Linux.com

Feature

EIOffice: The good, the bad, and the ugly

By Nicholas Petreley on June 02, 2004 (8:00:00 AM)

Share    Print    Comments   

Evermore Integrated Office is an extremely promising new Java-based office suite that currently runs on both Linux and Windows, with versions slated for Mac and Solaris. EIOffice is a remarkably faithful clone of Microsoft Office, with a twist -- it provides a level of integration unmatched by any office suite on the market. It's not without problems, though, a couple of which take EIOffice out of the running for some organizations.

EIOffice is a commercial package from Evermore Software. It is priced at $149, which includes one year of upgrades and support; you can extend that coverage for $99 every year after. You can also pay $389 for five years of upgrades and support. Various multiple user packs and business discounts are available.

I tested EIOffice on a home-brew workstation based on an Asus motherboard with an AMD Athlon 1800 MHz processor, a generic Nvidia GeForce FX video card, and a Flatron L1720P LCD monitor. I used a Samsung ML1710 laser printer for output.

The good

EIOffice is a welcome addition to the available productivity applications on both Windows and Linux for two big reasons. First, the word processor, spreadsheet, and presentation programs look and work almost exactly like Microsoft Word, Excel, and Powerpoint, almost down to the last dialog box and toolbar icon. EIOffice matches all but the sophisticated collaboration features of Microsoft Office. Only power Microsoft Office users might miss a feature here and there; the rest should feel immediately comfortable with EIOffice with little or no retraining.

Second, when it comes to integration between applications, EIOffice is without peer. EIOffice stores in a single binder file as many documents, spreadsheets, and presentations as you care to put into it. This encourages users to group related files in a single binder, but that's not an absolutely necessary approach, because EIOffice lets you integrate related data across different binders as well as different documents within a binder. EIOffice makes it far quicker and easier to share data and objects between documents, spreadsheets, and presentations than any other office suite I've tried, including Microsoft Office, OpenOffice/StarOffice, and KOffice.

For example, it is ridiculously simple to copy a cell from a spreadsheet, such as a dollar amount, and link it into the middle of a sentence in a text document. If you change the value in the spreadsheet, the dollar amount in the sentence will reflect the change immediately. If you then cut the cell from the spreadsheet and paste it into another spreadsheet, the link follows your cut and paste operation and the document continues to point to the correct value. It also maintains the correct link when you insert or delete rows or columns.

EIWord thumbnail
Click to enlarge

The persistence of links between EIOffice applications is not just better than OpenOffice, it is far more flexible and robust than what you get with Microsoft Office. This brings a new level of power to both Linux and Windows users. This kind of persistence is nonexistent in some suites, and problematic at best for Microsoft Office. Microsoft Office is hampered by sluggish and resource-intensive COM/OLE for linking, and office users may even have to resort to Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) programming for some links.

Even seemingly mundane types of links can prove to be valuable time-savers. Linking makes it easy to keep a white paper and corresponding slide presentation synchronized, for instance. One might link section headings to slide titles and sub-headings to slide bullet items. The slides will automatically reflect any corrections or changes you make to the section headings and sub-headings.

EIOffice didn't balk at importing a very large and reasonably complex Microsoft Word document, nor did it have a problem saving that document as a PDF file. Although it did not import Microsoft Office documents perfectly, it usually did a better job than OpenOffice.

EIOffice uses Java as its macro language. I could not find useful documentation for writing macros and custom programs in EIOffice. I had to record macros and look at the code that was automatically generated in order to discover the built-in functions of EIOffice that you can call from Java programs.

The bad

EIOffice is not without flaws, however, I managed to get it working on Debian (unstable branch), Gentoo, Fedora Core 1, and Fedora Core 2, but not without substantial effort on my part. The installation ran smoothly on Fedora Core 1, but it did not finish properly on any other distribution I tried. I had to copy files manually from Fedora Core 1 to my Debian and Gentoo installations to get it working on those distributions. Obviously, if you don't have a Fedora or Red Hat installation handy, you can't solve the problem this way, but a sophisticated Linux user can figure out how to extract and install all the files without the installation program.

The installation program completed successfully on Fedora Core 2, but the application did not run at first. Fedora Core 2 users will need to install a C++ backwards compatibility library to get it working. (One way to fix the problem is to issue the command yum install compat-libstdc++). I found it amusing that EIOffice told me I would have to reboot the system after installation before I could use the software. Perhaps this step is provided to maintain a consistent experience between the Windows and Linux versions, but no reboot was necessary under Linux.

The worst problem I had with EIOffice was a perplexing one of speed. Overall, EIOffice is very responsive, so much so that one would not guess it is a Java-based program. It was easy to navigate and edit a 300-page document filled with graphical objects and text with no perceptible delay.

I'm a very fast typist, however, and I found that the word processor occasionally dropped characters as I typed. This could be a show-stopper for some people, but I could not reproduce the behavior consistently enough to give EIOffice a thumbs down for all. Businesses thinking about investing in EIOffice for many users may want to test EIOffice on their slowest machines with their fastest typists before making a decision to migrate the entire company.

EIOffice was very robust in other ways. I've thrown a lot of types of work at EIOffice and it hasn't so much as hiccuped let alone crash. That's not to say there aren't a few non-fatal bugs. EIOffice sometimes forgets to switch cursor types from a text insertion cursor to a pointer, for example. Some other bugs were annoying, but none were show-stoppers.

The ugly

On the other hand, the fact that it occasionally drops characters may be the explanation as to why Evermore Software has not enabled font antialiasing or other font smoothing techniques available in Java. These features can slow down performance significantly. Without them, the fonts in EIOffice look anywhere from aesthetically challenged to downright homely. The problem is worse on an LCD monitor than on a CRT, but let's face it, it's the twenty-first century now and there's no excuse for such ugly font rendering, whether it's a Java problem or an EIOffice problem. Fortunately, documents print much better than they appear on screen, and the fonts are smoothed when giving presentations.

The bottom line

Although EIOffice is specifically designed to be a replacement for Microsoft Office, Linux users are more likely to compare EIOffice to OpenOffice. Since EIOffice emulates Microsoft Office sans a few features here and there, wherever Microsoft Office is more feature-rich than OpenOffice, EIOffice is likely to be equally more feature-rich than OpenOffice. And wherever Microsoft Office is superior to OpenOffice in design, EIOffice is also superior.

The most noticeable area where EIOffice whips OpenOffice is in the creation and management of presentations. OpenOffice Impress is certainly "good enough," but EIOffice (and Powerpoint) are clearly more usable and feature-rich. For example, EIOffice lets you customize your presentation in a much more granular way than OpenOffice. You can assign various animations and actions to individual bullet points and individual actions, such as a mouse click or a mouseover (when the mouse pointer hovers over the bullet item). While the presentation text in EIOffice is not antialiased or otherwise smoothed when editing a presentation, it is smoothed nicely when you run the finished presentation. Oddly enough, in spite of the fact that EIOffice is more feature-compatible with Microsoft Powerpoint, OpenOffice frequently imported Microsoft Powerpoint files better than EIOffice.

The EIOffice word processor is clearly superior to OpenOffice Writer in terms of integration with the other applications, and it has a user interface usability edge over OpenOffice. On the other hand, OpenOffice Writer text looks a lot better because the fonts are antialiased, and OpenOffice Writer never fell behind when I typed quickly.

The EIOffice spreadsheet is roughly equal to OpenOffice Calc, although once again the lack of antialiased fonts in EIOffice can be annoying.

EIOffice is peerless when it comes to application integration, so if the cleanest possible approach to integration is what drives your purchasing decision, EIOffice is not the best choice, it is the only choice.

OpenOffice is still plenty good enough for most users. Its antialiased text looks better, and the fact that it is free makes it difficult to beat on an economic level. But EIOffice is clearly the top choice for those who want the smoothest transition away from Microsoft Office. It requires little or no retraining, is almost as feature-rich, and is priced well within the reach of most organizations.

Nicholas Petreley is a consultant and writer in Kansas City, Mo.

Share    Print    Comments   

Comments

on EIOffice: The good, the bad, and the ugly

Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.

A frustrating review

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 12:44 AM
This review would be far more useful if it contained fewer superlatives and more specifics. For example, where, exactly, is MS Office or EI Office superior to OpenOffice.org?

In fact, I suspect a rather superficial acquaintance with OpenOffice.org, since there are relatively places where MS Office is superior to OpenOffice.org. Not only that, but the review doesn't mention the places where OpenOffice.org is superior to MS Office.

Obviously, space is limited in a review. But a few well-chosen examples would improve the review considerably.

#

Re:A frustrating review

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 01:02 AM
I was going to post about exactly that, but you beat me to it. This review is hopelessly biased and braindead. Apparently there was the wheel, sliced bread, and then this new EIOffice to save us all from OpenOffice's newfound crappiness. No sense bothering with stupidity like this. Not to even start about an office suite written in Java.

#

Re:A frustrating review - A Disappointed Customer

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 11, 2004 08:28 PM
I am most disappointed to have payed $150 for a product which, in effect, may only run on a Chinese flavour of Linux. I have tried to install it on 5 different Linuxes without success. I am very distressed and am considering approaching my card company to obtain my money back.

In addition, Evermore's payment system skips the confirmation stage during purchase without informing you of the details of your transaction.

I am surprised at the relatively glowing reports of the software when, in effect, it cannot reasonably be installed on most, if not all, flavours of Linux.

I consider Evermore's claims for it to be bordering on fraudulant in respect of Linux since the average guy, certainly, is unlikely to be able to install EIOffice and run it on most, if not all, normally available Linuxes. The reviewer, with a higher level of skill, did manage to get it running but should, under the circumstances, have written a much more balanced article. And Evermore should state accurately which Linuxes it will run (or will not) on and, if appropriate, give instructions to overcome minor difficulties.

EIOffice is a Java application and Sun Java Desktop did not want to know it at all, i.e. installation would not even commence.

That said, many of the reviewer's comments were relatively accurate when running EIOffice under Windows XP Professional, but then I don't need it for Windows.

Thumbs down for the Linux version of EIOffice until Evermore sort it out properly. It's still really only a Beta version, in my opinion.

In conclusion, Linux users are likely to be alienated under the circumstances.

#

Re:A frustrating review - A Disappointed Customer

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 11, 2004 08:41 PM
And, Oh, Evermore's site is so slo.....ow

#

Re:A frustrating review - A Disappointed Customer

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 24, 2004 07:27 PM
Contrary to Nicholas Petreley's experience, I cannot get EIOffice to run on Fedora Core 1, notwithstanding that it did appear to install.

I have, however, got it to to run on Suse Linux Office Desktop, based on Suse 8.1, with a little pockling.

It installs and runs O.K.as root except that the quick start function does not function. In order to get it running as user, I changed the permissions of various files and folders and copied the EIOffice icon from the root desktop to the user desktop. Still no quick start function, tho'.

Until Evermore Software sort out installation and compatibility problems, they cannot make the claims for it that they have done, their site is somewhat misleading.

Their FAQS claim it runs on recent versions of Red Hat and Nicholas claimed it runs on Fedora Core 1. Their FAQS also claim that it runs on Red Flag Linux which is only available in Chinese and another which is discontinued and unavailable.

The very least that Evermore Software should offer is proper support condidering the cost and the quirks.

#

what about the license? *NOT* free...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 02:30 AM
The issue of the licensing of this office suite is not even mentioned, like it is wholly irrelevant. It might be for the reviewer - but not for me.

This suite is proprietary, wholly non-free and no matter how "good" some of its technical aspects might or might not be - I want nothing to do with it.

I run solely free software, almost all of it under GPL, and I encourage everybody to do the same. By giving money to non-free software developers we are only strengthening the corporate noose around our necks!

[besides, a MS-Office look-alike written in Java - disgusting!]

#

Re:what about the license? *NOT* free...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 04:54 PM
Did you even bother to read beyond the first paragraph? Right in the second paragraph it states cost and licensing fees!

#

you might wanna use your head first

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 07:09 PM
costs and fees say little about licensing...

you can charge for GPLed apps for ex.

get informed first - then troll, moron

#

Re:what about the license? *NOT* free...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 10:26 PM
Q1: Which part of "proprietary" don't you understand?
Q2: Would you use an inferior tool simply because it is GPLed?

#

Re:what about the license? *NOT* free...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 04, 2004 04:37 AM
Q1: Which part of "proprietary" don't you understand?


          none.

Q2: Would you use an inferior tool simply because it is GPLed?


          yes. most definitey.

my turn for a question:

why do you post on a issue you most obviously do not understand?

#

Re:what about the license? *NOT* free...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 04, 2004 04:47 AM
Which part of "proprietary" don't you understand?

well, I can tell with certainty which part *you* do not understand: the implications of its use...

ignorance is bliss, right?

#

A CNET/Asia review by Brien Posey, MCSE

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 02:59 AM
Note: URLs below may need reassembly or the line wrap removed in case this text box does anything weird to the URL.

http://asia.cnet.com/itmanager/tech/printfriendly<nobr>.<wbr></nobr> htm?AT=39163468-39006407t-39000221c

His is shorter, but at least this is an MCSE who is not afraid or too reserved to pit this promising product against ms orifice.

Moreover, here is the link Google returned:

http://www.google.com/search?q=evermore+integrate<nobr>d<wbr></nobr> +office&sourceid=opera&num=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-<nobr>8<wbr></nobr>

It seems this company, Evermore, is getting some attention. If they are reverse engineering ms orifice this attentively and innovatively, then I hope the do the same about Lotus' SmartSuite's "WordPro", the word processor that replaced/expanded Ami Pro. WordPro has a KILLER metaphor for master/contained document creation: Tabs atop the form, in the ruler space.

Each tab contains the supporting or additional documents, and the URL to that document can be changed. The document can be inserted or linked.

Better yet, in the Lotus WordPro each document that is linked keeps it's own formatting, meaning landscape-oriented documents keep their footers, graphics, text flow and such intact. Page numbers appropriately and expectedly update. Page borders don't do funky things to the page layout or numbering, unlike my excruciatingly painful experience with SO & OO.o.

If there is available a demo or test of the EIOffice, I will try to download it. I hope there is a database tool similar to Lotus Approach, the worlds' best end-user/non-developer ad-hoc/wysiwyg relational database front end. For the cubicle worker this product kicks the pants off of ms abscess, OO.o/SO Calc, and more.

Regards,

David Syes

#

What about file formats?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 03:05 AM
What kind of file formats do they use?
Expecially if you compare this program to OpenOffice you should talk about this subject.
A significative advantage for an OpenOffice power user is the free xml file format:
1) it's XML -> you have tons of instruments to work with these files using the programming language you prefer
2) it's free. You can download the definition and use it as you like.

#

So, to summarise, it costs money and it has flaws

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 05:49 AM
If Evermore want to take paying users away from Microsoft Office and StarOffice, it's got to be able to import and export all common formats perfectly (it doesn't do this and can it read and write StarOffice/OpenOffice documents?! I bet it doesn't...).


It must also use anti-aliased fonts (users won't accept "chunky" onscreen fonts any more - and EIOffice doesn't use such fonts) and not have any "data loss" failures/crashes (it does - it drops characters if you type too fast, which is a disaster for a commercial product !). It needs to be available on at least the 3 main platforms (no Mac OS X version, so strike that too).


Add in the fact it doesn't install and run properly on most Linux distros and this looks a complete dead duck even compared to OpenOffice! Yet if you read this article, the author seems to have brushed away these serious issues - I think think they're important enough to give this first EIOffice release a major thumbs down. Maybe it'll improve, but with no demo version to try, I'm not paying anything until they sort it out!


BTW, I didn't see a URL for the package in the review - it can be bought from <A HREF="http://www.evermoresw.com/" title="evermoresw.com">www.evermoresw.com</a evermoresw.com>

#

I must have missed something.

Posted by: fmcgowan on June 04, 2004 11:36 PM
If the application suite is written in Java, why would platform specific versions be necessary unless the developers used native method interface code in the implementation?

On the other hand, the company website says nothing about "pure Java."



The following paragraph effectively states the product is subscriptionware for an initial fee + 99 USD/year subscription for updates:

EIOffice 2004 is available now in.English, Chinese and Japanese-language editions. Pricing is US $398 and includes five years of free upgrades and unlimited support. The suite is also available with one year of updates and support for US $148, with license extentions available for US $99 per year. Special pricing programs are available from Evermore for corporate, educational, senior citizen, family and other groups.



Given that aspect of EIOffice and the unspecfied effect of allowing one's subscription to lapse, I will probably be sticking with SO/OO.

#

Perhaps You're Missing the Point

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 08:00 PM
It's worth noting that Evermore is obviously a Chinese company. They're developing a regional clone of MS Office. Their intended audience isn't concerned with Free Software, XML, or interoperability with Open Office. Instead, they'll want to have an office suite that is as Office-like as possible, with the best possible Asian language support.

Most users will be running it on Windows. I'm sure that one of the Chinese Linux distributions will work out the details of integration and will offer it as a package. The review didn't mention the display of Chinese characters, but anti-aliasing isn't always a good thing, particularly at lower resolutions (as on a laptop LCD).

As always, your mileage may vary.

#

Re:Perhaps You're Missing the Point

Posted by: dukeinlondon on June 03, 2004 08:09 PM
You are quite right. However, it will make MS think twice about really fighting piracy in Asian Markets. Piracy makes Open source and any emerging competition irrelevant. Piracy in Asia is rife.

#

bad strategy?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 03, 2004 09:50 PM
It's worth noting that Evermore is obviously a Chinese company. They're developing a regional clone of MS Office. Their intended audience isn't concerned with Free Software, XML, or interoperability with Open Office.

That might very well be the case, but then this is a huge error on their part. First, because free software is really a growing trend in Asia and second, because the Chinese government is specifically pushing for the use of a GNU/Linux distro called "Red Flag" or something similar (forgot the name).

#

Re:bad strategy?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 04, 2004 08:55 PM
EIOffice runs on Linux and Windows, so it doesn't really matter whether the user has Red Flag or Redmond on his machine. What's important is that he or she can generate and open files that have been created by others using MS Office.

Two considerations:

First, it's hard to trace Chinese company ownership. A number of companies, particularly those with products that can be marketed in the West, have ties to the PLA (the Chinese military).

Second, the price that we see is that for overseas consumption. I suspect that the local price would be much, much lower. Remember that the Yuan (RMB)is artificially pegged to the dollar.

I doubt that it's a bad strategy from their perspective. They're not trying to take out Microsoft, just to capture a reasonable fraction of a very large market.

#

clearly not really targetting linux users

Posted by: dukeinlondon on June 03, 2004 08:03 PM
For linux home users, oo/staroffice is ubiquitous, so something commercial AND too tricky to install is a non starter.

For Linux soho/corporate users, the same applies with the added possibility of running MSOffice with crossover.

And the Windows Office suite market is LOCKED. Individual have MSOffice either bundled or pirated and corporate users consider it as unquestionably necessary as electricity.

Good luck to evermore.

#

EIOffice: The good, the bad, and the ugly

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 210.212.193.133] on January 17, 2008 06:50 AM
Try & Buy

#

This story has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.



 
Tableless layout Validate XHTML 1.0 Strict Validate CSS Powered by Xaraya