OpenOffice.org Project Update
November 9th, 2002 by Sam Hiser in
OpenOffice.org ("OOo")--the development project behind OpenOffice.org 1.0 ("OOo1"), the open-source office suite--declared its 2nd birthday on October 13th, 2002, and the tone was optimistic. On that day, the Community announced 8.5 million binary downloads tracked over the life of the Project, with about 5 million of those coming after the launch of version 1.0 in May 2002.
These numbers caused the trade and open-source press to prick up their ears sharply, a contrast to the laconic well-wishing that colored the 1.0 release a few months prior. The numbers also stimulated some FUD from the direction of Washington State. So there is a palpable sense of obligation in the Community to the large amount of work ahead, as well as great anticipation.
OpenOffice.org 1.0, the software, seems to have struck a chord based on the combination of its low price (free) and its promise of file format compatibility and continuity. The suite allows users to open and save-as the file format of the leading suite (from Word 6.0/97/2000/XP). In addition, OOo1's well-documented implementation of the XML file format offers guaranteed access to work created in the OOo suite (since future changes to the XML standard, properly implemented, will always be continuously accessible if not backward-compatible).
While OOo1 download-by-country statistics resemble any chart of GDP per capita (or total number of PCs per 1,000 people) you've ever seen in The Economist, the countries we hear about at the Project level that are most active in planned adoptions are extremely motivated to move. There are installations in place or in planning stages in the German Bundestag, the Maltese Prime Minister's office, to name just two. The governments of Italy, England, Canada, China, Peru, Chile, Costa Rica and many other countries have taken a view that these platforms can help them manage and control both smaller, more efficient IT budgets and establish for the first time a path to universal access to public documents.
Not surprisingly, other early adopters of OOo1 are the same kinds of people and organizations who were early supporters of Linux: military, security and police agencies. I'll never forget a New Jersey State Trooper's depth of interest in the project when I spoke with him at LinuxWorld NY, back in February 2002. The guy still had his gun on while we chatted, and he was clearly a serious user. He got more utility out of his Palm device in front of me that day than anyone I have ever seen tapping away on the subway. These adopters today are agencies with urgency: those who pay attention to the quality of their tools, who need infrastructure that works and who care about their budgets. So it's no shock at all when we notice that the US Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) is a dedicated user of open-source software. Furthermore, it is rumored that the Office of Homeland Security does not use IIS or Outlook.
There is no question that governments and agencies get open source, Linux and OOo1 at the IT level. In the UK, for example, early adopters of these tools are the Central Scottish Police and Scotland Yard.
Against this backdrop, the question of when corporations will wake up to open source is germane. But they are--at least in the City that Never Sleeps--evaluating open-source tools, including Linux, OpenOffice.org 1.0/StarOffice 6.0 and thin-client arrangements. Dan Ravicher, a hip intellectual property lawyer here at Patterson Belknap, NY, along with Jim Gleason, President of NYLUG.org, hosted a breakfast for folks to chat about how Disney, Morgan Stanley, Dreamworks, Credit Suisse First Boston, Merrill Lynch and others are hot on open source.
The reasons companies to-date seem deaf to the words "open source" and "Linux" are multifaceted. Large companies can't simply let employees install free software: they need to reorganize their IT and legal departments to deal with technical and licensing integration into complex heterogeneous environments. But another major factor is that their site licenses for things like proprietary office suites have time on them, say two years left to run. That means the 150-more seats added in the new desk at a Brown Brothers Harriman costs them next to nothing--until their existing site licenses expire (for those who did not take to "software assurance").
So the corporations are planning, in that inimitable way they do. A large investment bank I speak with thinks that Linux might one day deserve about a 20% share of their desktop infrastructure, if only to keep their vendors honest. I think they will more likely see worker-bee productivity gains and penetration more like 50%. It's Cluetrain all over again, but look for the migration stats to favor Linux & Co. in the glass house in '03-'05. These things take time. Red Hat, with a new arrangement on systems integration with IBM, should do well in this spell.
So it's almost needless to say that rave reviews about OOo1 are beginning to appear. Let's face it, people expect this software to be much more dog-eared than it really is at the price. Conversely, users (particularly LaTeX users) love to tell us how dog-eared the suite looks, especially the fonts. And we are pleased to hear it, because the OOo Community is extremely open to (and dependent upon) constructive criticism, the more specific, the better.
OOo sees the next few builds focusing on smoothing bug fixes and integration with other suites and environments. Developer build 643, just released, already looks and feels noticeably slicker on Linux, although it is suitably unstable.
Figure 2. OOo1 Writer. Nice fonts!
An effort is being made to coordinate if not standardize file formats with the other open-source office suites. The Community is extremely excited about the work going into the OpenOffice.org 1.0 for Mac OS X, with a developer build now available in beta that is sufficient for daily use. The OS X port, led by Ed Peterlin and his group of independent developers, is important to OOo because of the passion of the Mac user community. We are likely to get lots of sparks flying and good cheer from Mac enthusiasts when the final version is announced.
This current build for OS X runs on X11, and Peterlin has outlined a path to a Cocoa build with full Aqua look and feel. He estimates it will be out in 12 to 18 months. Anyone who has Mac and UNIX skills, step right up and help us accelerate this schedule.
There has been a lot of discussion over the need for a groupware or PIM solution to go into OOo. The present thinking of the OOo Groupware Project, led by Gary Frederick, is to not reinvent the wheel but to fit it around open standards like iCal, Mozilla Mail and perhaps others. They want to find a good open-source server and integrate with other existing groupware software.
Ximian has already been integrating OOo1 into their Red Carpet distribution environment and are looking into integrating OOo1 more suavely into GNOME. I believe integrating OOo1 with Evolution could be a really neat solution for Linux, and we completely support the idea. But that leaves a few other OS platforms in the OOo constellation unaddressed (Windows, Solaris, Mac OS X, FreeBSD, to name only the available platforms). If OOo and Ximian could work together to bring Evolution alongside OOo1 to Win32, then we'd have a goer.
No doubt, too, Mitch Kapor's Chandler is interesting. Although it's no Outlook killer, integrating Chandler with OOo1 could create an office suite-cum-PIM solution that's popular in the middle and lesser developed markets, where OOo currently is thriving.
OOo is working with some interesting partners on integration. OEone--a fledgling creator of a full-function, media-enabled Linux desktop and contributor of some key parts of the Mozilla code--is working on some groupware integration with OOo1.
On the OOo Project side, the Community is focusing on building its global native-language communities, in which members converse in local languages. Six non-English-speaking "Langs" are going to date: French, German, Brazilian Portuguese, Dutch, Spanish and Italian. We'd love to have others: Vietnamese, Chinese, Polish, Russian--the sky's the limit as long as there is motivation, and we know there's interest. Speak to project leaders, Louis Suarez-Potts and Guy Capra, about forming a new Lang in you neighborhood today.
The Porting Project, led by Kevin Hendricks and Martin Hollmichel, is extremely important to the overall Project and looks to be supporting more platforms than were originally imagined.
Ports of OpenOffice.org 1.0 now available include:
Mac OS X v10.2 (PowerPC)
Solaris 7 & 8 (Sparc & Intel x86)
Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP (Intel x86)
Linux (Intel x86 & PowerPC)
FreeBSD
Ports in development include:
Linux (Alpha)
Linux (ARM)
IRIX
Tru64 (Alpha)
NetBSD (Sparc)
OS/2
VMS
BeOS
Language porting activities are also critical to making OOo1 available and useful in the new and rapidly growing markets around the world that are not as yet saturated with PCs and office software. New language porting initiatives come to our attention frequently. We encourage the local developers responsible for the language porting to form a Native-Lang web site and start a community conversation that increases the tensile strength of OOo's awesome motley fabric.
The QA Project is growing, and its role in checking out issues and bug triage has never been more critical to us. We would love to see more folks come on board to assist here.
The Marketing Project, led by Nick Richards and myself, is working on expanding global impact through guerilla methods and massive locally based communications and support efforts. Nick is just now taking over from Josh Berkus, who made critical contributions throughout the Project in its early growth phase. Nick is articulating a fresh vision for the future of OOo and its marketing that will be apparent to Project watchers 2003.
Marketing is always expanding its "MarCon" (Marketing Communications) network of members around the world who manage press release information flow, so the project is synchronized on messages in all the necessary languages. We are also looking at P2P distribution as an option for when download demand gets urgent.
Pick a project and come aboard.
Presently, our bundling news is positive. Red Hat 8.0 and SuSE 8.1 have packaged OOo1 in their respective standard editions, and Ximian is including OOo1 in its Red Carpet update and dependency interface (which I personally enjoy). Lindows OS has both OOo1 and StarOffice 6.0 in its "look-Ma-no-hands" click-and-run service. If I've left anyone out, please let me know. Xandros is known to have something brewing, too. And OEone's offering (above) will be on the horizon soon.
The community of Linux distributors is one group I, personally, would like to monitor more closely from OOo. Not only do you have sophisticated users internally who have the ability to contribute productively on the bug front and with integration, but OOo would like to track the Linux distribution's' own release schedules more closely so that we can plan our own release schedule with mindfulness. Please see me after class, and we'll put some people together.
The Community could use more testimonials like Verizon's, where they are saving many millions of dollars by switching to Linux and OOo1/SO6, among other things for their system developers. Please don't hesitate to tell us if you are using OpenOffice.org 1.0.
Also, we would love to have some true ROI data and anecdotes to use to support the argument for adoption. We are happy to protect identities if we use your data.
One final request: downloaders and installers of OpenOffice.org 1.0, please link to the OOo User Survey when the installation wizard prompts you. The information you give is all optional, and it's really helpful to the Community's effort to improve the software and respond to user needs.
Come and visit our booth at LinuxWorld Expo in New York on January 22-24, 2003, where OpenOffice.org will share an area in the dot-org Pavilion with the Linux Terminal Server Project and quite possibly a pod in the Sun booth. We enjoy hearing from you.
OpenOffice.org 1.0 is dual-licensed under the LGPL and SISSL and is free to all users. It can be downloaded at www.openoffice.org. There, you'll find useful documentation, links to Howtos and mailing-list based support.
Enterprises and educational institutions might look to Sun's StarOffice 6.0 for value-added features and contractual support.
Sam Hiser is a contributor to the Marketing Project and member of the Release Committee of OpenOffice.org. He teaches middle-school English in the Bronx and consults on desktop productivity in media, financial services and education.
Special Magazine Offer -- 2 Free Trial Issues!
Receive 2 free trial issues of Linux Journal as well as instant online access to current and past issues. There's NO RISK and NO OBLIGATION to buy. CLICK HERE for offer
Linux Journal: delivering readers the advice and inspiration they need to get the most out of their Linux systems since 1994.
Sorry, offer available in the US only. International orders, click here.
Subscribe now!
The Latest
Featured Videos
Email is one of the least private and least secure forms of communication, although few people realize this. MixMaster is one way to allow secure, anonymous communication even over the very public medium of email. This tutorial will get you started with MixMaster quickly and easily.
In case you were wondering about the fun side of Linux World Expo, we thought we'd give you a peek at our shenanigans. We at Linux Journal love what we do so much, that we can't help but have a ball wherever we go.
Recently Popular
From the Magazine
September 2008, #173
Feeling a bit like a Thermian? Never give up, never surrender! Someday, you could go from underdog to top dog. Just take a look at a few of the underdogs we highlight in this issue: Mutt, djbdns, Nginix, Gentoo, Xara and the program voted mostly likely to fail just a few years back—Firefox. If Firefox not radical enough for you, check out Chef Marcel's column for some more alternatives. Having trouble mapping your program data to your relational database? If so, Rueven Lerner shows you some tricks in his At The Forge column.
Need to run GUI applications on your server in the next state? In his Paranoid Penguin column, Mick Bauer shows you how to do it securely. Kyle Rankin keeps hacking and slashing and shows you a few split screen secrets you may not be familiar with. Finally, we all know what happens next February, but only Doc knows what happens afterward.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Technorati







OpenOffice.org Loads FAST now
On January 30th, 2004 Anonymous says:
OpenOffice.org was taking a very long time to open empty, load a document (even the default text template) and a Data Source.
A lot of internet searching suggested the
Re: OpenOffice.org Loads FAST now
On May 28th, 2004 Anonymous says:
I am also facing same problem.
I am using RedHat 9.
if anybody have solution please help me.
sravan.n@hamarashehar.com
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 26th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Please forgive me if this is a dumb question, but i had occasion to actually use a word processor yesterday to write out a medication schedule and in the course of listing the six doctors and their precriptions in two columns (not using column mode but just using tabs (the very old fashioned way), well it was just a one page document after all... In any event i wanted to column block cut and paste like we could do with the 80k Wordstar 4.0 or Word Perfect 5.0. Couldn't find out how to do it.
1. Can it even be done with the dot addressable windows stuff nowadays?
2. If it can't, is it something that the OpenOfficeOrg community can handle?
3. If it can't be done, that's okay too, i'll just keep using WordStar 4.0 which does have a column block and paste. It is an 80,000 byte DOS assembly language word processor program for those of you under 40 years of age...
4. any answers can be e'ed to BrennanF@PacBell.net
Thanks in advance for any comments (good or bad)
best wishes to the OpenOffice community.
Real desktop integration (KDE, GTK)
On November 22nd, 2002 Anonymous says:
While OO is a great product, with lots of features, it is in dire need of a modern look and feel to be adapted by potential windoes converts. If OO looked like other GTK or KDE apps using one or the orher of those widget sets, I beleve that the product would look signifigantly more professional. This effort would have three effects:
Office apps are the bred and butter of most desktop users. The word processor, spreadsheet or presentation app are what people spend most of their working day looking at. Looking good IS important!
OOo Load times
On November 17th, 2002 Anonymous says:
The reason it takes so long to load is that there are a _lot_ of shared libraries. In fact, there is a small stub binary and 99% of the code is contained in shared libraries. So, when you start up, you have to load all those libraries and look up the addresses of the functions you want to use. This reduces memory footprint by a *great* amount but takes more time to start up.
When shared libraries get loaded, they usually stick around for a while in the system, and this is greatly helped by something like the quickstarted which does this on startup, in the background. Thus, when you launch OOo, all the libraries are already loaded, and time is reduced.
We'll get something like this together for MacOS X fairly soon, and will be looking into prebinding too (its broken right now and not in the build system).
Dan (fa at openoffice dot org)
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 17th, 2002 Anonymous says:
I have been using the Mac OS X port for a while now... and I must say that it is worth the wait to have it start up NOT to use MS office! It some how makes me feel clean! So far for what I do and that ain't much... it does a fabu job! Other then it does tend to ubergeek when I try to open a Appleworks file... but that is easily enough worked around.
OO File Format and CVS
On November 12th, 2002 Anonymous says:
It's really nice that OO uses XML by default, and even better that there is some work going on for interoperability.
I just wish 1) OO allowed users to opt for no zip compression and 2) this option plus the one to turn off "size optimization" (eg turn pretty printing on) was combined into one "CVS" option so that people could use revision control with OO documents.
The world has been polluted with MS-think for so long that people don't think twice about documents being binary objects.
Re: OO File Format and CVS
On November 13th, 2002 Anonymous says:
There's a FlatXML-Filter available for integration with OOo1 at http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/ProjectDownloadList
It's easy to install and works fine (nothing else required).The developer build 643 includes this by default (not included in the standard-installation, you have to choose custom - these additional filters in 643 require a JRE)
Why doesn't OO use QT/GTK ?
On November 12th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Since both are O.S. and available for all major platforms ( including QT for zaurus), it will be easy to port and can integrate with other apps better.
Besides, OO with QT will look a darned sight better on linux.
Re: Why doesn't OO use QT/GTK ?
On November 22nd, 2002 Anonymous says:
I agree. They really nead to adapt a look and feel that is consistant with the os. Currently it really does not look or feel right. Perhaps, while the Acqua port is going on, they can look at a way to seperate the widgets from functionality alowing them to use nice GTK or KDE widgets... It will even look better in windows with this approach, but in linux/BSD/Solaris it will finally look like a professional product worthy of consideration by corporations and most importantly potental windows converts!
Fonts in Openoffice not good below a size
On November 12th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Try as I might, I cannot get OO to AA fonts below size 10 ( its hard-coded in there somewhere). I even tried LD_PRELOAD stuff as someone here suggested with no luck. When it DOES AA, it looks good.
As I have a low-res Active matriz screen, fonts are unreadable without AA, esp BELOW size 10 ! You can get around this by boosting scaling above 100% but that magnifies everything and so thats not the best solution.
I have excellent AA for fonts of all sizes in KDE and QT apps.
Re: Fonts in Openoffice not good below a size
On November 12th, 2002 Anonymous says:
It not hardcoded, it configurable.
Goto Options, OpenOffice.org and then selct "View" there you can turn on /off AA in the first place and tell OO from which pixel size on it should do so.
Juergen
Government of England
On November 12th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Which government would that be, then?
Re: What about OpenOffice.org for the Amiga?
On November 12th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Is there something in work for the Amiga?
The new AmigaOne is already available, soon with the new AmigaOS4...
P2P distribution
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
You don't have to do anything to gain P2P distribution. Well, almost. You can encourage it by placing MAGNET, e2dk and/or FastTrack URNs on the dowload page.
P2P distribution works best when lots of people are sharing the same file(s), so it would also be nice if OOo didn't have one download for each architecture/language combination. How about one download for each architecture, and one architecture-neutral language pack download for each language? The installer should prompt for a language selection and download the appropriate language pack if it isn't available locally.
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
what about startup time. Anyone know why it takes forever to start open office in linux? Is there anything that can be done. I run the quickstarter in windows and it works great, why can't something like that be done in linux?
Re: Get Quickstarter for KDE here
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Here is Quickstarter for Linux (KDE), distro packages are available...
http://segfaultskde.berlios.de/index.php?content=oooqs
Single module compilation?
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
First of all, thanks to all the developers involved for this excellent suite.
My only grip with it is that it still is quite slow to load and resource hungry, especially on older hardware: as I practically only use Office Writer, would it be possible to split the different modules and only compile and use one of them?
Many thanks again.
Re: Single module compilation?
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
I'm told that different modules wouldn't make a significant difference to either download size or speed. It's all about the shared libraries supposedly.
Re: Single module compilation?
On November 12th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Huh? You mean that a sw which is about a quarter of OOo wouldn't be much
faster to launch and less CPU and RAM hungry? Seems strange to me, anyway, if that's the case, IMHO it's time to launch an equivalent of Phoenix for Mozilla: a word processor based on OO Writer but much faster and leaner,
possibly with a GTK2 frontend.
OpenOffice.org in Debian
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Although Debian does not yet have packages in the distro, the packaging team has been putting out packages since before the 1.0.0 release at http://linux-debian.de/openoffice, and the team has been one of the most actively involved in providing patches and support to the OOo community. We are the only distro with a separate mailing list, and an IRC channel (#debian-oo on FreeNode).
OOo will hopefully hit Debian unstable in the next few weeks and Woody packages are also available.
Chris Halls
Debian Openoffice.org team
KDE or GNOME integration
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
What about tighter integration of OOo with KDE and GNOME? Both environments (KDE especially) have now reached high level of sophistication and integration, and current OOo just does not use it.
Run on top of latest KDE 3.1 or GNOME 2.0 its interface looks ugly, it is not using file dialogs, or widgets of the desktop environment, copy&paste does not work etc. (and - it might be one of the reasons why it is so slow).
Will anyone be interested in making native port of OOo to KDE or GNOME (well at least Qt or GTK+)? Sure this would be huge work, but more or less comparable with native Aqua (Mac interface) port of OpenOffice.org?
Re: KDE or GNOME integration
On November 28th, 2002 Anonymous says:
(KDE especially) bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha good one
Re: KDE or GNOME integration
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Just look at Ximian and Sun candidates for Gnome board. They promise everything you ask for
Re: Omissions, Errors & Amplifications
On November 10th, 2002 swhiser (not verified) says:
Colleagues in OOo point out that Ximian has, with Sun's assistance, ported Evolution and GNOME to Solaris, while the article incorrectly states that Linux is the only platform on which that fine e-mail client runs.
In addition, Ximian sources indicate that porting Evolution to Win32 would take about 24 man months to complete. Anyone want to help here?
Also, OOo HAS been reported to run, via Debian, on an s/390.
FUD?
On November 10th, 2002 Anonymous says:
I read the article listed as FUD. It's not - it's entirely reasonable, with no OpenOffice bashing whatsoever.
There's no point pretending that every article which doesn't say things are 100% marvellous is FUD. OOo -doesn't- support pivot tables, it doesn't support Visual Basic macros...all of that is truth, not FUD.
Re: FUD?
On November 12th, 2002 Anonymous says:
No.....it's pretty solidly FUD...
"Although OpenOffice's appeal may grow as Microsoft's licensing rules change and its customers threaten to abandon ship, the transition remains costly and time-consuming. "
Ok...that's the Thesis of the article, straight from the lead paragraph. It's not only unsupported, it's actually contradicted in the article, when they note the only direct evidence in the whole read, the Verizon switch. They say the Verizon *saved* $17,000 (out of $20,000) a seat, and then the next sentence say, "Although this type of significant cost savings is the number one reason why companies turn to open source software, the actual migration can be problematic, as previously described."
But none of the sources even note any particular difficulty. The *only* mention by a source of a cost issue is the "rewriting macros" argument, which surely everyone is laughing about, right? I mean, seriously, the other poster's estimate of 5% of users seems sky-high to me....this is absolutely negligable, especially in comparison to even StarOffice-style licensing costs, much less MS. Otherwise, no one says a thing about a migration cost....they all mention that no one is going to just throw out paid-for software, but that's kind of basic; no one is expected to do that, rather businesses will move over when they are faced with either new systems buying or upgrading for a cost. But it still doesn't support the author's claims of high-migration costs.
And the only drawbacks to the actual software? Rubbish and FUD tactics. The arguments are
1)"Lack of support outside the developer community" What on earth could that mean? If you support it, you become part of the developer community..............so...um...what was that?
2)"there is no support for third-party proprietary software." What 3rd party software? What needs support? I don't get it, what are they asking for? Does MS Office have support for third-party software? How? I mean, this is just an office suite, not an OS....it isn't a development platform. Again, they aren't saying anything at all.
3)The entirely erroneous bit about macros and pivot tables, and the absurdly unreasonable visual basic thing. OK...no VB. Not a good language, OOo scripts in better ones anyway....the rewrite cost issue is BS. This is *not* a migration-breaker for *anybody* Just because this one whine happens to be "true" in that there *isn't* VB does not make the article *FUD free*.....it still doesn't come anywhere near supporting the article's outrageous claims.
4) Oh, I almost forgot...."But because Microsoft Office on the network is "like skin to bones," the process of removing the applications is tricky. "It's not that easily gotten rid of. It's interwoven into the fabric of the network." This is the best one...the argument that MS office is "too hard to remove"...hehe. That's a funny one from lots of angles, but seriously, any Windows administrator can get rid of a network install of MS Office. Taking out an average 1000 machine install of Office and replacing it with OOo would literally take a decent admin a day. If it was stupidly put together in the first place, make it 3 or 4. Not significant compared to the costs of that level of a network. Ridiculous argument.
Four things. That's all they could muster. And 2 and a half of them were out and out wrong; the other 1.5 totally blown out of porportion. And all that saber-rattling about it? Three anonymous sources, only one (from IDC) who we have any reason to listen to. And he only has two quotes...which are blown way past what he says by the author's commentary. And this all in the face of the only actual factual evidence in the whole story....the Verizon switch, which was far from costly.
I guess the sub-headings really say it all. "What Is Missing", "Switch Too Costly", "Major Adopters" (the Verizon switch), and "Existing Systems to Persist." This is what FUD is all about. It doesn't have to be one falsehood right after another...they can list a fact or quote someone and still be making FUD. It's that the facts they say and the people they quote don't add up to the Fear Uncertainty and Doubt they are cooking up and throwing in the headlines and commentary. This is classic FUD. Classic.
Re: FUD?
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Pivot Tables == DataPilot. Get it? Love it.
It also has support for StarBasic macros. I think it has rules for converting VB -> SB. I'd have to dig in the doucmentation, though.
Re: FUD?
On November 10th, 2002 swhiser (not verified) says:
Fair enough...easy for us to overestimate our impact.
I wasn't thinking or referring to pivot tables and VB, although these "shortcomings" are oft overstated relative to their impact on users. We see about less than 5% of users having macros that are too large to cheaply re-write. Also, OOo/SO have their own version of both...we DO have a table pivot feature, but it's located differently.
The feature comparisons that are inaccurate are annoying because they come from people who dont use the software and because it's a temptation to react to every one of them--and we have decided not to do that, given how positive the overall message is at OOo.
This link has repetition of old FUD (really old) by the tech PR analysts--particularly the nonsense about too costly to transition. It's complex, it takes planning, but transitioning to Linux (and what's more to the Linux Desktop) is happening...massively. Ask Doc Searls. It's obfuscation, not true, to say it's not being done because it's too expensive. It's difficult AND it's being done--what better endorsement for us all. Yet another message backfires!
BTW the article was submitted with 2 FUD links. Here's the other:
http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/19747.html
You may question too whether this one about Office 11 ('having XML, too') qualifies for Card-Carrying FUD, but the MS Survey just leaked indicates that they are in a disposition of fishing for functional messages to freeze customer transitions...and having no success.
Thanks for your comment.
Re: FUD?
On November 10th, 2002 Anonymous says:
I suspect the link was incorrect. There was no mention of Washington State in that article, either.
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 10th, 2002 Anonymous says:
I use OOo on Win32, and have been waiting for Evolution forever! I want it... now! :)
Ps... if macromedia makes flash or dreamweaver for linux... I am SO there.
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Now just wait a sec ... you use OOo - so you don't need MS Office - and you want to use Evolution, so you *can't* require MS Outlook. So why, oh why, are you still using Windows???
I can understand why people would use Windows because they needed the software, but otherwise ... ??
I'm sorry, but that's sick ... :)
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
There are some businesses where they really don't care what application you are using, so long as the input and output are readable by everyone else, but they do care about the operating system because the workstation is used by multiple people and they can't afford the training costs to make everyone capable in both windows and Linux. After all there is nothing really preventing a Win2k or WinXP platform from having different mime encodes for different users, where user Alfred uses OOo to open .doc files and user Betty uses MSWord.
-Rusty
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 10th, 2002 Anonymous says:
They *do* however make Flash and Dreamweaver for MacOS X.
Remember, it's a Unix derivative now, and it's not M$.
:)
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Wrong guess, not M$ is not what it's positive. Non propretary base is what counts. Apple is just as proprietary as M$
Please do not mention OpenSource Darwin. Having kernel that's open source (and works only on few specific supported machines... Man, that sucks)
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 10th, 2002 Anonymous says:
And it's not very free (yeah, I know about Darwin, but the interesting part is the UI...) and Macintosh has lot's of evil patents that makes life harder for free software programmers. Yeah, I know it's not microsoft, but it's a matter of size more than of concept. (However, I do think it's better to use Mac than Microsoft because of the monopholy.)
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 9th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Not that I don't like OOo, but posting screenshots like the one in the article really reflects badly upon the project. The fonts in that screenshot are not only ugly, they are buggy. Only AbiWord manages to produce worse screen font rendering. A C64 or ZX81 has cleaner fonts.
I have actually gone through the somewhat tedious process of getting OO to look acceptably, but the fact that the creator of the shot has not tells me that he is not a professional user. If you don't want your project to look amateurish, don't create such shots. And OOo, you really need to fix the fonts in the default install. Microsoft Office under Crossover looks pretty -- OpenOffice natively under Linux looks like typographer's hell. Please, fontconfig and xft are there for a reason.
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 11th, 2002 swhiser (not verified) says:
We like to show all our wrinkles.
That way you'll go, "OhMiGohld! I HAVE to contribute to this project!"
Thanks for the input.
Here's a solution to the bad fonts in OOo ...
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Have a look at this page (it's a hacked version of freetype) for a solution to your font worries. It finally makes OOo have decent fonts.
As far as I'm concerned, I can live with crappy fonts, I can live without native export to pdf (I mean, how hard is printing to a postscript file and using ps2pdf??) but what I really cannot comprehend is how long OOo takes to start up!! When Microsoft Office under WINE starts four times faster than OOo, there's gotta be something seriously wrong with that software.
Don't get me wrong, having OOo is one hell of a lot better than not having OOo, but really!! - I used to think MS Office was bloated!!
(I should that being a long-term LyX user I'm highly biased ... but I really would love to have a fast launching office suite that had even half the features of OOo, just to read MSWord attachments and to create spreadsheets and presentations)
Re: Here's a solution to the bad fonts in OOo ...
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Very good.
But i have also another very quick solutin. So far i have used LD_PRELOAD.
I put export LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 and now OO is using system freetype, not its own statically linked freetype.
Re: Here's a solution to the bad fonts in OOo ...
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
OMG! You are a frigging stud! I had no idea that would work with OOo. Finally! Yes! OO was doing anti aliasing but I think not using xft2. Now it looks perfect! Thank you.
Re: Here's a solution to the bad fonts in OOo ...
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
How about Abiword and Gnumeric!
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 9th, 2002 Anonymous says:
I agree. One of the biggest problems with Linux compared to Windows and Mac OS is poor font quality. Sure, things look pretty good on paper, but the quality on the screen is enough to make one want to run screaming and never return. As a graphic designer, the font issue is holding me back from adopting desktop Linux. When (and if???) it's fixed, I'll be a sold convert.
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 10th, 2002 Anonymous says:
If you're doing design work in a word processor you have more to worry about than how fonts display.
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 10th, 2002 Anonymous says:
This is false, Not having proper font rendering forces the user to use bigger zooms to be able to read properly the page and forces you to do paning all the time wasting time and frustrating the user.
Proper font rendering, and easy font management is a must, what do we win using badreadable fonts and difficult font management??? One more reason for the people to argue against how Linux is bad at the desktop.
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 9th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Actually in RedHat 8.0 its just a matter of adding a ~/.fonts directory and dropping in all the .ttf fonts your heart desires and boom!... You will have pwerty and smooth fonts =)
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
Well, yes, but do they appear in OOo? No, they don't.
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 12th, 2002 vd (not verified) says:
There's a new screenshot avaiable, that was made on Redhat 8.0 with all that eye candy fonts.
You can really add the new one to the ~/fonts dir, and after that you should add them to the Spadmin tool that OOo has for font recognition.
Cheers,
vd
Re: OpenOffice.org Project Update
On November 11th, 2002 Anonymous says:
spadmin. Import the TTF files with a nice GUI.
Nicely Done Sam!
On November 9th, 2002 ge (not verified) says:
Nice job Sam! That's is one concise and to the point summary. It always amazes me to find out who is using OO.org and why. Welcome is the day when the only amazement will be over who is still trapped on the Microsoft upgrade $ treadmill.
Keep up the good work Sam. Your herculean efforts are noticed and much appreciated,
~ge~
garyedwards@yahoo.com