Google Pack Adds StarOffice

derrida writes The GoogleOS Blog has the news that Google Pack, their collection of applications, now includes StarOffice. 'It will be interesting to see why Google didn't choose to include OpenOffice.org, the primary difference between StarOffice and OpenOffice.org being that StarOffice includes some proprietary components like clip-art graphics, fonts, templates and tools for Microsoft Office migration.'"

$69.95 U.S.

[krischik]

Did I miss something? I allways thoght that StarOffice is a commertial product - One you actualy pay for - $69.95 U.S to be precise.

So how does google do it then?

Martin

Re:$69.95 U.S.

[kaiwai]

Actually, its a free product in Solaris x86/SPARC - as for Windows, ever thought that *maybe* Sun approached Google and will use that as a way to get people to atleast *try* StarOffice 8 - then if they want support and so forth, to pay for it? Its all about getting the Sun name and brand out there, making the name known by non-technical people; making it more accessible rather than it being viewed as the domain of the purely UNIX geeks.

For me, I hope Indiana/Sun hook up with Google and use the Google hype, and integration with Google and Indiana to push it further out there as an alternative to Windows.

Re:Ask That Question Again

[Groggnrath]

rather than just forcing them to go cold turkey

Isn't this how Linux got Ubuntu? People don't like massive changes all at once.

Re:Isn't it obvious?

[tomhudson]

Or maybe they recognize that some PHBs won't go with "free", and StarOffice has the needed "we can get multiple licensed copies for a fee" thing going ...?

... and that google may want to encourage a more diverse ecosystem, with more vendors, as a couterweight to an either-or choice - MS-Office or OpenOffice?

What google did wasn't evil - they're supporting StarOffice, and this will help continue to develop the product. Competition is good, mkay? :-)

Staroffice without Linux...

[neapolitan]

My previous hospital (a very large tertiary-care facility) made the switch from Microsoft Office to Staroffice in late 2005. I had a decidedly mixed experience.

At first, I thought it was the coolest thing around -- can use opendocument formats and pdf. Unfortunately, the administration set them up on Windows 2000 workstations instead of switching to Linux. After several weeks of use, for the majority of tasks there was *no* difference (typing memos / patient letters, simple spreadsheet stuff.)

However, for anything more advanced (pivot tables) I found myself relearning stuff (StarOffice calls it a DataPilot). This wasn't too bad.

My biggest gripe was the small incompatibilities between .ppt and ooimpress; when presenting to an audience of hundreds you can't all of a sudden have text flowing off the slide or the .bmp come up black. If I wanted to share something (most everybody else still runs Powerpoint) I had to doublecheck the whole thing prior to doing the slideshow. There were also many small incompatibilites with Excel importing.

Openoffice / Staroffice is also definitively slower than Microsoft Office on startup and for most tasks I used. After awhile most doc's / staff members griped, "I am just saving the hospital money that I would never have seen anyway, why do I have a headache using this generic stuff when we could just have the real thing?"

Don't get me wrong; I use Linux exclusively at home (except for one WinXP box for VPN to work through a Juniper client that is a pain under Linux). I use OpenOffice at home.

However, for the enterprise the average user doesn't care that the IT department will save a few hundred thousand dollars a year -- they just want what is better or faster, or lacking that, what they already know how to use. The average user also doesn't care about the open source philosophy that you and I do.

The hospital still uses Staroffice (at least when I left) and you could request a workstation to be equipped with Microsoft Office if needed. I wish that the hospital had gone with Linux workstations, with Citrix / virtualization of apps that are Windows only, which would have given the clear benefits of Linux (stability, no spyware installed, etc.) with Staroffice.

The short story is - Staroffice in itself was slower and (from the average user's perspective) not as good as Microsoft Office, the current standard, and was perceived as an inferior product. I *really* think that had this change been bundled with a switch to Linux on the desktop, which would have enhanced the user experience (no more popups / junkware slowing down the system) it would have been a great thing; but by itself it was not that useful. Again, just one user's experience, but this was a large corporation with thousands of workstations.

  - Anybody else have similar experience with ditching Microsoft halfway in the corporate setting?

StarOffice is blog aware

[sagefire.org]

I am guessing that Google plans on using the Star Office blogging add-on to bridge the gap between desktop app and web-app.

Imagine writing a document and telling it to save to your Google account online and then being able to work with it remotely via Google Docs and blogger (also owned by Google).

Then again, maybe Sun has an aqua-native Mac OS X port that they have been secretly working on? That would make it much more attractive too.

Eric Schmidt is no dope. Seeing a Google-Sun collaboration does make me think of all of the old Apple-Sun rumors. And, Schmidt is on the Apple Board.

Basically, Star Office is OpenOffice.org + extras. So, if he could make a deal to distribute that for free, why bother with Star Office - "extras" at all?

Re:Ask That Question Again

[watchingeyes]

Or perhaps they're planning on some future integration between Star Office and Google Docs (Star Office using Google Docs as a backend online storage option with on-the-go editing and collaboration features over and above Star Office's default set come to mind...).

Re:why Google didn't choose to include OpenOffice.

[DrXym]

More likely because it is better.

StarOffice 8 might have received considerably more QA testing that OpenOffice and has some value added content, but two years of bug fixes and enhancements say OpenOffice is better.

The situation is a bit like Netscape was with Mozilla. If I recall, Netscape 6 was based off Mozilla 0.7 or 0.8. But by the time it had been tested and released, Mozilla was already several versions beyond. As long as you were prepared to trade off stability, you were better off sticking with the open source version because it was usually faster and had more features.

I hate the google pack

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to say this, but I can't stand the google pack. I hate the fact that it leaves an icon running in the system tray ALL THE TIME. I hate that it BOTHERS you all the time "ooo this update is out" "ooo you should add THIS feature". I think the idea is great. Put this in, install a bunch of good useful stuff in one go.

Along the same vein is the Google Toolbar, which I really like for people running MSIE, but I really HATE haveing the "GoogleUpdateNotifier" processing running ALL THE TIME whether MSIE and the google toolbar is showing or not. Guys, write code so it doesn't need to run ALL THE TIME (this means YOU, Apple and 'IPODUpdateServeice", I don't even OWN an ipod, and you won't let me disable this).

Re:Staroffice without Linux...

[rainer_d]

If you do this, you have to understand you are asking people to do something unknown and a bit frightening,

The Head of IT in the German city of Schwäbisch Hall had the oldest female member of staff demo some day-to-day work (via a beamer) to the rest of the staff on the new linux desktops.
When the rest of the staff saw that even the old lady could master it, they couldn't complain about the system being "too complicated" whithout putting an egg on their own face...
This (true) story always reminds me of the morale that psychology matters even more than technical facts and orders.