Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by AtHomeBoy_2000, Aug 30, 2006.
This is awesome news! WOOO HOOOO!!!
Going to be very interested in installing this when it's available
Wow... and that just weeks after NeoOffice...
Oh believe me, I have been very critical of OpenOffice for taking so long to get a native version of OpenOffice.
This is going to be awesome. Does anyone have any more news on it?
It surely is...woot!
Yes, it will be slow and buggy, with mediocre charting capabilities.
Has this been released yet?
I am waiting for this aswell
Nope, hasn't been released yet.
"Oh why are we w a i t i n g .... "
Is it too much to ask for cocoa?
Open Office Aqua timeline here. It looks like they're running about 12 months behind NeoOffice.
Not only 12 months late, but they seem to rely on Java as well, just like NeoOffice. Java dependence was their most significant reason why they thought NeoOffice was not the proper way of creating a Mac native version.
In one word, yes. They intended to do it with cocoa but had to stop and go carbon instead.
I could be wrong, but from my understanding, OOo for Mac doesn't and won't rely on Java more than OOo for other platforms. On the other side, Neo relies heavily on Java. Personally, I use both "OpenOffice.org 2.0.3" and "NeoOffice 2.0 Aqua beta 3" (based on OOo 2.0.3). Both have advantages and limitations.
- it uses native fonts (OOo uses fondu to extract the fonts and be able to use them, which duplicates them. Furthermore, when you want to use the document with Neo or OOo on windows, a 1 full page document may appear on 2 pages with 1 or 2 lines on the top of the second)
- it is more Mac friendly
OpenOffice.org for Mac using X11 has also some advantages:
- it opens quicker (I ran test on both on my PB G4 15" 1.5 GHz 1.5 GB RAM: OOo opens in 26 secondes the first time when even X11 is not launched, then OOo reopens in 6 secondes. Neo opens in 32 secondes the first time, then in 14 secondes after it has been closed)
- it uses less memory (OOo+X11: 87.15 MB real memory and 736.68 virtual. Neo: 218.35 MB real memory and 997.63 virtual)
- presentations transitions are way better handled than Neo (generally OOo tends to be faster than Neo, maybe due to this Java dependance?)
- it is the official OpenOffice.org, more up-to-date, is QAed, and the future of it doesn't rely only on two persons (as committed as they are, they are only human) but on a team.
It is indeed too bad that there are two separate projects, wasting in a sense time, energy and donations. It is the result of licence differences, technical approach differences, and miscommunication.
That would be cool and more to the point about time. I thinks the X11 version was the reason most "average" users were put off from installing it.
I thought so as well, but Java is one of the few specific items on their "to-do" list. It seems like it is a not-so-insignificant component, but I could be wrong.
You could add "native cut, copy, paste ability from other native Mac apps." There could be some printer abilities as well. I know I am missing more, but that's the first one to add that comes to my mind. BTW, can OpenOffice use the character palette?
Yeah, Java makes things a bit slower.
You are right about the two-person team issue. The future of NeoOffice may not be all that bright, but their file formats are the same, so I can always switch to OpenOffice if that happens. By then, maybe OpenOffice will have its own Aqua Mac version as well.
yes it is. i doubt that many people are willing to put in that much work regularly to keep up with OOo on other platforms. Particularly cause OOo is not for-profit, and the devs aren't being paid to volunteer their time to work on it.
Besides, what's so entirely wrong with Java? Why is it that everyone I see is always ragging on devs for using Java, instead of ragging on Apple's lackadaisical support of Java?
It's not a bad language, far from it. And in a situation like OOo (you know, MacOSX isnt the only platform out there) with like, a dozen ports for several different OSs and architectures, I can hardly see how OOo would fail to benefit from taking advantage of any multi-platform-compatible technology.