[kde] KDE version of OpenOffice?

[Jaymz Julian]

you know, some day, someone will explain to me why people get so damn wet
over openoffice - have people lost their ability to tell the difference
between "good" and "bad"?  Seriously.

Oh, gee, look, I'm gonna throw 128meg of ram at typing a letter, and still
be a pig.  How leet am I!

-- 
Jaymz Julian aka A Life in Hell
Coder, Visionary, Fat Ass.
"And the moral of this story is never lean on the weird. Or they will
chop your head off. And perverts will eat your brains." - Hunter S.
Thompson

On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Piotr Gawrysiak wrote:

> Dear all,
> 
> If you do not mind I would like to comment on some of the related
> suggestions in one post (and many, many thanks for your comments!!!).
> 
> >So by trying to port OO, you will need to change everything. So the only
> thing
> >what would remain would be some data and functional logic. Really not much
> at
> >all and in principle the same as if we would "simply" look into the code of
> >OO and take something into KO.
> 
> What about cosmetic changes then? Just changing the controls appearance and
> file dialogs would be (I think) quite an improvement and possibly not that
> troublesome. It would give KDE users something that looks a bit like a part
> of the desktop, while KOffice is being developed?
> 
> >I don't know much about the Mac port, but I assume they don't want to
> change
> >the internals, but simply try to adjust the OO widget design to the aqua
> 
> I am a bit puzzled here - I read the documentation on
> http://mac.openoffice.org, and also had a look at
> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/2097 and http://www.neooffice.org and it
> is a bit unclear. However it seems to me that this is much more than just
> making the OOo interface mimic Aqua look - they are talking about Aqua
> *native* interface. Note also that for a user there is little importance if
> the interface is native or not, if it looks and behaves as native. This is
> why (again - in my opinion only) Win32 port of OpenOffice looks quite good
> on typical Windows 98 or 2000 desktop (and worse on XP luna desktop).
> 
> >With marketing you are rather wrong. I think we are getting more of media
> >attention than what the current state of KO is worth it.
> 
> :-) I am not sure. But this also applies to all KDE. I am not writing here
> about technical media (or even slashdot etc.) but popular press. Often only
> the other desktop environment is mentioned, when people are writing about
> Linux, and when an KDE product is described its interface is taken "for
> granted". But I might have been reading not enough...
> 
> >This doesn't mean that we need to now stick to OO at all. OO has a rich
> >functionality but not all we want in detail. And it never hurts to have
> other
> >solutions as well. Monolithic is a bad thing.
> 
> I agree! But the thing I am most concerned with is mostly speed and timing.
> I would love to have choice but currently if I want to use quality Office
> suite integrated with the desktop environment, I have only two choices - MS
> Office on Windows or MS Office on Mac - both commercial. And I would like to
> have an Open Source alternative - but as quickly as possible - hence the
> entire post.
> 
> 
> >But that doesn't mean replace monolithic MS with monolithic OO. That also
> >doesn't mean (and this is the important part), that we are at the end. It
> >only means, today you have nearly 1 choice, and trust me, in future you
> will
> >have much more choice when the other projects aren't stopped.
> 
> I agree. However even if only OO replaced MS that would be quite a change -
> because one is open source software and the other is not. Also too much
> choice might be also a bad thing, especially when there is lack of
> compatibility. Note that competitors might use "divide and conquer"
> approach, and probably (just a guess) are using it.
> 
> Another thing - unfortunately for many people computer literacy means
> "ability to use specific software". Think for example about European
> Computer Driving License certificate.
> 
> 
> > There is work going on to standardize file formats, and to share work on
> > filters (filters for opening other office suite formats, that is.)
> How the prospects of creating universal file format, used both by OpenOffice
> and KOffice, look now? I guess (but this is of course just a guess again)
> that this rather means "KOffice adopting OpenOffice file format as native".
> I might be wrong, though...
> 
> Other thing - I have been observing KOffice development from the beginning
> of the project. Several times I saw opinions that other office suite format
> filters (especially Microsoft Office) development is not very important (the
> reasons given were however different every time :-). In my opinion this is
> rather crucial feature. Note that most of the Open Office reviews underline
> the fact that it is able to open and save Microsoft Office documents without
> big problems and conclude that this feature allows it be considered as an MS
> Office replacement, or *the* office suite at all. What the current situation
> looks like?
> 
> 
> > where you expect these other developers who are going to port a behemoth
> like OO from one programming language to
> > another, are going to come from?
> The thing that I am trying to do is to assess what are the possibilities of
> creating an integrated business desktop environment with office applications
> in a reasonable timeframe (say 1-2 years from now). And I am investigating
> if it would possible to boost such project with public funds and employed
> developers (think nationally supported project, EU projects, university
> cooperation and so on). Therefore the real question is - if (let's dream for
> a moment) we had funds and support allowing to launch a bigger development
> project with, say 5-10 people working exclusively on KDE office suite, what
> they should concentrate on?
> 
> > If they liked coding in C++ with KDE and Qt libs, they'd already be here
> doing so.
> 
> This is not necessarily true. Office applications such as KOffice or Open
> Office are not very "cool". Also - the people professionally using office
> suites are rarely professional programmers.
> 
> 
> > FWIW, there is no war between developers, only on slashdot and lists like
> > these, and generally only between users and trolls. Liking one thing, does
> 
> I agree, but the problem - I think - is that the users' opinions are much
> more important here. The desktop environment which is more popular will be
> developed faster and more actively because it attracts more attention. And
> its popularity will grow if it attracts more attention. The same applies for
> other applications.
> 
> Summing up - I think that as Open Office is multiplatform it attracts more
> media attention (and this is very important - several of my friends and
> coworkers - some not even IT people - knew about Open Office and were
> willing to give it a try or support the project somehow. None heard about
> KOffice :-( ). It seems that currently OO has much greater potential to
> attract developers, and attract businesses because of this.
> 
> >A specific KDE port is no doubt feasible -
> >it just takes resources. The question arises as to whether a port to KDE
> >would be the best use of the available resources at this time.
> 
> Exactly. I was thinking that it would be, but now I am not that sure. Still,
> I am also not sure about KOffice...
> 
> Many thanks again for all comments (hmmm, keep them coming?) and sorry for
> taking your time and mailbox space!
> 
> Best reagards,
> 
> Piotr Gawrysiak
> 
> 
> ____________________________________
> koffice mailing list
> koffice at mail.kde.org
> To unsubscribe please visit:
> http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice
> 

____________________________________
koffice mailing list
koffice at mail.kde.org
To unsubscribe please visit:
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice