Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Sun Microsystems Microsoft IT

Sun Releases ODF Plugin for MS Office 166

Posted by CowboyNeal
from the as-good-as-the-real-thing dept.
extra88 writes "Heise online is reporting that Sun has released their OpenDocument Format (ODF) plug-in for Microsoft Office 2000, XP and 2003. The plug-in allows Microsoft Office (for Windows) users to open ODF files and save their work in ODF formats used by OpenOffice, StarOffice, and other programs. According to the ReadMe, the plug-in adds "ODF Text Document (*.odt)" as a format to Word's Open and Save dialogs and adds Import and Export options to Excel and PowerPoint."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sun Releases ODF Plugin for MS Office

Comments Filter:
  • by mdsolar (1045926) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @10:25AM (#19779671) Homepage Journal
    Wow, if this won't boost the usability of Word what will? I might even try it now.
    --
    Solar power that is easy to use: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html [blogspot.com]
    • by The_Wilschon (782534) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @10:35AM (#19779739) Homepage
      No. This isn't meant to boost Word's usability. It is meant to boost ODF's usability. Now if you write a document in OOo, you can save it to a fully-supported format (no dialog box that says "If you save to Word 2000 format, you will lose some document formatting"), send it to your boss, and he'll be able to open it.

      It means that we won't have to pander to Word users any more, because they can be on an equal footing when it comes to document format support. This is much more important than getting rid of Word entirely.

      Anyway, I'd rather have a third party implement the ODF support for office. I don't trust MS to go against their embrace and extend instinct, and I'd rather have Office support ODF, rather than ODF plus some closed extensions and minus some slightly esoteric, but standard, features.
      • by mdsolar (1045926) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @10:48AM (#19779803) Homepage Journal
        I gave up on Word a long time ago when I had a hard time writing ascii files that didn't have non-standard characters in them. There just didn't seem to be a smooth devolution to something that worked well with a text editor with better marco capabilities (emacs in my case). So the program just didn't seem all that useful. Also the symbols were hunt and peck off a drop down. Very slow. So, to me, this development means I might try out Word again since I've been using StarOffice for simpler things like letters and such. How much does Word cost?
        --
        Solar power with no installation fee: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html [blogspot.com]
        • by doti (966971)
          LaTeX ftw!
          • by mdsolar (1045926)
            TeX is better.
            • by doti (966971) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @01:03PM (#19780867) Homepage
              If you're going low level, why not Postscript?

              LaTeX is great if you accept one of the nice provided layouts (LaTeX calls them "document styles": article, book, letter, etc), and focus only on the content. Or, if you want to tweak these layout just a bit, or make even your own.

              Maybe TeX can be useful if you want to make your own layout that has nothing to do with the LaTeX style, but I never had the guts to try to learn pure TeX. (LaTeX is easier than HTML).

              Once I was making a Perl script to create sokoban sheets using LaTeX, and my friend told me it would be easier in Postscrip. I was skeptic at first, but let him show how Postscript works, and I was very pleased with it.
              • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

                by mdsolar (1045926)
                Journals seem to be insisting on LaTeX so that is what I use, but LaTeX attaches figures to text with breakable bungee cords. If you want control of layout, then TeX does a better job. Having the figure being discussed on the same page as the text that discusses it is much much better.

                I get as far as editing bounding boxes with postscript. I think I've changed a few symbols as well.
              • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                by hey! (33014)
                It seems to me to be an apples and oranges comparison. PostScript is not a substitute for TeX nor vice versa. You can achieve the same effects you do in TeX in PostScript of course, but that's not the point. TeX does a small set of things very well and rather conveniently. PostScript does a broader set of things, but with more effort to reach the same level of quality and consistency TeX does in its small area of application.

                You should choose the system that fits your needs the best, and that you can w
              • by fm6 (162816)

                If you're going low level, why not Postscript?
                You're being sarcastic, of course. But Postscript by hand used to be very popular. Mostly for doing art and clever hacks, but there were people who insisted that a PS interpreter and a text editor is all the word processor anybody needs. Perhaps there still are.
            • by sg_oneill (159032)
              groff > troff

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Planesdragon (210349)

          How much does Word cost?
          $150 for a three-seat "non-commercial" license. More than that for just Word as a "do whatever you want" license.

        • Depends. Anywhere from 100 to 500 (complete Office) USD for a boxed copy (I think), or a free copy with a chance to win a federally subsidized vacation :)
        • by fm6 (162816)
          Dude, criticizing a word processor because it isn't good with text files is like criticizing semi-rig because it's hard to park. Editing text files and editing documents are fundamentally different activities, and require specialized tools.
          • by dwater (72834)
            Except that MS Word claims to be capable of editing text files, so one could be forgiven for thinking that it might be able to, trying it out, being disappointed, giving up and trying something better, like Vi.
      • by VirusEqualsVeryYes (981719) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @10:50AM (#19779823)

        I'd rather have a third party implement the ODF support for office. I don't trust MS to go against their embrace and extend instinct, and I'd rather have Office support ODF, rather than ODF plus some closed extensions and minus some slightly esoteric, but standard, features.
        I wouldn't worry about closed extensions, but overall I agree. If Microsoft had been forced to implement ODF, they would have made it half-assed, incomplete, and unreliable to give the impression of inferiority. They've done this before.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward
          So, Novell, Linspire and another Linux company signed an NDA with M$ to develop an ODF plug-in for Office, so that it can meet the Massechusette's standard for open document format. Then, Sun makes an MS office plug-in for ODF by itself, and releases it to the public. Oh the irony. Wait, it gets better.

          Microsoft wants to sue over 'interoperability' with windows environments, just as their sales decline. One financial report indicates M$ inflated sales figures for last year, by selling off assets. The i
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by HalifaxRage (640242)
        Never had an issue using Rich Text Format. Actually, only use that when I need boldfacing, otherwise ASCII is my weapon of choice.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by MightyMartian (840721)
          RTF importing from older software can be extremely problematic. I had a number of documents written in older versions of Microsoft Works and the OS/2 IBM Works wordprocessors, and no matter what I import them into (KOffice, OpenOffice or Word), they get seriously munged, so much so that the easiest course is to remove all formatting and reformat.
        • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @11:55AM (#19780347) Journal
          The RTF specification is about a page long. It defines some very basic formatting. It's then extended by different vendors in a variety of different ways. If you've never had problems with it, you've either only ever used the simplest formatting, or you've used a single library for reading and writing it (very likely if you're on Windows).
      • by hpavc (129350)
        Yes this was part of the anti-trust. Even though most of the formats can be preserved they choose to degrade them. Sow hy should this be any different.
      • It means that we won't have to pander to Word users any more, because they can be on an equal footing when it comes to document format support. This is much more important than getting rid of Word entirely.

        Sure, and now I have a fine response to anybody who sends me a doc file: Go here [sun.com], download that [sun.com], install, resave and resend. Thankyou.

        Sun: if you are interested in distributing this plugin as widely as possible you will fix your web site silliness and just provide a simple url to the install file, you can save the license dance for install time.

    • by HalifaxRage (640242) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @11:22AM (#19780067) Journal
      It looks like you're trying to be funny. Would you like some help?
  • by WED Fan (911325)

    Rather than complain about MS alternative to open docs, respond with a plug in that will allow MS users to choose.

    This is the way to do it.

    I'm sorry, OpenOffice guys, but compared to MS Office, your product is so 1995.

    What the OSS groups need to do is embrace and extend and borgify MS until all the MS tools are extensions of the movement.

    • by salesgeek (263995) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @11:01AM (#19779897) Homepage
      I'm sorry, OpenOffice guys, but compared to MS Office, your product is so 1995.

      Aside sharepoint extensions, the insidious smart tag, terrible GUI changes and the removal of Mr. Paperclip, how has the core of MS Office changed since Office 97?

      What the OSS groups need to do is embrace and extend and borgify MS until all the MS tools are extensions of the movement.

      Why the need? Adding tools that enable interoperability makes sense, so Sun did this one right. Extending Office? Why sell more product for MS, and why develop for MS when they'll take my extension, reimplement it as a new feature in the next version and put me out of business? I think you misunderstand OpenOffice: it's not about competing with Office on features. It's about getting things done.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by dgun (1056422)

        how has the core of MS Office changed since Office 97?

        The core? That would require adding real value to a system. Microsoft's strategy has always been to rearrange some menu items and add unwanted useless features like Word's "reading view" and call it an "Upgrade".

        And I think things will eventually come full circle. Office 2012, the return of Clippy (and this time...it's personal).

      • by symbolic (11752)
        It's about getting things done.

        Well, to be honest, watching Microsoft squirm a little doesn't hurt either.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by sid0 (1062444)
        You call the Ribbon a "terrible UI change"?
        • by salesgeek (263995)
          Is that what you call that total waste horizontal space for tabs that do nothing but glow when you mouse over
          • by sid0 (1062444)
            You have to have something to indicate major groups.

            Anyway, you're attacking a very minor drawback (the VERY SLIGHTLY increased display area for the interface). It isn't the horizontal tabs that are the important part, it's the organisation, the layout and the entire concept behind it that works. I've seen my *parents* use things like Track Changes and Captions (previously they drew textboxes below pictures) in Word documents. They can finally use mail merge without my assistance -- the mail merge tab is br
            • by salesgeek (263995)
              It isn't the horizontal tabs that are the important part, it's the organisation, the layout and the entire concept behind it that works.

              It's a tabbed toolbar with the glassy look applied. It is predated by Corel's adaptive toolbars (Better idea anyway, one strip stays the same the other changes based on context - not sure if it was in WP Office, but the Draw products use it) and is a tremendous waste on 1280x800 laptop screens as it takes nearly 1/4th of the screen for GUI chrome. Most users at our company

              • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                by sid0 (1062444)
                Because there's a learning curve? People don't like change. Microsoft has been very brave to make this big a change for this widely used an office suite, but I think for the most part it has paid off well.

                Jensen Harris's blog: http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh [msdn.com] gives some wonderful insights into the new design.

                PS: I'd like to have an option to display the ribbon vertically too (one of my few gripes), but it isn't a showstopper for me, and the benefits of the new version far outweigh the drawbacks.
        • by EvilRyry (1025309)
          The ribbon isn't a bad design at all. I myself am a full-time OpenOffice user but I had to quickly draft something up on a computer at work and it was very intuitive. The ribbon doesn't really seem to take up that much more space than the standard stack of toolbars either. As for OpenOffice, there have been some nasty bugs and lacking features for YEARS. Some of these make it unusable for many situations. Such as showing the formula for a trendline...
      • become 1997?
      • Why the need? Adding tools that enable interoperability makes sense, so Sun did this one right. Extending Office? Why sell more product for MS, and why develop for MS when they'll take my extension, reimplement it as a new feature in the next version and put me out of business?

        Parent poster meant we should extend the functionality of Office so that it is capable of interoperating with OSS, in the way that Sun did with its tool. If MS puts out a product, we should predicate any proprietary functionality w
      • by cbiltcliffe (186293) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @04:06PM (#19782377) Homepage Journal

        Aside sharepoint extensions, the insidious smart tag, terrible GUI changes and the removal of Mr. Paperclip, how has the core of MS Office changed since Office 97?
        Oh, come on! The interface for Office 97 was mostly grey. This was obviously changed in Office 2000 when they made it....well...uh....a different shade of grey. And they added web integration so it automatically made URLs blue and underlined! Then in Office XP, they got really daring, and changed the interface to be mostly blue! How can you not go "Oooohh! Aaaaaahh!" over that?!
        Then, for Office 2003, they got even more daring, and changed it to grey ! Ooooh! So retro and cool! Now for Office 2007, they've changed the menus to tabs, and made the interface blue! (Which, by now, is more retro than grey!)

        Hmmmmmm. My sarcasm detector seems to be broken. I don't know how that could have happened.....
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by MMC Monster (602931)
      You make it sound as if '95 was a bad time to be a word processor user. GUI-based word processing was just starting to take off with MSWord.

      I can't wait for 5 years from now, when OpenOffice is "so 2000". After all, that's what my office is set on (and fixed to, thanks to some legacy apps).
      • "You make it sound as if '95 was a bad time to be a word processor user. GUI-based word processing was just starting to take off with MSWord."

        MSWord was already the market leader in 1995. WordPerfect corporation had already given up on WordPerfect, selling it to Novell in 1994 who turned around and sold it to Corel about a year and a half later.

        Some of us had already been doing GUI-based word processing for a decade by that time.
    • by fermion (181285) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @01:12PM (#19780931) Homepage Journal
      Which is precisely why i use it. I need to get work done, not be wowed by new gadgets. Actually, key elements like master documents, version compatibility that goes back more than two versions, automatic PDF generation, support for nearly every format out there, and lack of licensing makes it perfect for someone who is looking for a work tool.

      I can get my work done without being interrogated if I own the product. I can download updates without downloading ancillary spyware. I don't have to worry if upgrades to my hardware will mean that I am unable to work due to licensing issues. Coming from someone whose efficiency not only translates into money but also increase in leisure time, I cannot image ever using MS products a my primary mission-critical tools.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by ScrewMaster (602015)
        No kidding. PDF support alone is worth the price of admission to Open Office (or would be, if there was one ... price, that is), particularly when you consider what Adobe's Acrobat tools cost. They wouldn't buy me Acrobat at work: I was always bugging someone in Marketing to convert my doc files to PDFs for me (I often send documentation to customers and PDF is the preferred method.) So I installed Open Office and that was that.

        Besides which, the GP's comment about "so '95" is pretty funny, considering h
        • by hazem (472289)
          I like to use PDF Creator: http://sourceforge.net/projects/pdfcreator/ [sourceforge.net].

          It installs like Acrobat in that it appears as a printer that you simply print to to create your PDF files. This lets you make PDFs of anything you can print.

          I haven't encountered anything it doesn't do a decent job with.

          Unlike Acrobat, you can't edit/merge your PDFs, but since it's free and makes PDF files, it's already doing a lot.
  • Will MS Object? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Gonoff (88518) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @10:41AM (#19779765)

    I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to object to this.

    I can think of several 'problems' they might bring up...

    copyright
    security
    warranty

    There might not be a real reason for them to object, but they don't like other people improving their stuff. I think it is somesort of perceived self interest.

    What other objections might they raise?

    • There's gotta be a few patent violations somewhere.
    • They have a well-paid staff of people whose only function is to raise such objections. Of course, if they blatantly update Office to simply not allow such add-ons they might get in some hot water, antitrust-wise.
  • Looking at the download site, I see a .exe file. I can't find out more without accepting the licence agreement. Is the plug-in open source?
    --
    Opening our Solar Power source to all: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html [blogspot.com]
    • by WebMink (258041)

      The plug-in includes some code that inserts the file format as an option in the "File Open/Save" dialog and in the rest of the file handling for MS Office so that the ODF formats appear as natural parts of Office (rather than in the un-natural way that the plug-in on SourceForge that MS sponsor tries to work). I gather that the developers are not sure if they can open that small piece of source code so the package as a whole is not under an open source license yet. The rest of the plug-in (the vast majority

  • by phoebe (196531) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @11:15AM (#19780007)

    ODF Converter [sourceforge.net] plugin sets, which are separate downloads for Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Just one package from a big, albeit Sun not a too popular name for most users, and no big ugly "Open ODF", "Save ODF" menu entries in Word. For some reason Excel & PowerPoint don't receive as nice integration: it gets an "Import ODF Spreadsheet" menu and new "Import ODF" & "Export ODF" toolbar.

    I already have .net 2 installed so not sure if its an additional requirement like the converter suite, there is however no need to install the Microsoft Office Open XML File Format converter pack.

    • by Kohath (38547)
      What's the problem with Sun again? When the open source guys said "gimme, gimme, gimme" Sun didn't give them everything fast enough?

      What's the big benefit of being randomly angry with randomly selected organizations based on 'net advocacy? Can't we all just get along?
  • 2007? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by frogstar_robot (926792) <frogstar_robot@yahoo.com> on Saturday July 07, 2007 @11:21AM (#19780053)
    Office 2007 is displacing the versions of Office this plugin supports. Any word when this will be extended to the latest Office? Or does is it already compatible?
    • Maybe you should tell about that replacing to all the people out there still using word 97...
      • Well, I've always said that the only thing compatible with every version of Office is to just HAVE every version of Office. You'll probably need three virtual machines to pull it off but you can't have everything....

        I suspect for ODF the Office 97 users are out of luck.
    • Re:2007? (Score:5, Informative)

      by SEMW (967629) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @12:47PM (#19780773)
      http://odf-converter.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net] works for Office 2007.

      The forth item in the list of contributors is thought-provoking.
      • by g2devi (898503)
        Have a look at the known unresolvable issues.
        http://odf-converter.sourceforge.net/features.html [sourceforge.net]

        Saving to file is an inherently lossy process and conversion from one lossy format to another rarely leads to equivalent results.

        I'm willing to bet Sun's plugin is better than the converter for the simple reason that Sun's plugin has access to the internal datastructures of the word document, i.e. it has access to the information before the lossy conversion happened.
  • ...when there's a version of the plugin that works with Office for Mac v.X and Office for Mac 2004.
  • Once again Microsoft is hammering it's customers into upgrading and I just wonder if it's customers expect to be constantly hammered to upgrade and like it? The Sun plugin, supports the most popular and most used versions of MS Office, 2000, 2003, and XP while Microsoft is pushing for adoption of MS Office 2007.

    I do get that their business is to sell new software but when it comes to things like this, having them skip much of the existing market should be a red flag to customers. The flag reads, Microsoft w
  • Yes, I know about the Novell one for Windows and SUSE Linux... but ironically I need one for OpenOffice... on Sun SPARC Solaris!

    The office where I work recently switched (for whatever bizarre reason) to MS-Office 2007 on all the Windows computers and instantly Microsoft's new proprietary .DOCX and .XLSX have become the new standard for sending junk in e-mail.

    We have some "public" SunRay terminals where employees from other locations can check their e-mail using Mozilla and OpenOffice, and overnight this swi
    • Just return the mail to the sender pointing out that they have sent you a document in an unsupported format and request that they send it to you in either ODF or .doc/.xls.

      Then you force them to face the problem they are causing. If they persist, start sending them documents in .odt/.ods format to let them know what it is like.

  • by pjr.cc (760528) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @12:39PM (#19780715)
    While i'm quite happy that a 3rd party developed this, third party plugin's tend to be a bit of an admin nightmare... I can just imagine having a conversation with my boss after sending him an odf formatted document:

    Boss comes running over: "what is and ODF? do I open it in photoshop?"
    me: "no, its a document format, you have do download a plugin from sun that works with microsoft word"
    Boss wanders off for 10 minutes, comes back and says "ok, i downloaded the plugin but it wont let me install it cause i dont have permissions".
    I wander back to the bosses desk to find he's gone to son.com and downloaded 15 different forms of virus, 2 pieces of spyware, a keylogger and his bank is ringing him on the mobile about a "$100,000 debt that just rang up on his bank account".

    I can't wait for the bofh to do a bit on this ;)
  • Now I love Sun (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Vexorian (959249) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @01:14PM (#19780959)
    What's great is that it also exports to PDF, what is a great reason to make people use it, I am gonna start by installing it to my parents' computer.
  • by Killer Eye (3711) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @01:16PM (#19780981)
    I think that until Microsoft's default format for Save is ODF, there will still be a proliferation of Word documents that require post-translation. Anyone have experiences convincing PC users at work to save as PDF for the benefit of Linux and other platforms? I thought so.

    I don't know how Word is configured, but I hope you can tell it what the default format for Save should be. At least then, an organization can pre-configure PCs for its employees to save in ODF, and start a reasonable migration to ODF. Telling users "by the way, every time you save you have to select ODF, company policy" will NOT work.
  • Somebody order another truckload -- this is going to be ugly.
  • It was my understanding that MS Word's save with password command is seriously broken, and I have told clients that. It doesn't affect their policy, in fact one uses the *same* password for all files, all employees. Just so they can say they are doing something even if it is the ultimate minimum.

    But that same client sometimes has ultra sensitive documents and they still use the same thing. Some people do save in password encyrpted zip files.

    Now if the Save as ODF plugin provides a really secure encryption m
    • The only point of saving in any 'word processor' format is for the ability to change. Using one (either proprietary or otherwise) for archival of anything remotely important is just plain dumb. (But obviously, the proprietary one is twice as dumb)

      If it 'musnt be changed' then print the damn thing to a PDF. Dials the changability to damn near zero, and the portability almost as high as it can go.
  • I'll install this when I get sent an ODF document. Maybe not for a while then.
  • This ODF plugin is good, at least as a start, but it won't have quite the impact desired until Word (et al) have ODF as their default save option. I couldn't see in the PR piece, but it looks to me like it is only an Export/Import option.

    Can anyone elaborate?

  • Their Read Me file in their downloads section reads:

    Sun ODF Plugin for Microsoft Office

    This file contains important information about the plugin. Please read this information very carefully before you begin.

    This software offered by Sun Microsystems will enhance several versions of Microsoft Office (see System Requirements). The following features will be added:

    In Microsoft Word, you can open and save text documents in the OpenDocument format.

    In Microsoft Excel, you can import and export spreadsheets in the OpenDocument format.

    In Microsoft PowerPoint, you can import and export presentations in the OpenDocument format.

    You find more information about installation and usage of the plugin in the following paragraphs of this readme file.

    For information about the OASIS OpenDocument Format (ODF), see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument [wikipedia.org]
    Notes on Installation
    System Requirements

    Microsoft Windows 98, ME, 2000 (Service Pack 2 or higher), or XP

    Microsoft Office 2000, Office XP, Office 2003, or the equivalent standalone version of Word

    Pentium compatible PC

    256 MB RAM (512 MB RAM recommended)

    45 MB available hard disk space
    Installing

    Installing Sun ODF Plugin for Microsoft Office has no known side effect on an installed version of StarOffice or OpenOffice.org.

    You need administrator rights for the installation. The plugin is available to all users on the machine where you install the plugin.

    Close all other programs before starting the installation.

    Change to the folder with the installation files.

    Execute the Setup.exe file, or double-click the *.msi file.

    Follow the instructions in the Setup dialog.
    Uninstalling

    Use the Control Panel to uninstall Sun ODF Plugin for Microsoft Office. Click "Start - Settings - Control Panel", then click "Add or Remove Software". Select "Sun ODF Plugin for Microsoft Office" and click the button to remove the software.

    Note: Your documents in ODF format are not affected by uninstalling the plugin. You can install a software like StarOffice or OpenOffice.org to load your ODF files and save them in other formats.
    Using the Plugin

    Start Microsoft Word, Excel, or PowerPoint.

    In Word, the ODF format is available as an additional filter in the file dialog.

    An additional toolbar in Excel and PowerPoint shows the icons "Import ODF" and "Export ODF".

    Additional menu commands in the File menu are available. The commands are explained in the following sections.
    To open an OpenDocument file

    In Word, choose File - Open. In the dialog, select the file format "ODF Text Document (*.odt)", then select any file with the extension *.odt.

    In Excel, choose File - Import ODF Spreadsheet. In the dialog, select any file with the extension *.ods.

    In PowerPoint, choose File - Import ODF Presentation. In the dialog, select any file with the extension *.odp.
    To save or export an OpenDocument file

    In Word, choose File - Save or File - Save As. In the dialog, select the file format "ODF Text Document (*.odt)", then enter a name for the file.

    In Excel, choose File - Export ODF Spreadsheet. In the dialog, enter a name for the file.

    In PowerPoint, choose File - Export ODF Presentation. In the dialog, enter a name for the file.

    Note: "Saving" versus "exporting": In Word, you can save the current document directly in the OpenDocument format. In Excel and PowerPoint, you can only export to ODF. When you save to ODF, from that moment on you are working on the ODF document. When you export to ODF, a snapshot of the current document is written to an ODF file, but you still work on the same document that you once opened.
    To always use the OpenDocument format in Word

    If you want to save your text documents always in the OpenDocument format, unless you specify another format,

    in Word, choose Tools - Options. Click the Save tab, then select the OpenDocument format as standard format.

    If you want to start Word when you double-click an *.odt file in Explorer, change the default file format as in the step above, or

    right-click an *.odt file in Explorer, choose "Open with...", select "Microsoft Office Word", and mark "Always use the selected program to open this kind of file".
    Word converter warnings

    Word shows a warning when using file formats that are foreign to Word. This warning unfortunately cannot be disabled and should be ignored.

    Word XP and Word 2003 show an additional warning about security of 3rd party converters. This warning can be disabled in Word 2003 SP1 and Word XP by setting a registry key.

    Registry entry for Word 2003 SP1:
    [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\11.0\ Word\Options]
    "DoNotConfirmConverterSecurity"=dword:00000001

    See also http://support.microsoft.com/kb/837011/ [microsoft.com]

    Registry entry for Word XP:
    [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\10.0\ Word\Options]
    "DoNotConfirmConverterSecurity"=dword:00000001

    See also http://support.microsoft.com/kb/840662/ [microsoft.com]
    Taskbar Icon

    A new icon is visible in the notification area of the Windows taskbar. Right-click the icon for a context menu.

    The context menu offers the following commands:

    About - shows some information about the plugin.

    Check for Updates - connects to the Internet (using the Windows proxy settings) and checks for an update of the plugin.

    Exit - removes the background task from memory and hides the icon.
    Support and Feedback

    Product support for end users for the Sun ODF Plugin for Microsoft Office is limited to a feedback alias. Please email your comments or feedback about the product to ODF-Plugin-feedback@sun.com. We appreciate feedback or questions about the plugin but cannot guarantee a response to every email.

    For organizations and businesses that require enterprise level support for the ODF Plugin, Sun offers backline support and indemnification to organizations that are deploying the Sun ODF Plugin for Microsoft Office in volume.

    To contact a Sun sales representative please call :

    1-800-555-9SUN (US)
    1-650-960-1300 (International)

    You can also go to http://www.sun.com/contact/index.jsp?tab=1 [sun.com] to get contact information for Sun sales.

    We hope you enjoy using the new Sun ODF Plugin for Microsoft Office.
    Legal Disclaimers

    Copyright © 2007 Sun Microsystems, Inc., 4150 Network Circle, Santa Clara, California 95054. USA. All rights reserved.

    U.S. Government Rights - Commercial software. Government users are subject to the Sun Microsystems, Inc. standard license agreement and applicable provisions of the FAR and its supplements.

    Use is subject to license terms.

    This distribution may include materials developed by third parties.

    Sun, Sun Microsystems, the Sun logo and StarOffice are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the U.S. and other countries.

Never trust an operating system.

Working...