

      And Exchange requires Active Directory, which requires a domain driven by Windows Server rather than Samba, so even if you weren't planning to before, you may as well authenticate other systems through that. Then people start looking at other things like Sharepoint and third-party applications which expect a Windows domain, and before you know it you've got an entire infrastructure built around Windows.

      This, ladies and gentlemen, is how Windows became a popular server platform in places where you might otherwise expect to see Unix, Netware or OpenVMS.

  4. Visio would be better by Helmholtz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As many people have already noticed, people don't choose to use Outlook. Somebody else choose to use Exchange, and that means you're using Outlook. There's no way a third party could attempt to compete, since Exchange uses totally proprietary hooks and methods.

    Personally, I think it'd be better to focus on something like a Visio replacement. Use Dia as a starting point, etc.

    --
    RFC2119
  5. How About A Complete Office System by WED+Fan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How about a complete system?

    Open Office System would include:

    • Open Office Server
      • Exchange-like services
      • Office Collaborator - SharePoint killer
      • Calc Server - Spreadsheet Server
      • Office Project - Project Server
    • Word, Calc, Database, Outlook-killer, Presenter
    • Project

    And, all of this would be compatible with MS Office, down to a UI switch that would allow the user to choose the MS style interface.

    All of this would have MONO programmability for "macros". (Not the half-hearted programmability that MS offers, and sorry OO only pays lip service to.)

    You do all of that, my org MIGHT think of switching.

    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
  6. Not what we want by markdavis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apparently the OpenOffice team is not listening to what users want. Most of us don't want a "bundled" Email client to add to the bloat.... we already choose the Email client we want to use. I don't want an IM client, web browser, or music player bundled into it either!!!

    This is what they should be concentrating on:

    1) Faster. Fast loading, faster opening documents, faster saving documents, faster menu response.
    2) Smaller. Higher efficiency. Smaller downloads.
    3) More stable. Better code. Less crashing.
    4) More compatible. With more types of files (for example, docx, wp, svg)
    5) Better documented. End user docs, help, and developer docs.

  7. Wrong prority! by ecbpro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Please this is so wrong, who needs yet another mail client?
    How about first finish cleaning up the OOo code?
    Then make Impress make slides look nice! Graphics output is so ugly I have to be ashamed when I use Impress, drawings in Powerpoint look so much nicer. Why cant they make good anti-aliasing of curves? What is really stupid is that when I export my slides as pdf they look really nice! Oh boy... but no, first they want to add a mail software into an already really slow office suite, THANK YOU!

  8. Re:Excel for investment? _you_ must be kidding by SerpentMage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > A copy of Office Pro costs less than your hourly billing rate, and you have no interest in this debate, so why are you posting?

    Why am I interesting in this debate? Because I had to buy Office 2007! I was holding out for the longest time, hoping that OO would finally allow me to do what I want. The days of Office pro being less than an hourly rate is long gone, just like the dotcom bubble.

    >You should not be using Excel at all. You should be using a proper financial modelling system connected to a relational database, e.g. Business Objects with various add ons. Again, for the level of investing that this necessitates, the cost is unimportant to you.

    I advise that you actually look at the tools that investment banks use. They in fact use Excel! Sure there is back end stuff, but traders and quants like Excel because it lets them very quickly come up with ideas and strategies.

    >Alternatively of course you are just someone playing at investing. In which case your opinion is not particularly valuable. Given how expensive professionals have been getting it so wrong lately, anyone who trusts the financial models of an amateur without access to proper business modelling tools and data...deserves to buy a share in this wonderful toll bridge I just bought that links England and Wales.

    I find it amazing that instead of actually doing a constructive argument you mock me. I could just as easily mock you since you did not even know that professional traders use Excel. Are you a quant? Do you follow the market?

    --

    "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
    "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
  9. No, sometimes OOo really can be that painful. by sgtrock · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wellll, not quite. Take it from a hardcore OOo user. I've used it for my primary office suite for about 5 years in a company that is a pure MS shop. Generally, I do all my work while saving to .odf formats, then do a final export to .doc so people will be able to open it for comments and edits. While things have improved, there are still tasks that are much more clumsy than they need to be in OOo.

    For me, the most painful thing that I've run into recently is partially due to the abysmal documentation that comes bundled with OOo and partially a clumsy implementation. The manuals that are located on the Website really used as the native help system. They are FAR better than the extremely limited and misleading information included in the help files. For example, compare and contrast the two sources for how to handle images.

    Recently I was using OOo 2.2, then 2.3 to work on a short 30 page whitepaper (including the appendixes) for work. I needed to insert just two image files to illustrate a point I needed to make. This is a task I've done plenty of times and it's never as easy as it should be. This last time, for whatever reason, was more than usually painful.

    It took me the better part of a couple of hours to place and size not only the images, but the frames that surrounded them. Time and again I'd click on the image and get just the image and not the frame that bounded it. I wouldn't notice, re-size or move the image, then wonder why I still wasn't getting the text to flow properly around it.

    After much mucking around, I FINALLY got them both where I wanted them, then saved the file as a .doc. Imagine my horror when I opened the document up with MS Word and realized that all of my work had been for naught, BECAUSE OOo HAD DELETED THE IMAGES WHEN SAVING THE DOCUMENT AS MS OFFICE .doc!!!!!!!!!!

    No, this wasn't a PEBKAC problem. I double and triple checked saving the document in Office XP format. I even saved it as .doc, then opened it in OOo just to make sure that it wasn't MS Office misinterpreting the image placements. Nope, still missing.

    To say I was pissed would be an understatement. Oh, sure, I could have exported the file as a .PDF, but then how would my boss be able to make comments and pass it back to me? A read-only format just doesn't work in that case.

    Besides, this is the first time that I can remember that OOo has failed me in such a fundamental way. Lord only knows why, because I sure don't. It does mean that there's no way that I can recommend OOo for even a pilot project here. This kind of basic functionality simply MUST work. First time, every time.

    Will I open a trouble ticket with the OOo team? Maybe, if I can figure out a way to duplicate the problem in a file that's not full of company confidential information. This is a HUGE issue. I can't believe somebody didn't stumble across it during the beta cycles.