Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses

OpenOffice.org For Mac OS X 64

Posted by Hemos from the making-it-work dept.
Chris Coleman writes "Move over Microsoft, OpenOffice.org is starting to take hold on Mac OS X. To facilitate this, we at Daemon News have put together a CD set that makes it really easy to install and use. We are also donating part of our booth space at Mac World Expo to the OpenOffice.org group to help spread awareness."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

OpenOffice.org For Mac OS X More

OpenOffice.org For Mac OS X

Comments Filter:
  • Maby a dumb question, but does it still require x11 installed? either way, cool.

  • Interface (Score:3, Insightful)

    by aufecht ( 163961 ) on Saturday January 04, 2003 @09:50AM (#5013914) Homepage Journal
    So the installer has the Aqua interface, but what about the app? Screenshots anyone? I wonder if those memos [opensource.org] and Emails [opensource.org] of hysteria are flowing through Micorosoft this morning.

  • I am so excited! (Score:5, Funny)

    by sharrestom ( 531929 ) on Saturday January 04, 2003 @09:56AM (#5013933)
    The packaging for OpenOffice looks very professional, very attractive, though I hope the box is really large with lots of manuals. People want to buy a box with heft, you know, lots of weight, like it has big manuals in it. Maybe put a ream of inkjetpaper and a script on the back in big letters that creates a manual. People will like that. I'm going down to my CompUSA to ask that they stock this. It looks like it will cost over $500, with all of that weight, so I'll have to save up. This is bad for Microsoft. Now they will have to spend more money designing a heavier package for Office.

  • Quartz (Native OSX) version not ready yet. (Score:5, Informative)

    by rf600r ( 236081 ) on Saturday January 04, 2003 @10:02AM (#5013943) Homepage
    So says this page [openoffice.org].

    "The 1.0 sources build for Quartz (Mac OS X native). OpenOffice.org doesn't work there yet, but the program compiles and links, a large first step towards beginning our Quartz and Aqua tracks. If you're a developer, find out how to build and help us get the Quartz version finished and move onto our Aqua redesign effort! Special thanks to Dan B. and Dan W. for helping to push this along!"
    • I can't wait until it has a native look for every platform.
    • With the new Aqua GTK [versiontracker.com], will this be able to run nativelyin aqua? that would be awesome!

      • Re:Quartz (Native OSX) version not ready yet. (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Sorry, but OpenOffice.org is NOT written to GTK+. The graphics layer is fairly abstracted, but the problem is that all the controls are drawn via graphics primitives like lines and filled rectangles and text. So a button really is a bunch of lines and rectangles.

        Its easy for us to get the Quartz port up and running, but the Quartz port will look _exactly_ like the X11 port because it will still use the lines & rectangles to draw the UI elements.

        What everyone really wants is the Aqua port, which comes after the Quartz port and has those nice pulsing buttons and a menu bar on the top. Right? Well this is harder. A lot harder. But we are working on it.

        Dan from the OOo Mac team

  • No dice, it still requires X11 (Score:4, Interesting)

    by analog_line ( 465182 ) on Saturday January 04, 2003 @10:05AM (#5013958)
    I don't care if the interface is "Aquafied", but it's a non-starter with me unless it runs without X11. I have XDarwin installed and use it pretty regularly, and it kills any real multitasking, either by slowing everything else down in rootless mode, or requiring a full desktop shift. It sucks, and I use it as little as humanly possible.

    So thanks, but no thanks. I'll certainly try it when the actual port gets working, but until it runs without X11, it might as well not exist.
    • It sounds like you need a little more ram or a slightly faster CPU. For right now try a lighter window manager. Usually when people complain about X being slow they are using too much window manager for their machine.

      • Are you going to give me the new computer?

        Didn't think so...
      • And, for the record, the window manager I'm using is the default, ugly fucking window manager. fvwm, I believe. I don't know how much more lightweight you can get.
      • I give them credit for getting it to run, but they need that native look to succeed.


        Macintosh owners are rebelous enough to spurn Windows, but we will use Office if it is the best available. Right now, it is the best suite. It looks right, works, and doesn't seem to damage anything.


        X11 apps will not be a mainstream item on OS X. Even a lot of java apps are painfull (I love jEdit but it is a pain). We want / need our menu at the top of the screen (not on some window). Toolbars are OK on windows, but I better be able to customize it (small icons, large icons, text under icons, what icons appear). The keycombinations better act like every other app. The fonts should not make my eyes water.


        I really hope OpenOffice learns enough from their test builds of native stuff to restructure their program to provide native look, feel, and services for each of their intended platforms (Linux, BSD, Solaris, OS X, and Windows). Competition is good.



        Microsoft: one of the best hardware companies out there

        • Its not openoffice that's doing look, feel and services but rather the OroborusOSX project (i.e. a X window manager that runs as a bridge between Aqua and X). My guess is that X apps will work about as well as Classic apps do now in say 2 years. GDK for OSX and QT for OSX will allow X apps to be recompiled and then you'll have something more like Carbon apps. Since at this point most of the "native apps sold today" are Carbon apps that's probably close enough. I wouldn't be suprised if Sun moves OpenOffice over to GTK/Gnome as part of their SunDesktop platform. So by say 2007 or so you'll have what you want.

    • go to fink.sf.net, install icewm, and then edit .xintrc to this:

      #twm &
      /sw/bin/icewm &

      for some reason, on my ibook, when i run even oroborosx, it doesn't immedaitely pick up mouse clicks. in gimp, i have to click twice to switch from one window to the next. not so in icewm. it's lite and fast and is actually fairly feature rich. there is nothing wrong with X11. i have only 256MB on my 700mhz ibook. i run X and aqua concurrently and have no problems. the biggest gripe about OO.org is it takes forever to load. they trashed the desktop, but they still kept the apps tied. if i load writer, i don't need the calc and impress libs loaded too. msoffice is "integrated" yet each are distinctly different apps. OO.org needs to do this.

  • note : not aqua, only X (Score:5, Insightful)

    by selderrr ( 523988 ) on Saturday January 04, 2003 @10:39AM (#5014043) Journal
    as long as they don't adopt the aqua interface, I doubt that they'll grab any serious marketshare. Mac is all about look & feel. About interface (you know, the lickable one...)

    Currently openoffice runs only under X, which is butt-ugly and completely windows oriented. Not exactly what 'switchers' have in mind IMHO.

    here [openoffice.org] is a screenshot that shows the diff between X and aqua (MS Ofifce in background). The price difference not withstanding, MSOffice is hands down the winner here.

  • Aqua adoption timeline (Score:5, Informative)

    by selderrr ( 523988 ) on Saturday January 04, 2003 @10:44AM (#5014058) Journal
    more detailed schedule found here [openoffice.org]

    Still a long way to go, but if they get it aquafied, MS might eventually get hurt. Offcourse, they'll change doc format faster than you can say 'blub'...
  • But I JUST installed XDarwin!!!

    Ah well, Basilisk is fun. Imagine.. all three Mac OSs running on one computer..

    This is great though, looking forward to seeing it made available as a free download!

  • clipboard (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Twirlip of the Mists ( 615030 ) <twirlipofthemists@yahoo.com> on Saturday January 04, 2003 @11:25AM (#5014176)
    I know that the X11 primary selection is somehow bridged to the system clipboard, so you can select in an X11 application and paste in an OS X application and vice versa, but does this interface handle styled text or graphics? I use the clipboard for moving styled text, Unicode text, and images around all the time, and not being able to do that to and from my word processor would kill me.

    Anybody know what the deal is here?

    • Re:clipboard (Score:3, Informative)

      by goon america ( 536413 )
      I don't know, but you can experiment using the pbcopy and pbpaste shell commands. You can pipe and direct in and out of them and everything. They're really cool.
  • There is already an OOo port the is 100% Aqua (no need for X11!!!).

    www.neooffice.org

    www.neooffice.org/flaming_yeti_screenshots.html

    • Re:Attn X11 foes (Score:3, Informative)

      by analog_line ( 465182 )
      As this is a prototyping project, it is merely a proof of concept intended for software engineers

      Mostly non-functional. Printing barely supported according to their comments. Nice, but I don't alpha-test software I'm not working on myself.
      • See you again in a few days when the Final Beta of OOo X11 for OS X is released. The version you see then will be quite different. For instance all printers in Print Center will work automatically under 10.2.

        This won't be an Alpha it'll be a final beta *for X11* the Quartz version is progressing.

  • What I hate about open office (Score:3, Insightful)

    by WasterDave ( 20047 ) <davep@zedk[ ]com ['ep.' in gap]> on Saturday January 04, 2003 @02:48PM (#5015247)
    I've been using OOo on Linux for about a year now. Yeah, it's competent, I guess. But it's not good, and it's office compatibility is not all it's cracked up to be.

    Look, for instance at their own screenshots [openoffice.org]. Here the fonts are completely different, causing line breaks to take place in the wrong place, page breaks to do the same, orphaned half paragraphs and assorted shit that I'll have to go through and fix before I can print the bloody thing. Don't ask what happens when I forward the document to a colleague who uses word.

    Sure, it's 99% there, but that's not enough. It's another demonstration of the "saving money by pushing my car around town" effect.

    Dave

  • What a rush... to market (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Slur ( 61510 ) on Saturday January 04, 2003 @04:15PM (#5015630) Homepage Journal
    I haven't looked at the source code for OpenOffice but I tend to think this is the wrong approach to get this software onto the Mac. I'm sure the development team is very excited to see their baby can walk, but why not take the longer road and get it right? What's kewl for geeks is not always kewl for end users.

    Assuming the program is written using intelligent design the data model and I/O controller should be almost completely isolated from the display code. If this is so then the bulk of work should consist of putting a decent Aqua interface on it, putting the menu bar where it belongs, and using Quartz for the text rendering.

    Could it be that there's a limited supply of Mac-savvy open source developers available?

  • You're doing a disservice (Score:5, Insightful)

    by GlassHeart ( 579618 ) on Saturday January 04, 2003 @04:53PM (#5015788) Journal
    by promoting a product that is nowhere near ready for primetime. OpenOffice for Mac OS is at alpha level, suitable really only for developers and very brave and dedicated testers. Putting in a box raises expectations to unreasonable levels, and saying "move over Microsoft" is just downright crazy.

    With lies like "amazing product that will soon give Microsoft a run for its money", free software doesn't even need enemies. Please do not promote free software to the general public until it is ready.

  • What is the reasoning behind adding Abiword to the CD set? Does OpenOffice lack confidence in their own word processor? It just seems like an odd move to say that they have a complete Office Suite, but then throw in an additional word processing program with it.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Pok pok pok, P'kok!" -- Superchicken

Close