Google Hiring Programmers to Work on OpenOffice 538
massysett writes "Google is hiring programmers to work on OpenOffice.org. "We use a fair amount of open-source software at Google. We want to make sure that's a healthy community. And we want to make sure open source preserves competitiveness within the industry," said Google's manager for open-source software. Perhaps Google's work will address an oft-heard complaint about OO.o: "Google believes it can help OpenOffice--perhaps working to pare down the software's memory requirements or its mammoth 80MB download size.""
Or better yet (Score:5, Interesting)
If Google can fix the load time (Score:5, Interesting)
"mammoth 80MB download size" (Score:5, Interesting)
the industry? whoever could they mean? (Score:5, Interesting)
should read:
"And we want to make sure open source preserves competitiveness against Microsoft."
Not that there is anything wrong with that, I just find it funny that they don't just come out and say what we all know they are thinking.
Kill Windows (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Well (Score:3, Interesting)
Google Desktop Search might be better done as a GUI for many pre-existing Linux tools, though. Grep, locate, find, etc. all with a pretty Gnome or KDE wrapper.
Having said that, I've never used GDS, and it might have some incredibly cool functionality that isn't replicated by any of the above. Even so, they could still probably write that functionality as a command line program and tie it into the same GUI, though....
Usability? (Score:4, Interesting)
This sounds like a good idea to me. (Score:5, Interesting)
First off, kudos to anybody who steps in and gives the Open Source movement a monetary hand -- and I gotta figure they're one of the top contributors at this point.
This is absolutely the right move. Word processing software has probably the most unnecessary bulk of any class of software on your operating system (the e-mail client placing a close second.) There was a day these things could fit in 640K, and while there are certain advantageous features such as spell check we would all be benefited by a more modular approach to installation that asks you what you need and what you don't.
Really, this seems to be the tip of the iceburg. With the increasing price of oil, I can't help wondering what the face of computing is going to look like five or ten years down the line. The average computer uses as much as 140 jack-o-lanterns worth of coal to run on any given day. Much of this is spent on wasteful peripherals we could do without, such as fancy 3D graphics cards or optical mice, but even more is being spent on processing power well beyond the needs of the average user.
Inefficiencies in microcomponent fabrication mean that a great deal of the electricity that goes into your computer is given off as heat. Techniques such as reversible or quantum computing hold much promise in the future for putting more energy into computation but today it is up to the consumer to safeguard the environment.
In a way, the argument is the same as with vehicles -- most people don't need a SUV or a top-of-the-line system but many choose to get them to compensate for inadequacies or because of marketing -- but with computers at least it is impossible to argue you are "safer" for having a faster system. Indeed, you are more likely to run viruses or worms without realizing it because you don't notice the hit in operating performance.
I've noticed that I've been holding on to computer equipment longer and longer these days. Oh sure, I have to fix a power supply here and a fan there, but besides slack engineering standards from software companies there is little reason to keep up with the hardware treadmill... and at least one compelling reason not to.
But much of the responsibility falls on the software developers to design for efficiency. That's not to say that they don't, but I think that as a priority in particular for software deployment to third-world nations operating efficiency will only rise as part of the software design philosophy.
Re:Well (Score:4, Interesting)
(although i must admit, reducing memory usage and speeing up startup does overlap)
Re:Please join me in opposing this. (Score:1, Interesting)
B - Paying a programmer $50K and locating them in Iowa is a better idea. they live the middle class lifestyle at the lower class income level you get cheaper labor, happy programmers that can afford a nice home and a couple of cars.
C - locating your global business in california is pure stupidity. there is no valid reason to be in california. most businesses there need to get the fark out now and cut their operating costs by 60-70% right away.
Here's hoping that google CEO and CFO have 1/2 a brain and relocates to a sane location soon.
Sizes - Memory, Download (Score:5, Interesting)
The download is not that bad (how big is MS Office?). What is bad is that the update requires a new download rather than an update/service pack type thing.
Can 2.01 be a smaller download to update a 2.0 install, rather than a complete download that'll try to install itself to OpenOffice.org2.01?
Just my list of demands, feel free to ignore
Maybe File Sharing (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It's been a while.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Well... (Score:3, Interesting)
Hosted OOo with browser interface (Score:5, Interesting)
Before anyone starts screaming about privacy and Google becoming too powerful, let me say that I find such a prospect very attractive for individuals and for small and medium size businesses. Let Google handle the backup issues and provide appropriate conversion utilities when communicating with others. While I am quite competent to handle such issues myself, I would be tempted to use a Google service such as this myself. It is so convenient having documents stored on a globally accessible server and not having to maintain that server oneself.
Doesn't this point to a weakness? (Score:4, Interesting)
Now please let me put on my flame-proof suit before I click "submit".
Re:If Google can fix the load time (Score:3, Interesting)
This has been long predicted as what would happen (Score:5, Interesting)
Now that we are begining to aproach the end of the line for the current computer hardware technology, much much more emphasis is being placed on effeciency instead of raw speed. You can see this change in attitude reflected in everything from processor design, to modular software and operating systems.
In no small part, one of the reasons the *nix's have become so popular(other than low cost) is that they are extremely customizable. So, you can have all the features you need, but toss out everything else you don't. This allows for a much more effecient, secure, and orderly system.
Paying for open-source software (Score:2, Interesting)
It is good that some companies/users consider "giving back" to the project by funding development. It is common to hear complains that something is not working and no one is willing to fix it, rare is it for the same people to contribute money to hire developers to fix those problem. Problems don't just magically disappear because it is "open-source", someone still need to do the hard work.
A developer can be motivated by they own interests or money, don't really matter, the main thing is that they produce good code.
Imagine individual/government/company spend just a small portion of their annual software/license budget to fund open-source developments, projects like OpenOffice will greatly benefit from this sort of support.
2 step process (Score:3, Interesting)
I've never had the great experience of using Outlook and/or Exchange; but it must be tackled to replace Office in many environments.
Re:Sizes - Memory, Download (Score:3, Interesting)
For example, a mail client written just to run on Windows can use the system addressbook. A mail client like Thunderbird that runs on many platforms has to implement an addressbook as a component because it can't guarantee the host system will have one it can access / have one at all.
Given the choice between writing code to access equivalent functions on different platforms, considering the differences between Windows, Mac OS and Linux/KDE or Linux/GNOME, many OSS apps choose to implement various core services internally so as to give consistency across operating systems. It's sub-optimal but it works.
OpenOffice too big? (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm really on a 2 GHz P4 with 768 Mb RAM with XP Home (agggrrrhh, that's blasphemous here!).
An 80 Mb dl is pretty small. It's great that Google's getting into this though. Paying people to work on open source software usually has excellent results.
Philanthropy (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't trust corporations (look at my posting history). But, I've been very impressed with the impression I get from Google. Yes, perhaps they are doing this for the PR, or to turn Microsoft's cash cow into hamburger and yummy, yummy steaks; but might it also be that Google is doing this because it has some extra cash, and since it benefits so greatly from free software, is just trying to give something back?
Maybe?
Anyway, in the end, it doesn't matter, as well *all* benefit.
Re:Hosted OOo with browser interface (Score:2, Interesting)
The dialogs might be done in XUL and as NeoOffice has proved it's quite possible to port the entire app to another toolkit. So why not XUL throughout -- then put it on the web ... it'd probably be quite healthy for boths apps.
Web interface? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:"mammoth 80MB download size" (Score:3, Interesting)
Does AppleWorks have all of the features of Microsoft Office? No. But aside from some Excel functions, it has all of the features of Microsoft Office (sans email) that I've actually used.
With a plugin architecture, it shouldn't be hard to have a small but functional installer that downloads all the bells and whistles the user wants, but only after it knows what the user wants.
I talked my mother in law through downloading OpenOffice over her AOL connection earlier this year. 16 hours later, she called back to say it was done. When she decided she didn't like it, it took far less than 16 hours to drive to Mall*Wart, buy a copy of MS Office, and install it.
Re:Or better yet (Score:5, Interesting)
EvoWin32 progress here: http://tml-blog.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]
Demo failed on GNOME Summit but as he writes otherwise, it should be pretty far with porting. If I remember correctly it is now about 2-3 months sice he posted first screenshots. And all libs are now in CVS and can be built
Re:Well (Score:2, Interesting)
If its nothing signifigant, than cool! But if half the program ceases to function...
Outlook (Score:3, Interesting)
-everphilski-
How about Picasa? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Well (Score:2, Interesting)
On windows it can take up to 20 seconds to start and open a large file. On my new Suse 10 install, the same file is open in about 5 seconds.
There are alternatives too (Score:2, Interesting)
TeX is a far-far superior way of formatting and writing documents compared to any of the word packages.
Re:Yeah, it's an office suite... (Score:3, Interesting)
Google Might Be One Of The Few... (Score:3, Interesting)
...companies to pull off one of the few FS/OSS business models that's sound, simply because of Google's size. The model?
1. Release FS/OSS.
2. Short stock of Proprietary competition. Or, drive dollars away from them towards you; since shorting is an unpopular tactic that might cause PR or even legal problems.
3. Profit. Oh yeah, big time!
Hate to burst the bubbles of people who still have them when it comes to the big G, but human attempts to create large, idealistic organizations have a nasty tendancy to end in failure. Exactly what is "not doing evil" when your only choice is the Google office suite?
Re:Sizes - Memory, Download (Score:2, Interesting)