Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

OpenOffice.org 2.0 Preview

Posted by Zonk on Sun Mar 06, 2005 05:19 PM
from the second-verse-different-than-the-first dept.
Reader lord_rob the only on wrote in to mention a preview of the upcoming OpenOffice.org 2.0 running on tectonic. From the article: "It is not too bold to say that OpenOffice.org 2.0 will usher in a new era of functionality, reliability, compatibility and ease of use. The extensive changes and enhancements which are to be included in the upcoming release are all the evidence needed to justify this assertion." As we mentioned earlier this week, the beta candidate is currently available.
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • I Took it For a Spin (Score:5, Interesting)

    by eno2001 (527078) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:23PM (#11860910) Homepage Journal
    It looks really nice. Especially the addition of "Base", the database portion which appears to be much more well thought out than most "easy to use" database products. FileMaker Pro? Forget about it. More like FileMangler Pro! ;P
  • by Tufriast (824996) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:24PM (#11860925)
    I find it funny, b/c my friends are still shelling out hundreds of dollars for M$ Office. At this point, I've decided never to pay again for an Office suite as long as Openoffice.org is around. There's no point. What I do not get, is why people are still acting stuck up when they say they use "M$ Office Professional." So, you can mail merge...OH wait OO.org can do that too...and you can play Pac Man in Excel...good for you...lol.
    • by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:31PM (#11860962)
      I find it funny, b/c my friends are still shelling out hundreds of dollars for M$ Office.

      I find your friends funny, cuz mine don't pay a cent for M$ Office. P2P, ya know...

      I mean come on, honestly: apart from businesses and some high(er)-profile folks, who the hell pays for Office?
      • I find your friends funny, cuz mine don't pay a cent for M$ Office. P2P, ya know...

        Congrats... Your friends are helping to raise the barrier to entry for smaller office suites.

        Friends don't let friends pirate software. Nor do they let friends by from MSFT....
        • by ceejayoz (567949) <cj@ceejayoz.com> on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:48PM (#11861104) Homepage Journal
          Congrats... Your friends are helping to raise the barrier to entry for smaller office suites.

          One would think the opposite is true.

          Given the fact that the vast majority of users still buy their software, Office going up in price due to piracy would be a good thing for cheaper alternatives.
          • Sorry but your argument doesn't hold water. Office never was significantly much cheaper than it is today. And besides, if everybody stopped piracy today, the only thing that'd happen is Microsoft getting a whole lot richer, and the price would stay exactly the same.

            Then you don't understand my argument. In the software industry, if you remove the requirement that many customers decide where to spend their money, then you make it harder for other office suites to get enough market share to be self-sustaining. Furthermore, such individuals only reinforce the dependence on MS Office without providing any real incentive for competition.

            Welcome to reality: Microsoft shafts their users whenever they can, and the users shaft Microsoft back whenever they can too in turn. That's the name of the game.

            But the problem is that the consumers are *not* shafting Microsoft when they pirate Microsoft software. Instead they are reinforcing users' dependency on it. Furthermore they make it harder for others to enter the market profitably. If users want to shaft Microsoft, they should *stop using Microsoft software!*
    • by generic-man (33649) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:31PM (#11860966) Homepage Journal
      It's not that they're acting stuck up. The number one reason why people still shell out hundreds of dollars for Office is VBA compatibility. Whether you like it or not, many companies have built shockingly full-featured applications using Excel as a base. Imagine a spreadsheet where you need to fill out forms (which are in cells) and hit submit buttons to transmit data to a server which then transmits data to you which opens up another form in the same file. That's an extremely clunky way to build (say) a procurement platform, but it uses a tool (Excel) that everyone has.

      Is VBA a great language? Not really. Does everyone use it? No. But you can use it to claim that OpenOffice does not have 100% of the functionality that MS Office does.

      OpenOffice has its own programming language, StarBasic. When you* get done rewriting all your MS Office-based applications in StarBasic, let me know just how "free" OpenOffice was for you.

      * By "you" I mean "a large albeit short-sighted company that entrusts important business functions to macros in spreadsheet programs."
      • by ckaminski (82854) <ckaminski.pobox@com> on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:51PM (#11861123) Homepage
        I just finished a contract with a trading firm to build a year-end customer reporting tool in Access. Needless to say, 48 hours later, after having the version changed from Office 2000 to OfficeXP 45 hours into the project, and having the DateTimePicker control removed, I will *NEVER* write another embedded VBA project again (except maybe Outlook. Outlook VBA has rarely broken my projects.)

        There were enough bugs and differences between versions that my code broke. Personally, I'd rather have written the app in VB and used Access via MDAC/ADO. Never again, and that goes for Excel and Word too... <shudder>

        VBA is actually a pretty formiddable scripting language. Nowhere near as powerful as perl, but quick, dirty and relatively clean.

        <dons asbestos underwear>
        Flame on.
        • by generic-man (33649) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:45PM (#11861082) Homepage Journal
          Walk over to the finance department of any sizable company and secretly switch an analyst's computer over to OpenOffice. It's a fun way to learn dozens of new swear words.

          At this point, saying "OpenOffice Calc is just as good as Microsoft Excel" is just as dumb as saying "GIMP is just as good as Photoshop." It makes open source advocates really happy to hear, but it makes experts just roll their eyes. That makes open source advocates belittle the experts for very shallow reasons, calling the experts names like "Joe Businessman."
  • Double page spread? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Psiren (6145) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:25PM (#11860928)
    Anyone know if you can view and edit two pages side by side like you can in Word? It's a really useful feature when you have a decent sized screen to work with. I have played with an earlier snapshot release a bit but haven't been able to find anything in the menus that would accomplish it.
    • by aussersterne (212916) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:39PM (#11861039) Homepage
      I second this! This was originally a WordPerfect feature and now Word does it. When will OpenOffice do it? I can't imagine writing without it!
      • by generic-man (33649) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:51PM (#11861121) Homepage Journal

        Thank you for requesting a new feature (which I will call "feature X") in an open source product. Please choose from the following responses for the community to give you.

        1. Insult the user. Feature X is only used by pointy-haired bosses for stupid reasons. I don't think anyone ever needs to use feature X outside your braindead company.
        2. Insult the reporter. Why the hell do you need feature X? Other Open Source product already does it, and everyone on our mailing list hates other Open Source product. Go use other Open Source product if you want feature X.
        3. Claim the feature already exists. I know it's not as simple as with your so-called "closed source product," but you can actually do feature X already. Just install plugin Y, extension Z, run the script at some broken URL, and recompile. Voila!
        4. Cite a future release. Thanks for asking for feature X. We already have it in our beta branch. You can use it for now, but there's a long list of bugs in the branch. It's beta and it's free; what do you expect?
  • Conversion guides? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rsrsharma (769904) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:27PM (#11860941) Homepage Journal

    Wow, this looks really good. Being a Linux user and student, I've always wished I was as productive in Linux-native word processors as I am on Windows with Word (currently 2003). However, after using Word for my whole life, AbiWord and OpenOffice (OpenOffice especially) seem unintuitive (obviously the result of Microsoft brainwashing ;)). Hopefully OpenOffice 2.0 will solve this problem for me, but in the meantime does anybody know of a good (as in you've actually used it successfully) Word-convert user's guide to AbiWord or OpenOffice? If there's another (preferably Gnome-native) word processor that you know a guide for, that's okay too.

  • by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:27PM (#11860943)
    Has it grown even bigger and slower than it is now?

    OOo is great, but I discovered the other day that it doesn't work anymore on my older laptop with 96M of ram and nothing loaded but a basic KDE. It used to work there not so long ago, not fast or anything, but well enough to do presentation with Impress on the cheap. No more, which is a real pain.

    So if 2.0 has grown even more monstrous, I'm not even trying it out, nosiree. My other laptop still has enough oomph to use 1.1.
      • by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:41PM (#11861058)
        A lot of software these days is heavely bloated. So a laptop like yours could properly only run old software, wich means that you will either have to buy a new one, or swich to something less demanding.

        Well quite, but what I meant was that 96M of RAM should be more than enough to run something like Impress under KDE. Heck, Windows and Powerpoint run just fine on that laptop.

        OOo has grown ridiculously big and slow. So has KDE and many other programs. So much for Linux users going all giggly when they mention Microsoft bloatware: OSS software has gone worse these days...
      • by cozziewozzie (344246) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:47PM (#11861093)
        drop kde, its not worth it. try using a true lightweight window manager like fluxbox or xfce.

        Drop the car, dude, it's not worth it. Try using a true lightweight tyre, like Pirelli or Michelin.

        My Michelin SX-LE4 tyre feels much more lightweight than any Honda Civic I've ever seen. It makes me much more productive.
  • Test it! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MicroBerto (91055) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:31PM (#11860968)
    In my opinion, OpenOffice.org is the most important software suite in the OSS movement. You might argue that Firefox is, but OO.org is competing against a very expensive application. If it can be used to stimulate innovation and bring prices down, I'm all for it.

    That said, please test it! OpenOffice.org's success in the long run is determined by the visionaries like us who give good feedback so that it can eventually make it to the mainstream smoothly.

  • a few things (Score:5, Informative)

    by matt me (850665) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:32PM (#11860981)
    1) launches faster :) 2) new quickstarter is useless, cannot launch apps from it. hopefully will add shortcuts to all apps like in old one. 3) uses new opendocument format. soon to be supported by legacy release of openoffice 1.1 and koffice.
  • by gnarled (411192) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:39PM (#11861037) Homepage
    I post this out of genuine curiosity and do not intend to troll. Where is the innovation in OO.org? Yes, I have used it, but a few extremely annoying glitches, such as copy/paste not always working correctly, made me switch back to Office. From my experience it is just a direct recreation of MS Office. Any feature that is added to Office seems to just show up a version later in OO. They are nearly identical even down to the UI.

    Is the fact that it is free the only innovation?
    • by kfg (145172) on Sunday March 06 2005, @06:02PM (#11861218)
      Some softeware is intended to innovate, some is intended to provide comfort. OOo is intended to provide comfort. It does so reasonably well.

      Personally I do most of my writing in an innovative editor that lets me control all editing functions on standard keys while touch typing, never having to take hands off home base, let alone remove them from the keyboard to use a mouse.

      But some people find this uncomfortable. They're used to MS Office. For them there is OOo. That's what it's for. If you wish to find innovation, look elsewhere, but then don't complain that it's different.

      KFG
  • Logic? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Michael Woodhams (112247) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:41PM (#11861053) Journal
    "... OpenOffice.org 2.0 will usher in a new era of functionality, reliability ..."

    "This beta is not for the faint of heart, and should not be considered as reliable ..."


    So on the basis of trying out some unreliable software, we conclude that the final version will be reliable?

    While it may turn out to be true, the logic is lacking here.
  • by ducomputergeek (595742) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:45PM (#11861084) Homepage
    Is optimized code damn it! I installed OO on my dad's K6-2 400 a couple years ago after a monster system crash due to a virus. Works for him for typing letters and tracking his stocks in a spreadsheet. He had no problems what so ever using it. His only complaint was it take a long time to load.

    In OO 2 its supposed to load faster, but to be honest, Hell Works 2.0 has done basically everything I've needed since 1988. Office 2000 added some useful features, but then I switched to Macintosh anyway. I wish they would optimize the code and take out the bloat. I would be impressed if just once someone came up with an application that version 2.0 ran on older hardware instead needing newer stuff because of code optimatzation.

    I have Office V.x for my Mac primarily for one program: PowerPoint. I've just purchased iWork and damned impressed with Pages and Keynote 2. Still not as many design templates as Powerpoint for Mac, but I am sure that will change with time.

  • by t482 (193197) on Sunday March 06 2005, @06:00PM (#11861199) Homepage
    Another review [xminc.com]:

    It hasn't quite caught up with MS Office 2003 in terms of functionality - but who cares? OpenOffice 2.0 is more that good enough for your average office worker. The suite is comparible to older versions of MS Office, which are functioning fine on millions of desktops around the world. The only things that I really disliked was the increased reliance on proprietary software (Java JRE) and the interoperability issues I experienced cutting and pasting tables between calc, write and impress. The Beta is currently a bit slow - however that should improve once it is released and any debugging code is removed. The user interface feels significantly nicer than the previous version; however, the dialog boxes are still not perfect. The suite uses Oasis file format - which may become the holy grail of document formats. HTML editing in write is far superior to MS Word and I recommend OpenOffice as a filter for word documents that require conversion to HTML or Oasis. Write includes a long awaited WordPerfect import filter. Overall I was extremely impressed with the new MS Office interoperability and the application's overall functionality.

    * Very good new functionality
    * Oasis file format - may be the new killer feature
    * Meets the needs of your average text oriented office worker
    * Excellent MS Office Integration
    * Annoying Java JRE reliance. Either open source java or remove the dependancy.
    * Dialog boxes occasionally still feel clunky
    * Crashes and table copy and paste issues need to be cleaned up before gold release
    * Free and open source

    7.7 out of 10
    • by schon (31600) on Sunday March 06 2005, @05:44PM (#11861071) Homepage
      My only gripe with OpenOffice so far has been the annoying quirks in th e UI

      My biggest gripe with OO.o (as of 1.1) is that it's still stuck in the MS single-user system world. I hope that 2.0 will break this, and make it a true multi-user application.

      I've tried 1.1, and the "multi-user" install is nothing of the sort - in addition to being painful, you still have to "install" it for each user, after you've "installed" it - quite a pain on a multi-user system (try doing it for 20 users - I can only imagine what it must be like for systems with a few hundred users).

      Just like every other Unix app, I should be able to install it once, and every user on the system should have access to it - I shouldn't have to do anything for each user.
      • This was the biggest showstopper for us - multi-user.

        Believe it or not, I've had a 4 month old build of OOo 2.0 (1.9.49, I think) running on our Terminal Server for the students. Not even a glitch. Far better this than the absolute hell I went through installing it in the labs.

        Yes, thank God, they've finally fixed the install! And thanks for asking - a lot of fellow admins out there were totally turned off because of this glaring omission. They should be aware that OOo 2.0 installs like Office does.