hmm-hmm. which version of oo.org ? since 2.0 oo.org uses native widgets and 2.0.1 definitely can use qt widgets, so it should look exactly as your other desktop. additionally, 2.0.2 will have changeable iconsets, and two that match major desktops are available (industrial is gnome-like and crystal is, well, more like kde:) )
if you have problems like that with recent versions of oo.org, check what might be the problem, as it is not supposed to behave like that.
btw, you can always choose manually which widgeting system to use (you can choose between qt/gtk/generic, with generic being the one previously available and shipped with oo.org)
note that gp was referring to ms accusing opensource development model of bringing problems that they themselves have, not amount of the code. you can code backdor in far less lines of code.
I'm really not that fast a typist - I do about 60 WPM on average - yet OOo doesn't keep up with my typing. I can usually get through 3/4 of a line before the letters appear on screen. Menus are equally slow - it takes about two seconds from the time I hit Alt+Letter to when the menu is done drawing.
ugh. that should not be happening. do you have problems with other applications ? any spyware or whatever is the trendy thing to have nowadays ? which oo.org version ? have you tried to reproduce this in a fresh user account ?
if you can relieably reproduce this, submit a bugreport. once loaded, oo.org is faster than most humans:)
what exactly ? i'm not a programmer, but from what i have heard, oo.org supposedly has a much better model overall (though it is not so easy to use) and much broader access to internals. and that is not counting the ability to use basic/java/javascript/python and, i think, ruby and whatnot for macros.
multilanguage suport [I use Español],
this is probably in the same cathegory as dict and other native language components. i believe es community was pretty active in oo.org, wasn't it ?
change tracking, notes,
agreed;)
overal confort 'feeling',
um, what ?:) isn't that just because you have used one more than another ?
versatility[Excel],
my requirements for a spreadshet are very, very minimalistic, so i can not comment much on this, though i have heard that excel still has more functionality. i also have heard that gnumeric beats them both:)
Formula support[excel],
hmm. care to elaborate ? i have heard exactly the opposite, meaning that oo.org formula is much better both in functionality and compatibility
speed, memory (I hate having to load a spreadsheet+drawing program+presentation creator+word processor when trying to write a letter).
this has been a problem for quite some time, and has gotten much better lately. and work on making oo.org faster continues by modularizing it even further.
btw, you do not load everything to write a letter - only components that are needed are loaded (though it still is not modularized as much as maybe is possible), meaning there are basic components and then writer part is loaded only if you write text document, calc part only if you edit a spreadsheet and so on.
and btw, draw and impress share a lot of internals, impress is based on draw;)
well, maybe it isn't possible with current resources to create an db frontend app that would be both easy to use and would produce a good technical solution ?
it's similar to a lot of complex software solutions - they are either easy to configure, or lack flexibility.
we probably will reach a state when you can just throw together some fields and software optimises queries, tables and whole db structure for you in amounts where it will not be possible for a human to reliably follow internal structures of the database itself - but that will be around the time when software will be written and maintained by another software.
well, i am an oo.org user for quite some time. currently i can remember two features that i still miss in oo.org;)
1. vertical selection of text;
2. ability to display information about changes and comments permanently besides text
these are in oo.org issuezilla for a very long time and they both would help me a lot. of course, then there's million things that are a lot better in oo.org than in msoffice, but that wasn't the question;)
well, you could create a simple script that would launch needed apps or documents. something like
soffice ~/docs/river1/*.od* amarok -play (or whatever is the correct commandline switch:) ) gimp ~/docs/river1/*.jpg
then launch this from a desktop you want all the apps to be on. using some additional switches you can also position documents in particular locations on the desltop etc. of course, this isn't very easy and is not feasible if things change often enough.
i have created some scripts like these for myself, but they tend to change very rarely, so this approach works for me.
actually, oo.org had a couple on novel concepts (like toolbars changing upon context), but they were changed to more mso-like because some of new users complained about the differences from the concepts they were already familiar with.
exactly what i thought. koffice should not create it's own desktop, but instead use what is offered by kde already (maybe integrating in pager thingies slightly more, maybe interacting with the desktop through superkaramba).
it's disadvantage (close ties with kde, which have so far limited it to *x only) could be turned in serious advantage over other office suites that do not have such a connection with desktop environment (ms actually already are using methods to integrate with os better by reusing components which allows to increase startup speed and reduce memory load)
one disadvantage to using print procedure might be loss of some information that can be achieved only by direct export - clickable bookmarks, table of contents entries etc.
oo.org also seems to support some sort of forms in pdf documents.
either you are incredibly uninformed, or you really were trolling. i'll try to respond to some of things you said, though my goal is not to convert you - my goal is to give you food for thoughts and make you research this topic at least slightly more.
As I see it governments will have a choice of choosing between two formats both of which are in XML, both of which have a license attached to them, one format regulated by a bunch of bureaucrats with an anti-corporate agenda, the other a dedicated commercial operation (ie microsoft).
you have mixed up so many things, i am pretty sure this was intentional. let's break it up, will we ?
As I see it governments will have a choice of choosing between two formats
that i can mostly agree with (though there will be other formats for other purposes, of course)
both of which are in XML
and here we have a first problem. you are seriously oversimplifying this thing (which is what ms are doing...). xml is only a container, which, in microsofts case, can contain proprietary objects. xml itself means very little, you have to look deeper than that.
both of which have a license attached to them, one format regulated by a bunch of bureaucrats with an anti-corporate agenda, the other a dedicated commercial operation (ie microsoft)
wtf ? this sounds pretty crappy. first, of course they have a license. let's just say that ms windows and linux both have license attached, thus they must be equal in this aspect. have you noticed that - oh my - licenses differ ? "bunch of bureaucrats with an anti-corporate agenda" ? i'd like to note that we must remind mcnealy that he must be anto-corporate. seriously. oh, and ms also is participating in oasis, so they must be "bureaucrats with an anti-corporate agenda" (or maybe we can call the "a bunch" in a single entity ?)
Ultimately they have no control of either format, if they wanted something changed in the format they'd have to bargain with Oasis in the same way they'd have to bargain with Microsoft.
um. no. the biggest gain is that there is no single controlling entity which could change the format specifications for their own good. and i suppose anybody can join oasis.
The commercial reality of it is simply this, Microsoft has poorly supported its formats on other operating systems because of the same reasons why every other vendor of software, drivers etc etc has poorly supported Linux and Mac.... numbers.... the numbers are in Windows, if you're making a product for the desktop that's always going to be your target market, where you stand to make or lose the most money. If you have finite resources and time (which is always the case) you'll sacrafice support for other operating systems in favour of Windows every time. There's no conspiracy here, it's just reality.
well, maybe you have missed here. in this case you have yourself shown why exactly current situation is extremly bad. you see, if the format is really open, there is _no need_ for ms to support linux, mac, beos. yeah, and that is what ms fears. because, if file format is really open and standardised, somebody can compete with ms on a relatively level playing field, on a basis of features and quality, not ability to catch microsoft. that would allow somebody to compete on their platform, but, more importantly, that would also allow competitors to use another platforms (thus ms would lose the ability to fight their competitors in office software space by abusing their operating system stronghold). that would result in a good support for file formats on all platforms, which would not be dependant on a single company.
If I was making a decision in a government body I'd choose the format with the broadest support
can you work both for ms and gov simultaneously ?;)
with the most amount features for the handicapped.
what ? care to elaborate what "features for handicapped" has ms office xml format over opendocu
"Frankly, I don't see much of a problem with Microsoft. When it comes to making file formats accessible and interchangeable, MS has behaved relatively well."
you're joking, right ? msoffice formats are well known for extremly bad interoperability even with other ms products (including the same product on another system...), visio, msproject binary formats are nightmare... these are just the first that come to my mind, there probably are much, much more examples of ms confining interoperabillity/compatibility/openness of file formats.
it's just the way they are used to doing business - they had to fight office file formats battle before, so they are bringin this battle to new competitors. of course, it also is a way for them to keep marketshare and restrict expansion of competing products, so struggling to keep open formats from bwcoming a reality isn't exactly a surprise.
also they are not the only ones to use this approach trolltech does the same with qt. i believe this to be a normal process and somehow don't see the BIG problem some people surely have noticed.
the only drawback is possibly smaller interest from developers of commercial software - but is that an 'evilness' promoting decision then ? anyway, in many cases we hear "there is no trustworthy company by get support from !". if there is such a company (mysqlab/trolltech) to get support for commercial development - that is bad again...
btw, if you have.doc that you are unable to open but the files themselves are not damaged, try opening them with latest oo.org version (2.0.2rc4 for now). if you still have problems, submit a report alongside with the file to oo.org developers. you might just get to your data:)
in the last year i am getting more and more documents in both sx* and opendocument (actually, more the first one). not because sender knew i had oo.org, not because we talked about formats - just like that. from commercial entities i know about, ~ 80% use oo.org on at least 50% of their machines. in some cases it is installed alongside msoffice, but a lot of companies just get one or two msoffice licenses for gateway purposes if they get a document that oo.org can not handle. it somewhat surprises even me (i've been using oo.org exclusively for some 4 years now):)
if you really are interested in this, you probably already have found references in this thread, but anyway;) it would be woth checking out http://www.zoneminder.com/
no. not yet, at least:) first, linux as a desktop has to get more mainstream, thus it is the best interests of lin companies to improve it's availability & ease of yse out of box.
desktop as such (home users) is going to turn into a commodity sooner or later, so that isn't a market to fight through a bleeding nose - but it is a market that will influent business buying decisions. how could you compete in (future) low margin but influential market ? provide a free product that everybody will use and then :
most companies that have reached some particular size prefer support contracts for most if not all systems they deploy - and this includes both hardware and software. additionally, gov institutions are even more demanding in this front. big systems, management of large it environments, support contracts, consulting for system deployment and usage - this is the market of the future as software itself will turn into commodity for most purposes. this is what ibm/novell/redhat want to do. and that is what ms does not want to see, so they are squeezing what they can (at the same time relaxing princing and other requirements where required) while current situation - elitist approach to what realistically is commodity software and monopolistic privileges.
it is possible that at one point linux desktop will get at the state when it will be beneficial to restrict one or other aspect to gain on support costs, but that might be possible only in a very short time, because somebody else will rush to offer beter product to the consumer and you will be left without software/support/whatever contract.
desktop linux have not been in the spotlight for big companies up until recently, but if you compare hype and actual situation five years, three years or only an year ago, you will see that things are changing rapidly even for such a dynamic field as it.
Slashdot Mirror
hmm-hmm. which version of oo.org ? :) )
since 2.0 oo.org uses native widgets and 2.0.1 definitely can use qt widgets, so it should look exactly as your other desktop. additionally, 2.0.2 will have changeable iconsets, and two that match major desktops are available (industrial is gnome-like and crystal is, well, more like kde
if you have problems like that with recent versions of oo.org, check what might be the problem, as it is not supposed to behave like that.
btw, you can always choose manually which widgeting system to use (you can choose between qt/gtk/generic, with generic being the one previously available and shipped with oo.org)
i think they will be shipped with 2.0.2. 2.0.2rc4 has an ability choose iconset and the one named "Industrial" seems similar to those icons
in oo.org you can define language as part of character style, so that should work without problems (at least i have done this with latvian/english)
note that gp was referring to ms accusing opensource development model of bringing problems that they themselves have, not amount of the code.
you can code backdor in far less lines of code.
I'm really not that fast a typist - I do about 60 WPM on average - yet OOo doesn't keep up with my typing. I can usually get through 3/4 of a line before the letters appear on screen. Menus are equally slow - it takes about two seconds from the time I hit Alt+Letter to when the menu is done drawing.
:)
ugh. that should not be happening. do you have problems with other applications ? any spyware or whatever is the trendy thing to have nowadays ?
which oo.org version ? have you tried to reproduce this in a fresh user account ?
if you can relieably reproduce this, submit a bugreport. once loaded, oo.org is faster than most humans
Aside of that I still believe Microsoft Office 2000 is better than OpenOffice 2.0 at thesaurus, dictionary,
;)
:) isn't that just because you have used one more than another ?
:)
;)
that probably depends on language used, as oo.org has made quite a lot of progress in this area (and in a lot of languages) - see
http://native-lang.openoffice.org/ and http://l10n.openoffice.org/
macros,
what exactly ? i'm not a programmer, but from what i have heard, oo.org supposedly has a much better model overall (though it is not so easy to use) and much broader access to internals. and that is not counting the ability to use basic/java/javascript/python and, i think, ruby and whatnot for macros.
multilanguage suport [I use Español],
this is probably in the same cathegory as dict and other native language components. i believe es community was pretty active in oo.org, wasn't it ?
change tracking, notes,
agreed
overal confort 'feeling',
um, what ?
versatility[Excel],
my requirements for a spreadshet are very, very minimalistic, so i can not comment much on this, though i have heard that excel still has more functionality. i also have heard that gnumeric beats them both
Formula support[excel],
hmm. care to elaborate ? i have heard exactly the opposite, meaning that oo.org formula is much better both in functionality and compatibility
speed, memory (I hate having to load a spreadsheet+drawing program+presentation creator+word processor when trying to write a letter).
this has been a problem for quite some time, and has gotten much better lately. and work on making oo.org faster continues by modularizing it even further.
btw, you do not load everything to write a letter - only components that are needed are loaded (though it still is not modularized as much as maybe is possible), meaning there are basic components and then writer part is loaded only if you write text document, calc part only if you edit a spreadsheet and so on.
and btw, draw and impress share a lot of internals, impress is based on draw
oo.org base also has .odb format. using embedded hsqldb, i think.l
http://dba.openoffice.org/miscellaneous/dba20.htm
http://www.hsqldb.org/web/openoffice.html
well, maybe it isn't possible with current resources to create an db frontend app that would be both easy to use and would produce a good technical solution ?
it's similar to a lot of complex software solutions - they are either easy to configure, or lack flexibility.
we probably will reach a state when you can just throw together some fields and software optimises queries, tables and whole db structure for you in amounts where it will not be possible for a human to reliably follow internal structures of the database itself - but that will be around the time when software will be written and maintained by another software.
well, i am an oo.org user for quite some time. currently i can remember two features that i still miss in oo.org ;)
;)
1. vertical selection of text;
2. ability to display information about changes and comments permanently besides text
these are in oo.org issuezilla for a very long time and they both would help me a lot.
of course, then there's million things that are a lot better in oo.org than in msoffice, but that wasn't the question
actually, outlook express is included with windows, so it does not quite pass as 'free' - it is bundled (same as wmp, ie and other stuff in windows)
well, you could create a simple script that would launch needed apps or documents.
:) )
something like
soffice ~/docs/river1/*.od*
amarok -play (or whatever is the correct commandline switch
gimp ~/docs/river1/*.jpg
then launch this from a desktop you want all the apps to be on.
using some additional switches you can also position documents in particular locations on the desltop etc.
of course, this isn't very easy and is not feasible if things change often enough.
i have created some scripts like these for myself, but they tend to change very rarely, so this approach works for me.
actually, oo.org had a couple on novel concepts (like toolbars changing upon context), but they were changed to more mso-like because some of new users complained about the differences from the concepts they were already familiar with.
exactly what i thought. koffice should not create it's own desktop, but instead use what is offered by kde already (maybe integrating in pager thingies slightly more, maybe interacting with the desktop through superkaramba).
it's disadvantage (close ties with kde, which have so far limited it to *x only) could be turned in serious advantage over other office suites that do not have such a connection with desktop environment (ms actually already are using methods to integrate with os better by reusing components which allows to increase startup speed and reduce memory load)
well, have you reported crashes and glitches to oo.org team ?
yeah, there are some, but it is developed in a pretty nice speed.
one disadvantage to using print procedure might be loss of some information that can be achieved only by direct export - clickable bookmarks, table of contents entries etc.
oo.org also seems to support some sort of forms in pdf documents.
either you are incredibly uninformed, or you really were trolling.
;)
i'll try to respond to some of things you said, though my goal is not to convert you - my goal is to give you food for thoughts and make you research this topic at least slightly more.
As I see it governments will have a choice of choosing between two formats both of which are in XML, both of which have a license attached to them, one format regulated by a bunch of bureaucrats with an anti-corporate agenda, the other a dedicated commercial operation (ie microsoft).
you have mixed up so many things, i am pretty sure this was intentional. let's break it up, will we ?
As I see it governments will have a choice of choosing between two formats
that i can mostly agree with (though there will be other formats for other purposes, of course)
both of which are in XML
and here we have a first problem. you are seriously oversimplifying this thing (which is what ms are doing...). xml is only a container, which, in microsofts case, can contain proprietary objects. xml itself means very little, you have to look deeper than that.
both of which have a license attached to them, one format regulated by a bunch of bureaucrats with an anti-corporate agenda, the other a dedicated commercial operation (ie microsoft)
wtf ? this sounds pretty crappy. first, of course they have a license. let's just say that ms windows and linux both have license attached, thus they must be equal in this aspect. have you noticed that - oh my - licenses differ ?
"bunch of bureaucrats with an anti-corporate agenda" ? i'd like to note that we must remind mcnealy that he must be anto-corporate. seriously. oh, and ms also is participating in oasis, so they must be "bureaucrats with an anti-corporate agenda" (or maybe we can call the "a bunch" in a single entity ?)
Ultimately they have no control of either format, if they wanted something changed in the format they'd have to bargain with Oasis in the same way they'd have to bargain with Microsoft.
um. no. the biggest gain is that there is no single controlling entity which could change the format specifications for their own good. and i suppose anybody can join oasis.
The commercial reality of it is simply this, Microsoft has poorly supported its formats on other operating systems because of the same reasons why every other vendor of software, drivers etc etc has poorly supported Linux and Mac.... numbers.... the numbers are in Windows, if you're making a product for the desktop that's always going to be your target market, where you stand to make or lose the most money. If you have finite resources and time (which is always the case) you'll sacrafice support for other operating systems in favour of Windows every time. There's no conspiracy here, it's just reality.
well, maybe you have missed here. in this case you have yourself shown why exactly current situation is extremly bad. you see, if the format is really open, there is _no need_ for ms to support linux, mac, beos. yeah, and that is what ms fears. because, if file format is really open and standardised, somebody can compete with ms on a relatively level playing field, on a basis of features and quality, not ability to catch microsoft. that would allow somebody to compete on their platform, but, more importantly, that would also allow competitors to use another platforms (thus ms would lose the ability to fight their competitors in office software space by abusing their operating system stronghold). that would result in a good support for file formats on all platforms, which would not be dependant on a single company.
If I was making a decision in a government body I'd choose the format with the broadest support
can you work both for ms and gov simultaneously ?
with the most amount features for the handicapped.
what ? care to elaborate what "features for handicapped" has ms office xml format over opendocu
"Frankly, I don't see much of a problem with Microsoft. When it comes to making file formats accessible and interchangeable, MS has behaved relatively well."
you're joking, right ? msoffice formats are well known for extremly bad interoperability even with other ms products (including the same product on another system...), visio, msproject binary formats are nightmare... these are just the first that come to my mind, there probably are much, much more examples of ms confining interoperabillity/compatibility/openness of file formats.
it's just the way they are used to doing business - they had to fight office file formats battle before, so they are bringin this battle to new competitors. of course, it also is a way for them to keep marketshare and restrict expansion of competing products, so struggling to keep open formats from bwcoming a reality isn't exactly a surprise.
also they are not the only ones to use this approach trolltech does the same with qt.
i believe this to be a normal process and somehow don't see the BIG problem some people surely have noticed.
the only drawback is possibly smaller interest from developers of commercial software - but is that an 'evilness' promoting decision then ? anyway, in many cases we hear "there is no trustworthy company by get support from !". if there is such a company (mysqlab/trolltech) to get support for commercial development - that is bad again...
for a relatively recent version of oo.org you could also try one of live cds.
;) ) you can file an issue and then povide the document to developer when requested.
unless the content is _extremly_ confidential (or embarrassing
btw, if you have .doc that you are unable to open but the files themselves are not damaged, try opening them with latest oo.org version (2.0.2rc4 for now). if you still have problems, submit a report alongside with the file to oo.org developers. you might just get to your data :)
in the last year i am getting more and more documents in both sx* and opendocument (actually, more the first one). not because sender knew i had oo.org, not because we talked about formats - just like that. from commercial entities i know about, ~ 80% use oo.org on at least 50% of their machines. in some cases it is installed alongside msoffice, but a lot of companies just get one or two msoffice licenses for gateway purposes if they get a document that oo.org can not handle. it somewhat surprises even me (i've been using oo.org exclusively for some 4 years now) :)
somehow this thread remined me of this :, 00.html
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/1,7340,L-3194238
i'm just reading through this thread and remnding everybody who haven't yet noticed ;)
http://www.zoneminder.com/
if you really are interested in this, you probably already have found references in this thread, but anyway ;)
it would be woth checking out http://www.zoneminder.com/
no. not yet, at least :)
first, linux as a desktop has to get more mainstream, thus it is the best interests of lin companies to improve it's availability & ease of yse out of box.
desktop as such (home users) is going to turn into a commodity sooner or later, so that isn't a market to fight through a bleeding nose - but it is a market that will influent business buying decisions.
how could you compete in (future) low margin but influential market ? provide a free product that everybody will use and then :
most companies that have reached some particular size prefer support contracts for most if not all systems they deploy - and this includes both hardware and software. additionally, gov institutions are even more demanding in this front.
big systems, management of large it environments, support contracts, consulting for system deployment and usage - this is the market of the future as software itself will turn into commodity for most purposes. this is what ibm/novell/redhat want to do. and that is what ms does not want to see, so they are squeezing what they can (at the same time relaxing princing and other requirements where required) while current situation - elitist approach to what realistically is commodity software and monopolistic privileges.
it is possible that at one point linux desktop will get at the state when it will be beneficial to restrict one or other aspect to gain on support costs, but that might be possible only in a very short time, because somebody else will rush to offer beter product to the consumer and you will be left without software/support/whatever contract.
desktop linux have not been in the spotlight for big companies up until recently, but if you compare hype and actual situation five years, three years or only an year ago, you will see that things are changing rapidly even for such a dynamic field as it.