OpenOffice.org for Mac Delayed Two Years 139
Athyra writes "According to their Mac porting page, OpenOffice.org will not release a native version of their software for Mac OS X (not counting the X11 version) until 2006. According to the project timeline, no real development can happen again until OpenOffice.org 2.0 hits Windows, Linux, and Solaris in 2005. Looks like Microsoft's got a cozy ride ahead on the Mac side of things for a while."
1 Word (Score:2, Funny)
Re:1 Word (Score:3, Interesting)
Errr... X11 on OS X is really that bad? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Errr... X11 on OS X is really that bad? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Errr... X11 on OS X is really that bad? (Score:2)
On the other hand, the nicest UI in an OfficeSuite that I have used was ClarisWorks 1.0 (I never used any of the later ones). Even if AppleWorks has simply maintained this standard, then it would be well worth the price that they charge for it (which, let's face it, isn't much).
Well... (Score:3, Funny)
Timelines are always subject to change (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Timelines are always subject to change (Score:3, Informative)
Not in the real world (Score:2)
And if pigs had wings, they could fly. There isn't an infinite supply of volunteer labor for open source projects, and very few such projects are sustained primarily by it. Like most, OpenOffice.org gets most of its resources from a company with a vested interest in seeing it happen -- in this case Sun. The low priority for the OS X native version was probably dictated by a
Re:Not in the real world (Score:2)
There isn't an infinite supply of volunteer labor for open source projects, and very few such projects are sustained primarily by it.
While it is true that OpenOffice.org is developed mostly by Sun, I don't think this statement is correct. Of all of the major open source projects, I can only think of two that are developed primarily by corporations, and the other one has just been dropped by its sponsor. Of course, most major OSS projects have full-time developers in the employ of interested companies,
Re:Not in the real world (Score:3, Informative)
Those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Am I just focused on a particular aspect of the open source landscale? or are there fair number of open source products owned by a corporation with a vested interest in its direction?
Re:Timelines are always subject to change (Score:2)
Yes, because it's PARTICUARLY the developers that are flocking to the Mac. Its rabid popularity amongst the Slashdot crowd notwithstanding, it's still mostly the non-tech types that buy into the OTHER evil empire.
Re:Timelines are always subject to change (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Timelines are always subject to change (Score:1)
I use the under-X version irregularly, because it can open Word documents that Word cannot open, and Excel documents that Excel can't open from other people in my company using Office 2000 or 2002. It is ugly to use, and nowhere near as easy for the sort of documents I have to write - lots of st
Re:Timelines are always subject to change (Score:2)
As a developer, I don't care so much about office productivity apps. I use primarily an IDE, a text editor, an email client, a web browser and a command shell. On the rare occasions that I need to create a spreadsheet or a presentation, the X11 version of OpenOffice is more than sufficient. Gosling probably does more presentations than me, but there's always Keynote for that and I'm sure he's even more comfortable with the X server on his machine than I am. I don't see where he or any Sun developers have su
Re:Timelines are always subject to change (Score:1)
Most open source developers are using IA32 unix-like OSes (read: fancy way of saying Linux and *BSD). Many of those are dual booting in to Windows for one reason or another. They want to use the same apps on Windows, so the demand for ports is strong.
Most other platforms don't have this situation. PPC Linux and the BSD base of OS X brings some of this to the Mac platform, but with a much smaller impact.
good news for Apple's products, though (Score:3, Interesting)
Open Source based? (Score:3, Interesting)
An NDA might keep them from talking about it directly, but it might not keep them from changing their public schedule.
For now, I'll continue using OpenOffice in Mac OS X with X11.
Re:Open Source based? (Score:2, Interesting)
There is no Open Office work going on at Apple. Open Office is, to put it mildly, not good enough. Take a look at Keynote and you'll see the direction that Apple wants to take business applications.
Re:Open Source based? (Score:3, Informative)
Native KDE Info [kde.org]
aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
With the way that Apple has been swinging recently I wouldn't be surprised if they released an office suite of their own for OSX. They already have a powerpoint replacement in Keynote. In panther you will be able to read/write MS Word files with cocoa text apps. They have a simplistic email client in Mail.app, but it could easily be buffed up into an outlook like app, using iCal for calendars, etc.
Apple has shown that they can make seriously kick-ass software, so wouldn't it make sense for them to make a seriously kick-ass word processor already???
Even if they don't, I think that cocoa's newfound ability to read/write MS word files will probably spurn the development of some nice third party office apps.
Ack, the silly lameness filter says that I have too much repetition, so forsooth fair lassy, may thine future be full of ripe cheese and bountiful eggplants!!! Godamn it! Fuck you you stinking lameness filter, accept my post.
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:2)
Keynote PPT
??? Word
??? Excel
MySQL + Enterprise Objects Framework or something Access
Mail+AddressBook Entourage/Outlook
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
> ??? Word
> ??? Excel
> MySQL + Enterprise Objects Framework or something Access
> Mail+AddressBook Entourage/Outlook
PowerPoint = Keynote
Word = Appleworks wp (rumoured to be under dev)
Excel = Appleworks ss (rumoured to be under dev)
Access = Filemaker Pro (rumoured to be taken back in-house, though that may have been debunked recently)
Outlook = Mail (being upgraded in Panther)
Really, the only 'missing' components are a good word processor and spreadsheet, at this point. We'll see what's missing in the Panther version of Mail as far as how well it compares to Outlook. It may be more of an Outlook Express class app than an Outlook class one.
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:2)
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:4, Funny)
I like to think of Canada:USA as approximately equivalent to Mac:Windows.
There's less of us, we're more user-friendly, the 'others' don't even remember about us most of the time, and the form factor is often easier on the eyes.
In conclusion I invite all the sane macusers out there in /. land to move your asses to Canada already. It's just like a mac: once you try it out for a while you'll never go back.
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:2)
Also, Jean Poutine? I thought the Canadian PM was Jean Chretien (sic?).
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:2)
Pfffft. Shows how much you Americans know about your closest neighbor. It's Jean Poutine, and he's a delicacy.
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:2)
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:2, Funny)
1) Thanks to that sumbitch George "Government do take a bite, don't she?" Bush, I can no longer afford to move (anywhere).
2) It get's COLD up there. I don't mean just cold, I mean cut-through-the-bone painful cold. At least I won't have to worry about a cooling system on my PC, I guess.
3) Quebec.
4) I secretly suspect that the US is just waiting for an excuse to invade Canada. OK, that one might be a little off in left field.
5) Did I mention Quebec?
6) No Tex-Mex food
Canadian response (Score:2, Informative)
1) Thanks to that sumbitch George "Government do take a bite, don't she?" Bush, I can no longer afford to move (anywhere).
Yeah, I hear he can be a dick.
2) It get's COLD up there. I don't mean just cold, I mean cut-through-the-bone painful cold. At least I won't have to worry about a cooling system on my PC, I guess.
It's pretty cold, its true, but many parts are warmer or the same as the states.. don
Re:Canadian response (Score:3, Funny)
Sorry if I missed the sarcasm, but are you serious? There is no part of Newfoundland anywhere between Quebec and Nova Scotia. The highway between Quebec and Nova Scotia goes through New Brunswick. If you wanted to go Nova Scotia from Quebec via Newfoundland you'd have to go way the hell up by Labrador, take the ferry across to Newfoundland, drive all the way across the island, and then
Re:Canadian response (Score:3, Funny)
Because Canada is funnier than OpenOffice.org.
"Quebec, we love you"
And what did Quebec say in return?
big gap between Ontario and New-Brunswick
Who'd notice?
Quebecers where the most opposed to the invasion of Irak
I can categorically state that there was at least one American who was more opposed than Quebec was. It wasn't your country bound and determined to show their ass to the
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:3, Interesting)
You did leave out the "Safari Internet Explorer:, though that isn't technically part of Office.
I'm REALLY waiting for Apple to get on the ball and do something with MySQL at the core of the system. Instead of storing all preferences, playlists, etc in all those small files that they keep coming up with new file formats for, they could just throw everything in to databases. There's little more work involved with getting the XML plist
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:2)
By MySQL I meant MySQL, but yes, any database would do fine. I don't really care if it's open source even, just that it's free and flexible. It would probably be MORE interesting to have a "lite" version of something like Oracle shipped with the stock OS than
Re:aaaaaaaaaag!!! (Score:1, Interesting)
This is one case where it is OK for OpenOffice to come out for the W
itch to scratch? (Score:1, Insightful)
If enough people really want a native Aqua version, they can create it. It seems OO.o couldn't find them.
Kiwaiti
Re:itch to scratch? (Score:2, Informative)
2 words - well now alot more (Score:1)
The point is moot... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The point is moot... (Score:5, Informative)
Fonts. Dock. drag & drop. etc, etc, etc.
this is good news for Nisus though.
Re:The point is moot... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The point is moot... (Score:2)
I'm trying to get my girlfriend to use OpenOffice on her IBook, but the XDarwin interface is annoying. I mean, when will she ever need the console windows that pop up?
I sincerely hope it takes less than two years for a native port!
Re:The point is moot... (Score:5, Informative)
and you won't have to run x11 in panther -- it will have a compatibility lib to display x11 via aqua.
as a last point, not many people complain about the lack of a native port for mozilla -- it still uses its own xul interfaces instead of aqua goodness. with x11 libs in aqua, a native port isn't as necessary.
Re:The point is moot... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The point is moot... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The point is moot... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The point is moot... (Score:3, Informative)
It's one way of running X on OSX. Another is Apple's X11 client [apple.com], which is better integrated with the OS.
What's wrong with the X11 version? (Score:5, Informative)
With the time I wait for X11 to start up, I might as well be running my paid versions of Word 5.1 and Excel 98 under Classic.
Have you used the spreadsheet? Full-screen redraws for something that causes cells to recalculate. Actually, half-screen, then full-screen.
For those of us using third-party USB scrolling mice, scrollwheeling scrolls twice for every ratchet of the mouse, and the redraws are so slow you find it's buffered your impatient scrolling and you're pages from where you wanted to be.
Inserting/deleting rows occurs on the row with the selected cell, not on the row you right-clicked. And slow full-screen redraws as you do it, undo it, and do it again.
And each time I open it, the window gets taller. Eventually it gets so tall that the resize widget is off the screen. I just had to scale it down manually again yesterday as it was getting too close to the edge of the screen.
Did I mention the redraws are slow? Quartz Extreme must be amazing if that's tolerable with it enabled. My system is PCI-based, not AGP.
I also have no idea if 1.1 is going to fix these problems because they don't promote builds for 1.1 RC3 for Mac X11--the links from the download page for 1.1 RC3 for Mac go to the 1.0 page--and attempting to download what looks like it could have been the 1.1 build (only 79.4 MiB) failed to complete overnight (over DSL).
Re:The point is moot... (Score:5, Informative)
Apple has announced that X11 will be installed as part of Panther. So what's wrong with the X11 version?
Well, let's see...
Don't get me wrong - OpenOffice is a great product... Just not on the Mac. I've used OO a lot on Linux, and it works great there. But on the Mac, it's not good enough that something "mostly" works. If it doesn't walk like a Mac app (key bindings) or talk like a Mac app (open/save dialogs, print dialogs, etc.), it ain't a Mac app. Until there's a native version that integrates nicely with the rest of the OS and its apps, even power users such as myself will have a hard time justifying the use of it - free or not.
As a slightly off-topic aside, I will say that there are things I don't like about MS Office on the Mac as well. Take the key combos, for example. In every other Macintosh program holding the Command key and hitting the left or right arrow will take you to the start or end of the line. But in Word, this just takes you back or forward one word. Very annoying.
Re:The point is moot... (Score:2)
You can change those though. I believe MS kept the same bindings, where possible, with the Windows version of Office. I should say I prefer this. Some things on the Mac are very frustrating. i.e. why on earth do Home and End take you to the beginning and end
Re:The point is moot... (Score:2)
Hmm. While yes, most things (I tried Mail, Stickies, Sherlock and TextEdit) in OS X are that way, both my Photoshop and InDesign are word by word (Adobe's choice?)
In OS 9, I tried Quark, Word, Photoshop and Entourage; all go word by word.
Maybe MS is just trying to stick with familiar conventions (if they even noticed them). I, for one, like word by word. By Command-S
Re:The point is moot... (Score:2)
Re:The point is moot... (Score:2)
Maybe MS is just trying to stick with familiar conventions (if they even noticed them). I, for one, like word by word. By Command-Shift-Arrow'ing, I like that I can take out several words at once with a couple key taps.
Or maybe it's just laziness on the part of developers porting products from the PC world. :) It's not that you can't go word-by-word (that's what the Option key is for), it's that when I press Cmd-LeftArrow in pretty much every program on my system, I know that the cursor will go to the st
What is wrong with X? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:What is wrong with X? (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure it works, but It looks so ugly.
Not everything is about functionality.
What is wrong with caring about something looks?
Re:What is wrong with X? (Score:1)
I don't mind using X11, and it will get better when Panther is out.
This would matter more if I used a Mac at work. At home, my office suite consists of Safari, Mail.app, BBEdit, & Python. When I need to bang out a quick spreadsheet or a nice looking letter, I use AppleOffice.
The only thing which bites about AppleOffice is the dreadful (and I mean dreadful) Presentations module.
Which is just as well. The world needs less presentations. Here's a made-up statistic which feels true: 90% o
Re:What is wrong with X? (Score:4, Insightful)
On their site, OOo says the X11 version is for the "Unix-Savvy" user, and I thought that maybe I was savvy enough a while back and tried it. I couldn't even get all the components installed correctly, which told me that I probably should be messing around as root in X11, lest I royally screw my machine.
The point it, I could make very good use out of a native version of OOo (wouldn't it be nice to abandon MSOffice completely!), but am simply not l33t enough to safely and comfortably get around in X11 and run that version.
Re:What is wrong with X? (Score:1, Interesting)
Not to flog the Mom thing... (Score:2)
Not that OO isn't functional in X, but the whole point of why Apple's own software, and much of the major third party software is so great, is that it is incredibly consistent.
What happens to Panther with MS Office 2k3? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What happens to Panther with MS Office 2k3? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What happens to Panther with MS Office 2k3? (Score:2)
probably about as fast a OOo can crack it and apple can port it.
OOo X11 OS X (Score:2)
Hopefully with 2.0 they will get to the point of having code that is truely portable rather than the current situation. It would also be nice if OOo for X11 used Gnome themes, maybe they can get that into 2.
Apple could lend a hand... (Score:1)
Re:Apple could lend a hand... (Score:1)
Why this is happening: (Score:5, Informative)
Currently, OpenOffice's interface is based on two different subsystems: UNO and VCL. UNO (Universal Network Object) is the component model that OpenOffice uses. It is roughly comparable to Microsoft's COM. Unlike popular thinking, UNO is NOT COBRA-based, although it does use a COBRA-like IDL. VCL (Visual Class Library), is how OpenOffice draws it's interface. VCL is cross platform, and is designed to maintain a common look and feel in all the platforms that OOo runs on (mainly, Windows, OSX-X11, and non-OSX-X11..)
Now, the problem is that VCL doesn't interface with native widgets that well. There are some crude hacks to try to integrate OOo slightly better, such as Ximian's OOo, but they arent' as effective as using native widgets. It'll take quite a lot of work to make VCL do this, and won't happen before OOo 2.0. The current plan is to reimplement VCL to make it a very abstract library that eventually calls native functions.
Now, there are several ways that this can be done, and it hasn't been decided by OOo developers which course to take. First, there can be a mapping of controls themselves to native controls. For example, OOo could tell Cocoa/Carbon to "draw a button at 300,100", etc.. Another approach is to map windows and dialogs as a whole with native windows and dialogs. This would be akin to OOo asking an Aqua frontend to "display a print dialog". The final approach is to make VCL a simple UNO interface and make each OOo frontend "do their own thing". This is how existing applications like Abiword. Thus, each OOo frontend could look completely different.
There are several OOo frontends that are planned for OOo 2.0. A Win32 frontend, being the most important platform that OOo runs on, is a foregone conclusion. Also planned for certain is a Java-interface for platforms that don't have a native frontend yet. A native OSX (using Cocoa or Carbon) frontend is also likely to happen. On X11, there has been a strong commitment as of late from OOo developers not to focus on one toolkit, but to support several. A gtk+ frontend is a very certain frontend. It looks like there might be a Qt frontend too. Less likely is a wxWindows frontend.
Now, there have been many people who question why OOo just doesn't use a multi-platform toolkit like wxWindows, gtk, or Qt. The answer is that the OOo developers don't want to focus on any single one. Additionally, there are problems with certain toolkits, such as wxWindows, which lacks a significant amount of accessiblity support.
Re:Why this is happening: (Score:1)
Re:Why this is happening: (Score:2)
-sigh-
wxWindows for Native OS X is currently in a mess... it's still VERY broken. I've been using it in conjunction with boa-constructor (SourceForge project) and it is barely working.
If that was not the case then perhaps wxWindows would be a viable alternative..
Re:Why this is happening: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Why this is happening: (Score:2)
Re:Why this is happening: (Score:2)
The project I'm working on: see project of the month on http://sourceforge.net/ (Boa-constructor). I'm working on the Mac part of it...
Re:Why this is happening: (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately this never happened and I really don't know why. We'd certainly be eager to help. The particular point about accessibility is a very good example of why collaboration between wxWindows and OO
Can Apple help? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Can Apple help? (Score:2, Interesting)
OS X also differs from the other Unix-like platforms in that it has a native Office port, so there really isn't an urgent need to produce an substitute.
Help out OOo and Reap the Whirlwind (Score:4, Insightful)
That's not to say that the company isn't savvy, and could wisely be working on an Office replacement (OOo-based or otherwise) just in case MS decides to throw down the gauntlet one day. They have done this in the past (eg. Marklar), but you'd never hear them announce projects such as these publicly.
Less of a problem than realized ... (Score:5, Insightful)
That being said, there are existing commercial non-Microsoft solutions. Mariner Software [marinersoftware.com] has decent word processor and spreadsheet software available for a reasonable price. Redlers [redlers.com] has a nice little word processor for a shareware price.
The thing is, Mac users have (or used to have) a tendency to monitor what's available for their platform. It comes from being treated like the bastard stepchild of the neighboring axe-murderer by the rest of the computer community.
Superficially Bad (Score:2)
Initially I thought this was really bad news. And it is bad news that the OpenOffice 1.* series isn't making it to OS X.
But it might reflect honest difficulties in porting to a whole different windowing system that may be too clunky to retrofit onto the OOo 1.* codebase.
Now if Apple were to put a few engineers into accelerating the OOo 2.0 release schedule, things might look better.
If I know my Mac users, they'll be pressuring for better free fonts, too, which hobbles the practical effectiveness of curr
Please Apple! (Score:3, Interesting)
My wife and I have been using OO for about three years for my university work and our Sunday school work. It has worked brilliantly and the new version with export-to-PDF is fantastic.
I just imported the entire FreeBSD online HTML manual (copied and pasted from Mozilla) and about 834 pages later I have a beautiful document with all FreeBSD's original formatting intact and it looks great. As the owner of an iBook (donated from mother-in-law), I would love to see Apple put some $$$ into porting it. It is one app that would stop me buying a Powerbook at years end.
Re:Please Apple! (Score:2)
Let me get this straight - you want Apple to invest time and money to port OpenOffice so that it uses the native GUI in order to prevent you from buying a PowerBook?
Somehow, I don't think this argument will be very persuasive, you know?
Re:Please Apple! (Score:2)
First of all, any Mac OS X application that can print can export to PDF. This isn't anything that has to be supported by the application; it's a button that's in the print dialog that every application uses. Since Mac OS X's entire display system uses PDF internally, it's a breeze to do. Very fast, also.
Secondly, I just tried downloading the HTML version of the FreeBSD handbook and dragging it on top of TextEdit, which is a very basic word processor/text editor, uses all standard Cocoa APIs a
NeoOffice (Score:5, Informative)
There is still a port (branch, aquafication, quartzification, whatever) going on, a couple in fact. Check out NeoOffice and NeoOffice/J (Java):
www.neooffice.org
www.neooffice.org/java
trinity.neooffice.org
Not surprised (Score:3, Interesting)
I spent 6 months trying to get someone to take my offer to help seriously, and gave up. And don't get me started on the squabling on the Mac dev forums for OO...if you're not on the good old boys list, you ain't spit.
May Not Have To Wait That Long... (Score:2, Interesting)
If Sun and Apple start work together on this whole Unified Destop thingy, I would bet StarOffice would be one of the first things ported to OS X. It would be a big boon for both Apple and Sun, anyway. Sun would squeeze into the desktop market, and Apple would squeeze into t
but why do you need openoffice? (Score:2, Funny)
doesn't vi come installed by default?
Quite amused (Score:3, Insightful)
If Microsoft can make a lot of money from Macs, why wouldn't/couldn't OpenOffice?
Re:for one very simple reason... (Score:2)
Solution is (Score:3, Interesting)
If you produce a product called Productivity Plus and Productivity Pro, one being a word processor/spread sheet package, and the other throwing in a few other tools + integration with the iApps, and then give it the nifty Aqua finish...
Why would anyone expect it to be Free?
Mac OpenOffice 'delay' debunked (Score:4, Informative)
The Register [theregister.co.uk] spoke with Dan Williams (one of developers) whose said that they "may be able to wrangle a 1.5 release with our required changes or something. Others, like Ximian, want to add stuff to. So the long and short of it may be that there isn't an "official" Aquafied OpenOffice.org release until 2005 and OOo 2.0, but there could be an interim release". There is heaps more info in the article, so have a peek.
Re:why leave out mac (Score:1, Insightful)
The reason why macs are overlooked so often is simple. It's called money. You make more money programming for windows than anything else. Bigger user base = bigger end profit.
Companies look out for their bottom lines, not their customers. Everything else done is just another way to increase the profit number.
Re:why leave out mac (Score:2, Insightful)
It's open, and it's a competitor/replacement for MS Office. That means the way to create the most use for all people needing an office suite is to replace the majority of office installs, so Windows gets preference there. That makes a quick easy fix to get people away from MS
Now as a secondary goal being open source advocates, if OOo aids towards getting more than just an Office suite switched over to open source, but also
Re:why leave out mac (Score:1)
There are lots of Mac only and Mac first products out there and have been for years.
ThinkFree Office is already out for Mac.
Re:why leave out mac (Score:5, Interesting)
The numbers just don't look good. No getting around it. It just makes OOo priorities that much easier to manage.
Sorry.
Re:why leave out mac (Score:2)
Mac Users, you're not missing out on much, so don't be too concerned. If you really weren't willing to pay for quality, you wouldn't have bought a Mac in the first place, right?
Re:why leave out mac (Score:1)
Most of what I do with a word processor involves 8-15 page documents with large amounts of graphs and photos. all the various versions of word I have used have been completely misersable at formatting this type of document. I will agree that OOo has an ugly interface, but as long as the program functions well, interface is a second priority for me.
I have n
Themeply beautiful (Score:2)
Try some themes [sourceforge.net]. It's not Aqua, but at least it doesn't look too jarringly out of place.
MS-Office sucks! (Score:2)
Re:Major bummer (Score:2, Insightful)
If it is good enough to use, pay the price for it. If it is not good enough to pay the price for it, don not use it.
Anyways, its a shame that OOo isn't ready for the Mac. My wife who does the church bulletin has been using MS Office 97 (she tried OOo 1.0.x and it didn't cut it) just tried out OOo 1.1 and was very impressed. Starting soon she plans on switching over.
I bet once OOo is ready for the Mac they will be in for a real treat.
Re:Major bummer (Score:1)
OOo is long since ready for the Mac!
Just not for ONE of the operating systemS that run these nice Computer systems.
Just don't say Mac, when you mean OSX.
Re:Major bummer (Score:1)
Re:Major bummer (Score:2, Insightful)
Computers are not a requirement for life.