We are currently porting SoftMaker Office to Android, and we are not experiencing any extraordinary issues that weren't present when we developed for Windows Mobile. So there are different screen resolutions, different Android OS versions, phones and tablets and netbooks, but a well-designed application should be able to handle that.
I didn't sound dismissive, or at least didn't want to. I simply invited him to track this down, if he has the time and inclination to do that. That's all.
If it takes 12 seconds to start a SoftMaker Office app, there is something seriously wrong with your setup. If you care, start it with "textmaker -debug", and it will create a log file (tmlog.txt) that protocols the launch process. Might be interesting to figure where it's idling.
As for the test documents, is it possible to get them? We take pride in our DOCX and XLSX filters (and their quality has been confirmed by several reviews), so I'd like to check them out.
On 32 bit systems, SoftMaker Office inherits the colors and fonts from the system (if you are running KDE or Gnome). On 64 bit systems, this doesn't work yet.
>> it includes the earlier-promised support for ODF text documents...
And boy does it suck at that. We tried it out, and it is extremely unimpressive. Tracked changes are gone when you save to ODT, nested tables from ODT often lose their text, and object positioning is often wrong. Generally speaking, anything more than simple letters requires manual intervention.
Did they just repurpose the open source converter they commissioned? It certainly is the worst filter I've seen from Microsoft in a long time.
It supports it in the same limited way that OpenOffice.org does comments and tracked changes:
Comments are simply inserted in the text and cannot be applied to a range of text.
Tracked changes don't support many operations that Word 2003 added, such as overlapping or certain types of nested changes, and changes in formatting.
... and this caused us headaches in supporting OpenDocument in our TextMaker word processor. Yes, we solve it by adding proprietary extensions. There, I said it. Now I feel better.
That ODF mirrors OpenOffice.org so closely is no wonder. Before it became the world's "standard" file format, it was simply the storage format of OpenOffice.org. So, it has the same limitations and idiosyncrasies as OpenOffice.org.
How is that different from what's happening now? I stayed at the Hilton in Beijing (supposedly property of an American company) last year, and they of course filtered the net connection. No boobie pages, some political pages didn't work; even SSH connections were impossible for one whole day during my stay.
If you accept OOXML as your organization's file format, you are limiting yourself to Windows. The specs contain many Windows-specific things (for example, EMF and VML) that it's very hard to implement on a non-Windows platform. Why would you as a purchaser want to do that, while you still have a choice in desktop operating systems?
I prefer OpenDocument, and I am putting my money into it: OpenDocument export is finally finished for our TextMaker word processor and will be released in a few days.
ODF mirrors the OpenOffice.org 2.x word processor.
OOXML mirrors the Microsoft Office Word 2007 word processor.
Each format has support for the respective features of each applications and either nothing or not a lot more.
If ODF doesn't support something, it's usually because OpenOffice.org doesn't support it. Two features I know of (because we discussed them in our implementation of the OpenDocument filter):
1. Tracked changes in OpenOffice.org are at a Word 97 level. ODF's support mirrors that. 2. Tables. OpenOffice.org is pretty restricted in what it can do with nested tables, merged cells etc. ODF's support mirrors that.
Your mentioning of 'relatively simple specs' needs to be put into perspective. Yes, the ODF specification is much smaller than OOXML's. But that's because it a) simply refers to other specs ("For more on vector graphics, read the SVG specs") without mentioning what subset of the referred-to spec ODF supports and b) because it simply does not mention many things. What is the default fill color of objects? Quick, tell me from the specs. You can't because it's not documented. You have to use OpenOffice.org as the reference implementation and try it out -- not much different from feeding Word a program-generated.doc file and seeing how it behaves...
RTF is structured in a way that applications can skip the parts they don't understand, and RTF supports saving multiple versions of the same object (say, a graphics frame) in different formats, so that an application can pick the version it understands.
The same thing will happen with ODF as more word processors pick it up. Every word processor has its little 'extra' features for which a different file format has no support. As an example, ODF only supports an extremely simplistic way of 'tracked changes' that mirrors the level of tracked changes support in OpenOffice.org. Another word processor with better tracked changes must either add its own XML tags in the ODF file or drop the extra features. Every WP developer will of course opt for the former, leading over time to variations in the ODF format as supported by different applications.
In other words, ODF will become quite varied over time, as soon as OpenOffice.org is not the only complete implementation anymore.
How do I know? We had to make exactly that design decision a month ago. See www.textmaker.com
Yes. TextMaker 2006 is a totally new release (AutoShapes, Track Changes, comments, better Word filters, OpenDocument import, and a zillion other new things). And, yes, there will soon be a Linux beta (the Windows version of TextMaker 2006 is already shipping).
We'll announce the public beta program in our newsletter and on our web site.
We have one set of source codes that works on all platforms, so OpenDocument import and export will be both in TextMaker 2006 for Windows and TextMaker 2006 for Linux, as well as the other platforms we are supporting.
We are already working on ODF export, and it will be featured in a free servicepack later this year. When this is done, OpenDocument will be added as one of the "default file formats", i.e., you can set TextMaker to create OpenDocument documents by default.
Don't LTSP clients need at least a minimal local storage medium as well? If you cut out the software (OS plus applications), I don't think you can shave away more than $10 of the cost.
BTW, if you are interested in putting TextMaker and PlanMaker into your distribution, contact me by e-mail (martin-k at softmaker.de).
Slashdot Mirror
LibreSSL? LibreOffice?
This reminds me of something...
http://youtu.be/iV3-OdQkXPU
Austria of course
We are currently porting SoftMaker Office to Android, and we are not experiencing any extraordinary issues that weren't present when we developed for Windows Mobile. So there are different screen resolutions, different Android OS versions, phones and tablets and netbooks, but a well-designed application should be able to handle that.
I didn't sound dismissive, or at least didn't want to. I simply invited him to track this down, if he has the time and inclination to do that. That's all.
If it takes 12 seconds to start a SoftMaker Office app, there is something seriously wrong with your setup. If you care, start it with "textmaker -debug", and it will create a log file (tmlog.txt) that protocols the launch process. Might be interesting to figure where it's idling.
As for the test documents, is it possible to get them? We take pride in our DOCX and XLSX filters (and their quality has been confirmed by several reviews), so I'd like to check them out.
On 32 bit systems, SoftMaker Office inherits the colors and fonts from the system (if you are running KDE or Gnome). On 64 bit systems, this doesn't work yet.
Like this? http://www.cio.com/article/514673/Kiss_Microsoft_Office_Goodbye_Three_Alternatives_to_Office_2010
Or this? http://www.infoworld.com/d/applications/better-office-alternative-softmaker-office-bests-openofficeorg-445
And boy does it suck at that. We tried it out, and it is extremely unimpressive. Tracked changes are gone when you save to ODT, nested tables from ODT often lose their text, and object positioning is often wrong. Generally speaking, anything more than simple letters requires manual intervention.
Did they just repurpose the open source converter they commissioned? It certainly is the worst filter I've seen from Microsoft in a long time.
After USB full speed and USB high speed, we now have USB superspeed. What comes next? Hyperspeed? FTL-speed?
Gotta love the marketing hyperbole...
There will be a 2008 version of SoftMaker Office for Linux soon. Beta due in about 2 weeks.
That ODF mirrors OpenOffice.org so closely is no wonder. Before it became the world's "standard" file format, it was simply the storage format of OpenOffice.org. So, it has the same limitations and idiosyncrasies as OpenOffice.org.
Thanks. Added to my road warrior toolchest...
How is that different from what's happening now? I stayed at the Hilton in Beijing (supposedly property of an American company) last year, and they of course filtered the net connection. No boobie pages, some political pages didn't work; even SSH connections were impossible for one whole day during my stay.
TextMaker 2008 Viewer
I prefer OpenDocument, and I am putting my money into it: OpenDocument export is finally finished for our TextMaker word processor and will be released in a few days.
ODF mirrors the OpenOffice.org 2.x word processor.
.doc file and seeing how it behaves...
OOXML mirrors the Microsoft Office Word 2007 word processor.
Each format has support for the respective features of each applications and either nothing or not a lot more.
If ODF doesn't support something, it's usually because OpenOffice.org doesn't support it. Two features I know of (because we discussed them in our implementation of the OpenDocument filter):
1. Tracked changes in OpenOffice.org are at a Word 97 level. ODF's support mirrors that.
2. Tables. OpenOffice.org is pretty restricted in what it can do with nested tables, merged cells etc. ODF's support mirrors that.
Your mentioning of 'relatively simple specs' needs to be put into perspective. Yes, the ODF specification is much smaller than OOXML's. But that's because it a) simply refers to other specs ("For more on vector graphics, read the SVG specs") without mentioning what subset of the referred-to spec ODF supports and b) because it simply does not mention many things. What is the default fill color of objects? Quick, tell me from the specs. You can't because it's not documented. You have to use OpenOffice.org as the reference implementation and try it out -- not much different from feeding Word a program-generated
RTF is structured in a way that applications can skip the parts they don't understand, and RTF supports saving multiple versions of the same object (say, a graphics frame) in different formats, so that an application can pick the version it understands.
The same thing will happen with ODF as more word processors pick it up. Every word processor has its little 'extra' features for which a different file format has no support. As an example, ODF only supports an extremely simplistic way of 'tracked changes' that mirrors the level of tracked changes support in OpenOffice.org. Another word processor with better tracked changes must either add its own XML tags in the ODF file or drop the extra features. Every WP developer will of course opt for the former, leading over time to variations in the ODF format as supported by different applications.
In other words, ODF will become quite varied over time, as soon as OpenOffice.org is not the only complete implementation anymore.
How do I know? We had to make exactly that design decision a month ago. See www.textmaker.com
Be sure to use the ddrescue version that works with a logfile, so that you don't have to write down the blocks that you could rescue.
You shouldn't use past tense :-) Early next week, there will be public betas of TextMaker 2006 for Linux and PlanMaker 2006 for Linux.
Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH
Yes, the mobile versions of TextMaker support OpenDocument, too. In fact, they have all the features of their desktop counterparts.
Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH
Yes. TextMaker 2006 is a totally new release (AutoShapes, Track Changes, comments, better Word filters, OpenDocument import, and a zillion other new things). And, yes, there will soon be a Linux beta (the Windows version of TextMaker 2006 is already shipping).
We'll announce the public beta program in our newsletter and on our web site.
Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH
We have one set of source codes that works on all platforms, so OpenDocument import and export will be both in TextMaker 2006 for Windows and TextMaker 2006 for Linux, as well as the other platforms we are supporting.
Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH
We are already working on ODF export, and it will be featured in a free servicepack later this year. When this is done, OpenDocument will be added as one of the "default file formats", i.e., you can set TextMaker to create OpenDocument documents by default.
Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH
BTW, if you are interested in putting TextMaker and PlanMaker into your distribution, contact me by e-mail (martin-k at softmaker.de).
Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH
Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH
Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH