Re:OOo not "all that", but thanks anyway developer
Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on February 13, 2004 11:13 AM
OOo for GNU/Linux users is certainly a godsend. But it isn't "all that".
What do you mean by that? I am certainly very familiar with it, as I am a very active contributor. All the things I said about OpenOffice.org are true.
OOo may have much better file compatibility with MS Office than [snip] But there are major problems with it as well.
What does that have to do with my post? I said it had better compatibility with MS Office 2003 than Office97 does. This is correct.
In fact, there have been a few cases where MS Office cannot read a file even on the *same* version, on the *same* computer, and the file was read correctly by OOo.
Yes, there are problems with importing DOC files. But there are problems with the DOC format itself.
I'm no programmer, but a few F/OSS programmers I know, some with over 20 years experience programming, and who started early with Linux and with GNU, have stated that the OOo code is a mess.
What does that have to do with my post? Does that mean that it's more expensive? Or that it doesn't have PDF export? Those are the kind of things I said about it.
OOo's codebase spans about 15 years of development and contains twice as many lines of code as the Linux kernel. Many parts of the Linux kernel are a mess too.
What I can tell you from personal experience though, is that OOo is an absolute dead weight.
This has a lot to do with the history of the codebase. Back when the code was started, there weren't any good, viable toolkits that could be used for a cross-platform product like OOo. Therefore, most of what the system is supposed to provide had to be done from scratch.
Now the codebase is being reworked to take advantage of the existing toolkits, and the development is paying off. Version 1.0 is faster than StarOffice was. Version 1.1 is noticeably faster than 1.0. The next version, (2.0 due next year) will be faster yet. The graphics layer is being redone to take advantage of native toolkits (Gtk+ in the case of Linux). This will make OOo faster, and make it look more native.
While the resource issue will be less and less of an issue going forward as processors get faster and memory gets cheaper, this should not be the solution. The solution is to fix the code. Pre-loading is not the solution either.
And when did I say any of that??? Show me where I said any of those things.
And this isn't my major issue. My issue is that I get BSOD's, OOo style.
Have you reported an issue? We can't read minds. All I can see is that OOo doesn't crash on *my* computer. If it crashes on yours I need you to tell me so and help me pin-point the problem so it can be fixed.
Send me an email directly and I'll try to get this problem resolved (dcarrera AT openoffice.org).
These issues need to be fixed now, not taking on new features.
Have you taken a look at IssueZilla lately? Do you even have a clue of what we are working on?
Crashes *always* take priority. And after that, speed. Most of the work we are doing is in the speed front because, as of version 1.1.0, OOo really is very stable.
And btw, pdf export? Big deal. Other FS programs had it before OOo.
Other FS programs generally use standard Unix/Linux tools to do it. OOo did too before version 1.1, but only under Linux (by using those tools). What's new is that now OOo has PDF export *natively*. It works on all operating systems (even Windows). And the deal with it is not that it's hard to do, but that it's a feature that many people had been clamoring for. Currently, one of the most popular reasons we hear of people switching to OOo for is precisely PDF export.
Of course, I must also state, thanks to everyone who have contributed to OOo
Adding a small note of thanks as an afterthought does not justify your poorly researched and unduly-critical post. I spend 30 hours a week working on this project, and I don't appreciate someone telling me that this is all just a "dead weight".
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:OOo not "all that", but thanks anyway developer
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 13, 2004 11:13 AMWhat do you mean by that? I am certainly very familiar with it, as I am a very active contributor. All the things I said about OpenOffice.org are true.
OOo may have much better file compatibility with MS Office than [snip] But there are major problems with it as well.
What does that have to do with my post? I said it had better compatibility with MS Office 2003 than Office97 does. This is correct.
In fact, there have been a few cases where MS Office cannot read a file even on the *same* version, on the *same* computer, and the file was read correctly by OOo.
Yes, there are problems with importing DOC files. But there are problems with the DOC format itself.
I'm no programmer, but a few F/OSS programmers I know, some with over 20 years experience programming, and who started early with Linux and with GNU, have stated that the OOo code is a mess.
What does that have to do with my post? Does that mean that it's more expensive? Or that it doesn't have PDF export? Those are the kind of things I said about it.
OOo's codebase spans about 15 years of development and contains twice as many lines of code as the Linux kernel. Many parts of the Linux kernel are a mess too.
What I can tell you from personal experience though, is that OOo is an absolute dead weight.
This has a lot to do with the history of the codebase. Back when the code was started, there weren't any good, viable toolkits that could be used for a cross-platform product like OOo. Therefore, most of what the system is supposed to provide had to be done from scratch.
Now the codebase is being reworked to take advantage of the existing toolkits, and the development is paying off. Version 1.0 is faster than StarOffice was. Version 1.1 is noticeably faster than 1.0. The next version, (2.0 due next year) will be faster yet. The graphics layer is being redone to take advantage of native toolkits (Gtk+ in the case of Linux). This will make OOo faster, and make it look more native.
While the resource issue will be less and less of an issue going forward as processors get faster and memory gets cheaper, this should not be the solution. The solution is to fix the code. Pre-loading is not the solution either.
And when did I say any of that??? Show me where I said any of those things.
And this isn't my major issue. My issue is that I get BSOD's, OOo style.
Have you reported an issue? We can't read minds. All I can see is that OOo doesn't crash on *my* computer. If it crashes on yours I need you to tell me so and help me pin-point the problem so it can be fixed.
Send me an email directly and I'll try to get this problem resolved (dcarrera AT openoffice.org).
These issues need to be fixed now, not taking on new features.
Have you taken a look at IssueZilla lately? Do you even have a clue of what we are working on?
Crashes *always* take priority. And after that, speed. Most of the work we are doing is in the speed front because, as of version 1.1.0, OOo really is very stable.
And btw, pdf export? Big deal. Other FS programs had it before OOo.
Other FS programs generally use standard Unix/Linux tools to do it. OOo did too before version 1.1, but only under Linux (by using those tools). What's new is that now OOo has PDF export *natively*. It works on all operating systems (even Windows). And the deal with it is not that it's hard to do, but that it's a feature that many people had been clamoring for. Currently, one of the most popular reasons we hear of people switching to OOo for is precisely PDF export.
Of course, I must also state, thanks to everyone who have contributed to OOo
Adding a small note of thanks as an afterthought does not justify your poorly researched and unduly-critical post. I spend 30 hours a week working on this project, and I don't appreciate someone telling me that this is all just a "dead weight".
Daniel Carrera.
A very active OpenOffice.org volunteer.
#