Sun Joins Mac Open Office Development

widhalmt writes "In a blog post, a developer at Sun Microsystems announces that Sun will help with porting Open Office to Mac OS X. The open source office suite is well known on Linux and Windows, but does not have a native version on Mac OS. For a long time Sun did not want to join the development of that port but now they will actively push it."

Not true! NeoOffice!

OpenOffice.org runs on Mac OS X under X11.
NeoOffice is an independently developed version of OpenOffice.org 2.1 which runs on Mac OS X natively and without the need for X11. I've been using it for years.

Re:Not true! NeoOffice!

maybe. What Im more hoping for is the NeoOffice guys and Sun will bury the hatchet and work together on this, since the point of contention between the teams is now moot.

Re:Not true! NeoOffice!

If you've looked at the latest Mac builds from the OpenOffice native port team, you will see that there is no contest with NeoOffice. NeoOffice is using a bad approach. Adding another layer of indirection (through Java) was a bad idea from the start, and became an even worse idea when Apple deprecated the Java-Cocoa bridge. The native implementation (demoed at FOSDEM) is significantly faster, and will be much more maintainable since it does things the right way from the start. I occasionally fire up NeoOffice/J, and within five minutes I've remembered why I don't do it more often. The native port looks like something I might actually consider using.

We never used CocoaJava

Disclaimer: I am a founder of the NeoOffice [neooffice.org] project.

Quote: and became an even worse idea when Apple deprecated the Java-Cocoa bridge

We never used the CocoaJava bridge at all. I guess you never bothered to read the source code. In fact, we use very little Java at all as is pointed out by the ohloh source code analysis [ohloh.net] of our open CVS. There's little Objective-C as we do most of the logic in C++ and call out to ObjC when required. There are some other stats there you may find intriguing as well like the estimated man-years and cost [ohloh.net] it will take to approximate our code.

Trust me, once any OS X port of OOo starts getting font handling and input methods correct, it'll slow down as well. This is true especially for Asian and other foreign languages. The bottleneck is in Apple's ATSUI and how it mismatches to the underlying OOo code. Has nothing to do with Java at all. Speed in a vaporware demo is one thing; carrying speed into a functional product is something different completely.

ed

Re:We never used CocoaJava

If that's true (and I don't doubt that it is), then putting that "/J" in the name was a spectacularly bad idea.

Re:Not true! NeoOffice!

Have you tried the latest major release of NeoOffice? For an office suite, it's awesome. NeoOffice has matured through years of development, and unless Sun joins the NeoOffice effort it's going to take a long time before they produce something that rivals it, I imagine. Give the NeoOffice guys credit where it's due.

Re:Not true! NeoOffice!

I've been using it for years.

So have I. Hopefully it will have fully started up by the end of next month. Then I can get some word processing done. I need to allow another six months before the spreadsheet module will open, I think.

Re:Not true! NeoOffice!

You're lucky then. Mine regularly takes a minute or more to start up, and over 30 seconds to save a simple, small document. Not to mention the lags in the spreadsheet - I can easily enter 3-4 cels worth of data before it's finished showing the entry for the first cel. If I get too much futher ahead of it, it starts to lose data.

I must be doing something wrong, since my NeoOffice (2.1 patch 3) takes about 10 seconds to start.

Re:NeoOffice is not 'native' in a sense...

Sun is pushing for a non-Java, non-X11 native solution.
I hope you appreciate the irony of that statement.

Re:Not true! NeoOffice!

OpenOffice.org runs on Mac OS X under X11. NeoOffice is an independently developed version of OpenOffice.org 2.1 which runs on Mac OS X natively and without the need for X11. I've been using it for years.

Given its heavy use of Java I think the 'native' qualification is debatable. Some aspects are native (e.g. font management), which is certainly a major plus.

Unfortunately, though, this application gives new meaning to the words 'slow' and 'bloated'. The author has also chosen to make its license (GPL) incompatible with OO.o's (LGPL) so that his porting efforts cannot be contributed back to the main project. That makes NeoOffice a very hostile fork. What's more, he is trying (against the terms of the GPL/LGPL) to limit free distribution [neooffice.org] by using the trademark loophole.

So, I would say that while a port exists, it's both low quality and under bad management, and I welcome this new effort to do it properly.

Re:Not true! NeoOffice!

Unfortunately, though, this application gives new meaning to the words 'slow' and 'bloated'.

Well, it's not snappy, but it's certainly better than the "nothing" that OpenOffice has been offering in terms of native OSX ports.

The author has also chosen to make its license (GPL) incompatible with OO.o's (LGPL) so that his porting efforts cannot be contributed back to the main project. That makes NeoOffice a very hostile fork.

I'd probably be hostile, too. IIRC, the backstory with NeoOffice was that they were trying to work with OOo on a native OSX port, and not only did Sun refuse to help, but they basically sabotaged their efforts. Rather than give up, these guys split off and started their own project, and because of that, OSX users have had a very functional free office suite for OSX for a couple years now.

What's more, he is trying (against the terms of the GPL/LGPL) to limit free distribution by using the trademark loophole.

Protecting your trademark is not a "loophole". All sorts of projects, whether they're commercial (Redhat) or not (Mozilla), protect their trademarks. Worst case scenario?-- you take the source and strip out trademarked graphics/names, recompile, and then you're free to distribute the results however you want (under the GPL).

I don't want to be misunderstood: I'm happy that Sun is finally porting OpenOffice to OSX. The result may very well be superior to NeoOffice, and if so I'll use Sun's version. However, they've been taking their sweet damn time, and in the mean time, the NeoOffice team has made a very useful bit of software. I don't think we should be belittling the NeoOffice team and their terrific efforts simply because they don't have the resources to perfect their port. They've been doing a lot with very little while OOo has been doing practically nothing with their bounty.

Re:nagware, opens browser windows to author homepa

Err, that's rubbish. NeoOffice opens the default browser when there's an update. The update page happens to have a donation message on it, but the main thing is to inform you that an update is available!

Simple solution: email Steve

The OpenOffice developers doing the porting should send an email [slashdot.org] to Steve Jobs asking him to help end this outrageous and inexcusable incompatibility issue. It worked for Greenpeace and J. Maynard Gelinas!

Amazing

First we get news that Microsoft was recently acting all Mac Happy, and now Sun is acting Mac Happy. My, my, my, but these coincidences of timing in the software world never cease to boggle the mind!

Will they unarchive?

Sun already owns the rights to Lighthouse Design [wikipedia.org]'s application suite. Since these were originally developed for NeXTstep/OpenStep, they should be relatively easy to migrate to Cocoa. I'd sure like to see an Improv/Quantrix like spreadsheet tool put a stake through the heart of Excel!

Improv

Having Improv back would be wonderful. The best spreadsheet I've ever used - using Improv made using Excel or other grid based spreadsheets painful.

But then too, there was also this oddball thing called (I think, its been some years) "Advance", I only had a couple weeks to play with a test copy. Very powerful, rather strange. I'd like to have that back to play with too.

Best intentions, but still...

From the blog:

MacOSX and Aqua are quite new to me, so please bear with me as I learn about this (for me) exciting new platform at first. Certainly I will have many questions for my fellow Mac porters. However I can contribute ~10 years experience with vcl which I think the port can benefit from.

The problem has always been that OO.o makes assumptions about GUI development that are well-suited to X11 and Windows, and not well-suited to Aqua. The question is, can someone who's learning Mac development as he goes push changes back to OO.o to make it more suitable for Aqua and other GUI toolkits? Can he do it before Sun changes their mind and de-funds the Mac port? Sun has a habit of funding things for about six months and then getting cold feet.

Which reminds me: I should throw some money at Ed and Patrick for their continued work on NeoOffice [neooffice.org], which uses Java as a GUI adapter (!) to get OO.o tolerable on the Mac

OO has been on OS X since 10.0

I use to have a dual G4 machine 5 or so years ago when OS 10 came out and it ran Open Office. I think the big problem is that it used the X interface instead of Aqua, so maybe that's what they're concerned about. But from a user perspective I had no problem using just the plain ol' X11R6 version. Think it was via Fink.

Could be fun.

I'd use it - I use Mac at work for Photoshop compatibility, and I've wanted a true port of OpenOffice. I don't care too much for NeoOffice - I'll agree that it's a decent product/port, but for some reason I just want some OpenOffice. Go figure.

Mod me off topic...

But this native port of OpenOffice reminds me of a problem I'm having with the native OpenOffice build I have on Ubuntu (7.04 Feisty). The font rendering is hideous, and nothing - I mean nothing - I've done has helped solve this problem! I've tried tweaking settings, recompiling from source (takes forever btw), and even export LD_PRELOAD=/opt/openoffice.org2.1/program/filter/l ibfreetype.so.6.3.8 but none of this worked. Meanwhile the font rendering for the rest of my system is gorgeous, including AbiWord, which I am now using in place of OOo writer until I figure this mess out (I may never go back to OOo if I can't get good rendering out of it.) It's like having a layer of grease on the monitor.

yey!

I definitely welcome a native port of Open Office. While using X11 works, it still sucks big time. You can't use all of OSX key combinations, it's slow ect. I hate the fact that I have to use Office for it to be usable. Actually that shows how bad the situation is, Office sucks big time on Intel Mac's, and it's still far more usable then Open Office.

Port it all you want...

It still pales in comparison to MS Office.

Yes, I am complimenting Microsoft -- I am sure I'll be flamed for it. But frankly, they make the best office suite, and since theirs is the standard look and feel (although the new Office is a departure), the other guys have to play catchup.

I would love to use OpenOffice, I just hate the look and feel and have always been more comfortable in Microsoft Office.

Re:Port it all you want...

As much as we /.-ers love to bash Microsoft, there comes a point when you just have to give them a bit of credit for their office suite. I've used Office, and I've used OO.o. They both get the job done. They both are usable for 75% of what needs to get done with an office suite. But MS Office just has more polish. For example:

- Keeping an informal "database" of crap in Excel or Calc - Both will sort the list by whatever column your highlighted cell is in if you hit one of the "A->Z" or "Z->A" buttons. But Calc will treat the column headings as data and sort them into the middle of the list! Excel knows that the first line is not data if it's a different text style from the rest of the list. Polish.
- Printing in Excel or Calc - Having a sheet loaded and trying to print will print the whole entire freaking spreadsheet, all sheets, all ranges in Calc. That's just stupid. Excel will (for obvious reasons) default to printing only the sheet you're on. More polish.
- Mail merging in Word or Writer - Trying to get Writer to realize that "mail merge" doesn't necessarily mean "i'm writing a form letter and want to import addresses" is like pulling teeth. Word has no problem with just binding whatever data to a form. Polish(x1). Also, Word doesn't force you (or confuse you) into creating an Access database when you just want to import an informal list of crap from Excel. Writer DOES try to get you to make a Base .odb file when you try to just pull data from a Calc sheet. MS Office Polish(x2). Then there's the lack of a data-bound preview... (or at least one that's as simple as Word's - a toggle button on a toolbar or a checked menu item).

Now, none of these are absolute deal-breakers, nor do they show that OO.o is somehow unworthy of attention. On the contrary, it shows that OO.o needs more attention, and from people who actually use the features they're coding. MS Office will only get better if there's pressure on MS to make it better, and OO.o is probably the best hope for applying that kind of pressure. I just think that MS really deserves some credit for making Office a decent app suite. They've done far more than most /.-ers want to acknowledge.

Just to clarify, none of this applies to the Windows vs. Linux debate. I want Windows to just go die in a fire. It really needs to be flushed like all the other turds.

It doesn't matter

Sun's history and reputation on the Mac with things not related to the JVM is pretty awful. This has as much of a chance of seeing the light of day in a usable format as their version of Watson [karelia.com]. Give it a year and by then Sun will have 'realigned their priorities' via reorg or a RIF will have wiped out the group that is working on this.

Exciting! Can't Wait!

As someone who has used OOo on Windows/Linux/OS X, I have to admit that the OS X X11 implementation feels like the biggest kludge. I've been attempting to move all my documents over to the ODF, but everytime I boot up OOo on my Mac, I get frustrated with so many things about it. As slow as Word is on OS X running under Rosetta, recently I've been finding myself using that much more. I haven't tried Neooffice yet, because I can't imagine using something slower. On the other hand, I've found OOo quite a good replacement under windows.

So I say, bring it on! I think that getting a good implementation of OOo running natively under Aqua is key in the cause of reducing reliance on Microsoft. People switching to Linux obviously are going to use OOo or some other open format, but still too many people switching to Mac are relying on Microsoft. It'll be curious to see whether they take Firefox's approach to have the interface be consistent across the board, or if they try and take advantage of OS X's toolkits and design guides to make it a true Mac application.

Won't (and shouldn't) happen

I'm not optimistic about an OO port to native Mac, regardless of who is on board with it. Why should I be, given the legendary code cruft of OO, the lousy relationship relationship dynamics between the Mac- and non-Mac developer leads on OO, the well-intentioned-but-ghastly-performance object lesson of NeoOffice?

OO is very decent office suite on Linux and Windows. So leave it there, where it is working acceptably. I think any effort to take that code base and reconcile it to an acceptable UI and functional level on the Mac will be the definition of a trip down the rabbit hole, taking years to realize and resulting in a UI compromise that annoys users on all platforms.

Time to cut bait on this, accept that it never will be workable on the Mac, and free its development team to focus on improving it in the Lin/Win world. Better to spend development time and effort developing a Mac-specific office suite that uses the various Open*** file formats as its native storage, while providing a real Cocoa-based UI experience that actually integrates into OS X the way Mac users expect an application to. Not that Sun will come within a mile of such an initiative, but it's a great opportunity for frustrated Mac developers looking to solve a real practical problem...

move to Gtk+

With the upcoming Cairo-based version of Gtk+, Gtk+ is turning into an excellent cross-platform toolkit.

I think it would do OpenOffice a world of good to adopt Gtk+ as the standard toolkit and gradually phase out its own internal toolkit. By sharing the cross-platform development with Gtk+, both OpenOffice and Gtk+ would benefit.

develop an import/export for the apple writer/...

spreadsheet app. I do not remember its name, but about 3 years ago, I was helping my neighbor move to a bunch of OOS on his mac. Tried to move him to OOfice and that was a nightmare. Neo did not cut it. More importantly, moving off of his old app was going to be copy and paste time. Wicked.

why not NeoOffice?

One would hope that Apple, in its expansion of development staff and facilities, would acquire the guys who produce NeoOffice, or at least hire them as consultants -- as that's already 98% of the way toward what OpenOffice should hope to achieve in a Mac distribution -- and have them guide things, as they already know where the bodies are buried between OpenOffice and OS X.

Lord knows they deserve to get something out of their years of hard work making NeoOffice the svelte speedster it is today.

Slap some paint on the old horse, eh?

It's great social policy for Sun to spread OOo, and I admire that. Hopefully this port will be of benefit to somebody years from now. Of course, in the real world, we can't wait. We need our tools today.

I run OOo 2.x when stuck on a Windows box, and Writer, at least, is decent. While it may look and feel dated, I couldn't care less. It gets the job done.

What didn't work for me were the X11 and NeoOffice ports: sluggish, fussy on early 2000s-era PPC hardware. I even tried setting up a relative's business on NeoOffice on Mac Minis, and its lethargy and idiosyncracies drove the employees crazy. That led to a pile of new licenses for the Redmond mafia.

For myself, I demo'd the gamut of OS X word processors and settled, happily, on the low-cost and high-powered Mellel. It's one of the only apps I've never regretted buying.

ooh, noes

actually, I like NeoOffice more. They support docx, while OOo still does not.

NeoOffice's reply...

...is an open letter [neooffice.org]:

An open letter to Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Sun Microsystems, Inc. regarding the official Sun Microsystems Mac OS X participation announcement of May, 2007.

attn: Jonathan Schwartz
c/o Sun Microsystems, Inc.
4150 Network Circle
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Return Receipt Requested

Mr. Schwartz:

Send beer.

Sincerely,
Edward Peterlin
Chief Visionary, NeoOffice.org
and The Undersigned

Re:But...

Even if Apple were doing this (which they aren't), they don't have a spreadsheet yet. Appleworks had one, but it was pretty crappy compared to Excel or OOo. Personally, a spreadsheet for iWork is EXACTLY what I'm waiting for - I've been waiting on buying it specifically because I don't want to have to pay for it again, and I'll definitely want the spreadsheet when they finally release it.

Re:But...

Apple has nothing to do with this. Read the article. Heck, just read the summary.

Huh? Read the summary? This guy didn't even read the title!

How do you see that?

This is an application that runs on an OS. It's as likely as saying that because Adobe was working on a "native" version of Photoshop for the Intel Macs, that they were planning a merger with Apple.

Unless you are smoking some banned substance or another, I can't imagine how this would fuel any speculation about an Apple / Sun merger.