Posted by: Anonymous
[ip: 124.106.192.77]
on October 10, 2008 02:32 AM
Bruce,
I think you made quite a presumption up there, right at the very beginning. You presume that it aims to match OO. feature for feature in the first place. I think that's a bit unfair to the KOffice developers. KOffice was never meant to copy or even match OO.o. It is not its standard. In fact, even their implementations of ODF are not exactly similar (see comments in previous KOffice news in dot.kde.org). KOffice is an office suite in its own right, with its own goals and its own design. To measure its improvements based on how closely it matches OO.o is doing it a disservice.
P.S. Of course that doesn't invalidate the rest of your observations and assessments. :)
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
KOffice != OpenOffice.org
Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 124.106.192.77] on October 10, 2008 02:32 AMI think you made quite a presumption up there, right at the very beginning. You presume that it aims to match OO. feature for feature in the first place. I think that's a bit unfair to the KOffice developers. KOffice was never meant to copy or even match OO.o. It is not its standard. In fact, even their implementations of ODF are not exactly similar (see comments in previous KOffice news in dot.kde.org). KOffice is an office suite in its own right, with its own goals and its own design. To measure its improvements based on how closely it matches OO.o is doing it a disservice.
P.S. Of course that doesn't invalidate the rest of your observations and assessments. :)
- Jucato
#