Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
KDE GUI

KOffice 1.1 Rolls Out 235

Posted by timothy from the excellent-news dept.
Andreas "Dre" Pour wrote to say that KDE's long-awaited version 1.1 is out, and asks you to check the dot for some more details. He also points to this temporary fixed-for-Netscape announcement as well as the official announcement. Dre continues: "The dot link includes commentary by me (including a call for Open Source office developers to collaborate on filters!)"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

KOffice 1.1 Rolls Out More

KOffice 1.1 Rolls Out

Comments Filter:

  • Filters are proprietary (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Good luck.

    With DMCA the Microsoft filters are "effectively" protected by their refusal to share the information with the rest of the world. Find out how the filters work and you're going the Sklyarov-way.

    • I remember MS Word format description being published in some MS Web site.
      The problem are the undocumented features and the fact that you have always to dance at MS tune to keep compliance with a changing non-standardized format (though doing filters with Very High Level Languages could make things tad easier today ).

      As much important as doing filters for MS doc formats is define an easy way for users of differen OSS apps to share their documents (at least defining a better version of RTF, but the best would be to use full standardized document formats).

      • How is Word non-standard? 95% of people out there that use word processors either use Microsoft Word, or some word processor capable of saving files in Word format.
        • Word is non-standard in the meaning that each and every version of Word has a different, uncompatible format.
    • But you aren't trying to break a mechanism used to control access to information, unlike the DeCSS and Sklyarov cases.

      If some time in the future MS make their file format dependent on on some undisclosed encryption methodology (XOR with "Open Source Sucks" backwards as such like) then the DMCA may be invoked.
    • Please. That's BS, you know. :)

      The DMCA forbids you to circumvent IP protection schemes. While in a MS Word doc you've written, the content belongs to YOU. No way the DMCA could be applied here.
  • it's come a long way, if only i can just click on setup.exe....
    • But why would you want to click on setup.exe ? Just download the RPM and type "rpm -i koffice[whatever].rpm" or, even better, under Debian, I just type "apt-get install koffice".
      Even easier than setup.exe.
      • Because during a setup.exe-type install under Windows I can *easily* tell the program where to install itself, it'll set up icons for my gui desktop, and I usually have the ability to select and unselect specific options before the package installs itself. AFAICT, rpm and apt-get just *put* stuff certain places. I seem to recall one package I apt-getted asking me a couple questions, but I can't remember the specifics, and it seemed to be the exception to the rule.

        • Because during a setup.exe-type install under Windows I can *easily* tell the program where to install itself,

          This is a double-edged sword IMHO. I too used to be one who ALWAYS clicked custom and always made sure programs went into Program Files, etc, etc. But some vendors still haven't caught on and I've run into too many troubles not allowing a program to install where it normally wants to. On Linux evven more so. Sure, you CAN install stuff in various places, but more times than not you'll just end up breaking some other poorly written config script and have to search for all those custom places you stashed stuff it depends on. With RPMs you have to create sym links and junk.

          So with Linux, I've started a shift to letting stuff install where it wants to - I've found it reduces trouble down teh road. Yes in an ideal world it shouldn't matter, but right now its just not worth it to me to specify special install directories vs the trouble it can cause later. However, kudos to teh Mozilla team for trying to adapt the GUI installer concept for their package - its worked well for me so far even though it doesn't do a whole lot :)

          • I too used to be one who ALWAYS clicked custom and always made sure programs went into Program Files, etc, etc. But some vendors still haven't caught on and I've run into too many troubles not allowing a program to install where it normally wants to.

            I am one of those people too, but I find the problem is a lot LESS of a problem on Linux. Linux has softlinks and environment variables that the linker listens to, even if the program doesn't.

            So with Linux, I've started a shift to letting stuff install where it wants to - I've found it reduces trouble down teh road.

            Heh. I install everything that didn't come with my distro (Slackware) to /opt. That means VMWare is in /opt/vmware (I don't want it in the path). Acroread and CVS KDE are in /opt (where I have he paths modified so /opt/bin, /opt/lib and opt/man are part of the whole process). My MPEG tools are in /opt. Same with XMMS. Hell even my uClinux build tree is in /opt!

            That way, I back up /opt and my home directories and I have very little to do if something destoroys my install.

            Mind you, I also have a /data directory where all the tarballs go, and off of that directories for mp3s, avis and a documents directory for anything I work on. Backups and resotres are a snap. I found that Windows software tends to break the "My DOcuments" rule, sticking edited files in the Program Files directory and causing major trouble for backing up. Hell even Outlook Express does this (wtf, putting my amil under the windows subdirectory?!)

      • Re:sweet! (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Masem ( 1171 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2001 @08:25AM (#2229555)
        There's a good point to this thread.


        If we are continuing to try to advocate linux to the standard user, we do need point-n-click installers. Sure, having things that can be done at the command line is nice, but a typical user doesn't want to type much, and trying to remember all the arcane commands can be a problem.


        And how many of you want to help your mother run through the rpm/deb process?


        But besides the p-n-c installer, we also need some way to allow non-root users to install packages in their home dirs without the need for root to get involved. Obviously, there are some packages that would need root, and so the package manager should be smart enough to have a 'root-only' flag and tell the user that they must tell their sysadmin to install this, so that a system doesn't have 20 copies of apache running around on it. You also need to have a way for the package manager to see if the package is already installed on the system, and let the user know that installation is not needed unless absolutely necessary (say, downgrading or upgrading). Of course, there also has to be quota-watches (don't want someone installing the gimp into a 5meg quota area).


        Double-clicking a package icon in whatever file mangaer you are using simply then starts this package manager up. This part is trivial for the current batch of linux fm's.


        Of course, the way most packages are packaged, or how a few programs expect access at given locations, this is not a universal solution. But I do believe that such a user-installation tool is going to be another key step in getting linux to joe sixpack.

        • I remember a tagline from around 5 years ago announcing that the internet had been hijacked by the 'point and click slumlords'

          nonetheless, I'll acknowledge that we want to invite everyone into linux, but it's never going to be windows - and shouldn't

          Any GUI install needs to be an *OPTION*, not the default and only install method.

          I do most of my work in an xterm, and don't want GUI's launching all over. I also want more control.

          Perhaps the best solution is to have some sort of GUI for autoconf that does the same thing you can do from cmdline, but is also able to read rpm .spec files and take a list of files, and run through and install them in order based on some config file.

          An example would be: a gui that uses wget, lynx or something similar to download the latest kde packages, uses autoconf to check some default vaules, comes back with some config boxes -- it could look 'windows-install-ish', and then these values are passed to all of the configure scripts as tarball after tarball is built and installed and results are logged.

          But... I don't want some heavy setup.exe that uses java or something that takes over my whole screen. Just something simple, and it has to work with *SOURCE* distributions.
          • I agree; you don't want a solely gui installer; in unix-land there are too many that live by the CLI that going completely gui would harm them.


            But a well written package manager with appropriate options at the command line can be easily adapted to fit into something as simple as a Tk GUI, with the Tk code simply making system calls to the package manager CLI version.


            I don't expect either rpm or dpkg to head in that direction, so this may be a non-concern.

        • And how many of you want to help your mother run through the rpm/deb process?

          Where's the problem?
          "Click the K menu, select System -> Package Manager. Click the Open icon in the toolbar on the left side."
          • Better yet: "Just click on the RPM package in Konqueror". Since rpm files are linked to kpackage, it will actually work.
        • that a system doesn't have 20 copies of apache running around on it.

          And what exactly is wrong about that? Maybe a user-specific installation of Apache could have some restrictions, like running only when the user is logged on and serving pages only to localhost, but I don't see why it should be impossible. If someone is about to test a web site, wants to test it on Apache and knows how to locally install it, I don't see why you'd want to require him to call his sysadmin.

          If user Apache installations were possible, he could call his sysadmin and say "I'll need a test server that serves to our local network in maybe about a week, can you do that?" The sysadmin will be more than happy to have a week so he can delay the installation in favor of more urgent tasks if necessary, and the user will be happy to have his local setup at once, without having to wait for the admin.

      • Uh, no. Clicking setup.exe works 90% of the time under Windows. 90% of the time under Linux, rpm -i koffice*.rpm gives you an errror message saying you need to install some other RPM. Then you have the fact that circular dependencies can only be resolved by putting both RPMs on the same command line. Then... then you have a user who just wiped Linux and reinstalled Windows...

        Even when it works, typing rpm-i koffice*.rpm requires breaking out an xterm, cd'ing to the right directory, and typing the comman. You've already lost a whole lot of users right at 'xterm'.
    • whether is setup.exe, rpm files, or compressed tars...........nothing will ever be easier than a binary file. Quit living in the GUI and get some fresh air at the terminal (it's a beautiful day outside)

      just in case you're a first timer..installation of binary file is

      "./filename.bin" (in most cases)

      now i ask you....what's easier than that?
  • I have been using KOffice for a while now, but havnt quite mustered up enough guts to type a paper for class on it yet. It crashed a little too often for my liking. Lets hope this new version is a bit more stable.

    • Re:About Time (Score:1, Flamebait)

      by SamBeckett ( 96685 )
      Real men do their class papers, letters and all other communication with LyX.
    • Once you get at least 128MB of memory on your machine (yeah, I know), StarOffice works beautifully as an office suite. I've done several documents with it, including my resume.
      • Real men use binary language to write documents.

        I'm such a sissy for using LaTeX2e even for my resume.

        Hugs, Cyclops
        • For documents that you use often, or documents you edit frequently, yes, LaTeX.


          For quick one-time things, wordprocessors and spreadsheets. I don't really have the time to set up the templates, by the time I did, I could have had the finished product.


          I could use MySQL with a web front end to keep track of my resume contacts...but it's a waste of time. That's what spreadsheets are for...quick and dirty.

    • Re:About Time (Score:2, Interesting)

      by dinotrac ( 18304 )
      I've been working with kword 1.1 for a while now.
      Though still pretty feature light, it is much more stable than it had been.

      I've taken to typing in chapters with kword, then integrating them into larger documents done with StarOffice. Not the best way to work, but let's me use the very snappy and pleasant-to-use kword for the biggest part of the work, while using StarOffice's larger feature set for the final heavy lifting.

      One real big plus: the koffice print support (at least if you have CUPS) is awesome.

  • I read the "fixed for Netscape" link. It doesn't mention Netscape at all. Is the implication that the contents of the link are fixed for Netscape? One would think that an Open Source development group would understand how to write proper HTML that would render on everything. What, did the main announcement only work on Konquerer?

    • Re:"Fixed for Netscape?" (Score:2, Informative)

      by keesh ( 202812 )
      There is a difference between writing proper HTML and writing HTML that NS / IE / Konqy / Whatever will render correctly.
    • No, there was a bug in the HTML of the official announcement (PHP footer missing), and Netscape choked on the resulting HTML, but Konqueror parsed it alright. Another good point for Konqueror, if you ask me ;)

      Anyway, the official announcement is fixed now, it shows up in Netscape too.
  • I think there will be a big quest between Staroffice 6.0 and KOffice. Although I don't believe Staroffice will have so many nice features like KOffice.
    We will have to wait a little longer to make the big compare since Staroffice 6 isn't out for what may be a "little longer" (they started speading the word about a beta version July 25 2001). People who are willing to betatest Staroffice (when a beta would be out) can leave there email address on the sun - staroffice [sun.com] site.
    If I see the many features of KOffice, things are made easy, KOffice will be used here.
    I just hope I don't have to install too many libs. (I'm on Slack.)

    • Very un-informed (Score:3, Insightful)

      by GauteL ( 29207 )
      Star Office is already much more feature-rich than KOffice. The sheer amount of features is probably like 2 to 1 (or even more).

      Now you might assume that I do not like KOffice, which is wrong. Microsoft Office and
      Star Office actually contain FAR more features than most people ever use.
      In fact, most people do not need Microsoft Office, they just buy or pirate it because they THINK they need it. The amount of features is so immense, that it scares people, and make people need COURSES to master the application. Upgrading to new versions of MS Office is for most people totally unnecessary after Office 97.

      KOffice have huge potential if they keep on concentrating on making the package easy to use, well integrated with the desktop, and with an acceptable amount of features.
      The analogy is almost like Linux vs. Windows. A regular Linux-distribution has an enormous amount of applications and features. Not a single Linux-user has ever needed all of them. Most distributions try to cater for absolutely everyone, and end up alienating the biggest amount of users in the process, the ones that only want to check mail, surf web and write letters.

      Gaute
    • I just hope I don't have to install too many libs. (I'm on Slack.)

      Just the current kdelibs (2.2 or more recent) should be all you need. I'm running a recent CVS snapshot of kdelibs/kdebase, hopefully that'll work too.

      I've played a bit with the most recent StarOffice 6 (build 638, if I recall correctly). It also seems quite nice, though much slower currently than KOffice. If I could get KPresenter to import "powerpoint" files (the office insists on using it) I'd be set...

  • Heh. I don't think I've ever seen a KDE-related announcement, which typically includes a link to the dot site, where it hasn't been totally and completely slashdotted into the ground. Still, I admire them for trying, or something. ;^)

  • I'll get hammered, but Internet Explorer 6 is out! (Score:3, Offtopic)

    by cybrthng ( 22291 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2001 @07:36AM (#2229414) Homepage Journal
    Screw my karma, if this was a news for nerds website they would have told the nerds that
    Internet Explorer 6.0 is out. http://www.microsoft.com/ie.

    It is fast, lean and can i say fast again?

    Now back to the topic, Koffice 1.1 is cool, been using the CVS tree for a few weeks. i'm still waiting for the KDE 3/QT 3.0 rewrite before i deploy.

    • Re:I'll get hammered, but Internet Explorer 6 is o (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Eloquence ( 144160 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2001 @08:04AM (#2229490)
      Screw my karma, if this was a news for nerds website they would have told the nerds that Internet Explorer 6.0 is out. http://www.microsoft.com/ie. It is fast, lean and can i say fast again?

      The typical Slashdotter doesn't hate IE because it is technically inferior. While MS, like Netscape, has a tradition of breaking existing standards with proprietary extensions (ActiveX, special CSS features, VBScript etc.), their browser functions fairly well. There are several reasons not to use it:

      • You give Microsoft a lot of control over the content. Unlike many open-source projects, MS is for-profit, and the only reason they give a product of the size of IE away for free is that they plan to make money with the services they will gradually add. Smart Tags is the beginning of that. Every new user supports their position. Every IE user will eventually be a .NET/Passport user.
      • Digital Rights Management is of increasing relevance and requires broad support in many applications, especially in the webbrowser (detect copyright flags = don't download file). By giving Microsoft control, you effectively sign away your rights since it is a closed-source project and they may introduce such an extension any day.
      • Censorship standards such as PICS can only effectively be adopted in closed-source browsers such as IE which make it effectively impossible to remove them without violating the law (cf. CyberPatrol).
      • In a closed source development model, external security review of the browser, an essential component of any modern system, becomes impossible or hard. As the software grows more complex, you have to depend on Microsoft to fix all problems in time -- as compared to depending on a huge community of security specialists who can submit patches.
      • As you give more and more control to Microsoft, their proprietary extensions to the web will become a "de facto standard". Eventually they can say "80% of users support technology X" and market technology X that way. This makes it ever harder for competitors to give their users access to a majority of websites. In other words, using IE is the most obvious way to support a browser and OS monoculture. It not only ties you to the browser, it ties you to Windows as well.

      IE is not free. Eventually you pay with your freedom of choice and your privacy. That's why we care about the browsers -- not because we hate IE itself (if you throw that much cash at a problem, you are almost bound to come up with a solution). Using IE means signing away your rights for convenience. If that is your choice, fine, but you're on a shaky moral ground if you want the rest of the community to think the same way ("report IE releases!").

      • If that is your choice, fine, but you're on a shaky moral ground if you want the rest of the community to think the same way ("report IE releases!").



        Actually, I think it's a win-win situation if /. does post non-open source software annoucements with a similar proficiency as open sourced applications like KOffice. For those of us that want to know and discuss it because they use it (either because they choose to or their PHB says they have to) it's a win. While for those of us who disagree with the ethos get a chance to get all outspoken and try and win some converts for the open source movement, so it's a win there too.



        The "typical Slashdotter" that I see would rather preach than stick his head in the sand, although the same does not appear to be true about those that choose what gets submitted. Especially since recent statistics on a Slashdotting show that the vast majority of us use IE, and by implication other Microsoft apps, at some point during the day. It's certainly relevent, so why isn't it here?

        • Especially since recent statistics on a Slashdotting show that the vast majority of us use IE

          Well, right now Slashdot thinks my Mozilla web browser is really IE 5.5. It's pretty hard to say how many people like me there are.
          • Well, right now Slashdot thinks my Mozilla web browser is really IE 5.5. It's pretty hard to say how many people like me there are.

            I wouldn't think many - using IE as a user agent indicates to content producers you use IE. If everyone using Netscape, Mozilla, Koffice, etc used IE as a user agent, nobody would ever bother testing against anything else, and IE will have won the web forever. If you need a user agent that will get you everywhere, pick Netscape 4.7x on Win98.

            Or if its nto a problem, don't change it at all.
      • "If that is your choice, fine, but you're on a shaky moral ground if you want the rest of the community to think the same way ("report IE releases!")."

        Use the words "rest of the community" carefully. True, there are a large number of open source mavens on Slashdot, but they are an equal number (if not far greater) that simply like good technology and don't care where it comes from or its possible underlying "grassroots" crusades. I'm not an inherent fan of Microsoft, but I certainly like Windows 2000 for example, the same as I like Linux. For me, a member of the "community", it's not whether it's "free" or not that's important, but whether it is functional, usable and stable. Windows 2000 is the first OS from MS that really fits these bills.

        Same way, I think IE 4.0 revolutionized a lot of what we consider the "operating system" and "applications", whether "the community" likes it or not. It brought a lot of this to the masses, and I was impressed with it.

        Plus, you make a few mistakes in your arguments:

        - Every IE user is not an inherent Passport user. I'm not, and I've been using Windows XP since the first beta release. In addition, Smart Tags are almost officially gone from the XP roster. These are truly optional features, and Windows/IE runs just fine without them.
        - Digital Rights Management, like Smart Tags, is a feature that is not enabled by default and is very easy to change. In Windows Media Player, for example, one can easily turn off the copyright protection on WMA files with a checkbox. I'm assuming you have never used Windows Media Player 7.0 and above?
        - PICS is hardly used on the internet, and the use is dictated by web developers. If you don't have it on a web page, IE assumes the content is "clean", not dirty, as your argument seems to make. The PICS standard is also fairly robust, and allows a large number of flags and modifications.
        - I agree with your fourth point, except for the term "security specialists". To be honest, a lot of the community simply doesn't look for bugs, it just makes the fixes when they're published. Some don't have the time, while others simply don't have the technical ability. To liken the open source community to a security team is a real misnomer.
        - I agree partly with your fifth statement, but I'll bring up a point that earned me an "interesting" before: MS has spent a great deal of time in the past year renovating IE for the Mac, making it a solid broswer with little connection to the Windows operating system. In fact, there have been a good number of improvements in IE for the Mac that simply haven't been made to IE in Windows. If they were working towards OS monoculture, wouldn't they be trying to remove functionality from Mac IE?

        • If they were working towards OS monoculture, wouldn't they be trying to remove functionality from Mac IE?

          Not if they think .NET is the platform of the future. That is, they probably see the world as primarily Windows and Mac users; the Linux and other users are too small to count (on the desktop). So if they have a kickass IE for Mac and Windows and both do .NET just fine, then they've made captive the Apple users as well as the Windows users for selling services via the .NET platform.

          Then again, Ruffin would probably tell me I've got it all wrong.
    • Screw my karma

      Get enough so that it doesn't matter. [smile]

      Internet Explorer 6.0 is out

      I figure that MS has enough bucks to promote their own monoploy

      That said, MS always has the weirdest logic with their product names. For example, Windows CE = wince

      The fact that I.E. as commonly pronounced, sounds like a scream of agony doesn't help. On the other hand, Koffice looks like you could say it "cough-ice", but that doesn't really work. And Konqueror is a decent name.

      - - -
      Radio Free Nation [radiofreenation.com]
      an alternate news site based on Slash Code

    • Microsoft has a massive PR machine getting that information out - all those who really want to know probably already heard from 2-3 different sources (plus you - boy am I fed up with the microsoft greek chorus on /.) KOfficve on the other hand is a bunch of OS hackers working hard for our own good - they CAN'T afford PR flunkies

  • Standard format? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Eloquence ( 144160 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2001 @07:39AM (#2229422)
    Will KOffice support OpenOffice's XML-based file format [openoffice.org] for saving and loading documents? Besides supporting DOC, it seems like establishing an OS-wide open standard for formatted documents would go a long way to make Linux-based office tools more popular. As more and more apps use it, eventually, Word would have to provide an import filter, too.
  • Filters, filters, filters,

    is what we need!

    Or actually, just two: MS-Excel import and export and MS-Word import and export. When they are ready, we are ready to take over the world!

    • Filter code needs to be written in such a way that it can be shared by multiple projects. Gnumeric has fairly decent Excel import capability -- why write two from scratch?

  • i'm running it for a while, (i submitted the story on slashdot, but was rejected.. wonder who moderates sometimes..) and really it rocks.. new KWord is really impressive.. just hope they can manage to do an export for MSWord format, so i can get rid of vmware and win....
    it's a real office suite, contrary to 1.0 version (even wonder why it's not 2.0 ?!)

    just my (for now little) experience of the thing :))) good work guys !
  • If I have to read email from my "office" suite, I can easily do that from any platform.
    If I have to write dox, spreadsheets or presentations, I'm pretty sure I can find some common format to exchange data between platforms.
    But the real problem for me (and for many likewise) is the total lack of any support for M$ Exchange server (calendar, contacts, etc...)
    AFAIK there is no client available for Linux which is OpenSource or GNU (otherwise I'll stick to the original, thanks)... And this is why I still can't swap to Linux on my workstation, I am required to use Exchange by the firm I work for.
    Now a feature like that would mean something is changing, i.e. that regardless of minifeatures or looks, you can have a fully integrated linux workstation in a windows network.

    • Exchange servers support "Outlook Web Access" - basically webmail access to your mailbox, calendar, contacts, etc. I don't know what version of Exchange server this requires, but it's not E2k because we don't have that here at work yet :) So for the requirements that you listed, it might work out OK. You probably have to ask an admin to turn it on - it helps to use the argument that now people can easily check their email and calendar from home (via a VPN) no matter what web browser they have.

      It still doesn't support the usual gamut of email viruses and trojans, though, so the quest for full *nix LookOut/Exchange compatibility must continue :)

    • In addition to the now-Open-Sourced "TradeClient" Linux mail client (which I believe is Exchange-server compatible), they sell two products called Insight, which appear to be a client and a server that support Outlook/Exchange's (IMHO useless) calendar-and-meeting features on Linux. They say it's "not an Outlook clone!" but you might find one of these programs useful. They sure as damn aren't a total lack of any support , though.

      In my shop, which uses MS Outlook / Exchange, I just run a standard POP3 client off the mail server's SMTP/POP gateway, and to the seven hells with the calendar functions. Integrated systems fail in an integrated fashion... Of course, not everyone has that option.
  • I stayed up late last night checking out the new features. Very cool stuff.

    The format support is amazing, not to mention the standard-based XML support.

    I would definitely expect KOffice 1.1 to lead the charge in retaking the office desktop environment out of the hands of Redmond.

    -Marvin
    • new features?

      not having support for foot/end notes? What the hell kind of wp is this? Every paper I write I have to use Chicago style notation. Not everyone can get away w/using MLA.

      I am not terribly happy w/WP 8.0 but I really don't have much of a choice. The Word97 filter for WP8 sucks, but at least it gets enough of the information in that I can edit it and work w/it.

      How are you going to say that KO is a viable suite when the WP doesn't include the basic necessities?

      I love free software and all but I might as well type it in fucking pico.

      Just my worthless .02

  • features DO matter (Score:4, Insightful)

    by abde ( 136025 ) <apoonawa-blog@@@yahoo...com> on Wednesday August 29, 2001 @08:59AM (#2229670) Homepage
    KWord is easily up to the task of generating nice letters, letterheads, memos, faxes and papers, but lacks hyphenation, mail merge (or any database integration) and endnotes/footnotes. Similar stories for the other applications. But, with all due respect to the diligent work of the filter developers, the biggest obstacle to KOffice right now is the filters for MS Office documents.

    what's the use of filters for opening Word file formats if the program doesnt support the features? Fine, it's ok if KOffice doesnt have Auto-Hyphen Underlining. But lacking endnotes/footnotes? mail merge is gone? These are SERIOUS problems. It automatically means KOffice is totally useless for any professional academic or business use. What will happen if I try to open my Physics Thesis or my Business Plan word file in KOffice - will it barf when it gets to eth footnotes? mangle it beyond compare?

    Features DO MATTER. It's a very sour-grapes attitude to say "sure our open source Office lacks some features, but users dont use them anyway". If all you want out of an Office suite is to type some letters, then you don't need Office, you just need Microsoft Works! but if you want to use an Office suite for true business or academic or professional uses, you need much more features than the average letter writer.

    frankly, there's a REASON that Office became the behemoth it is, and that is solely due to features, not monopoly. Remember Wordperfect used to OWN the Office space, and Lotus has a really nice office suite as well. In fact I myself used to be a SAM file diehard, until one day I just realised that the things I wanted, Lotus was dragging its feet on, and Word already had (example - integrated equation editor. advanced font and layout abilities. sectioning and numbering. Automatic tables and figures indexes. list goes on). Other things like support for third party tools like EndNote [endnote.com] and MathType [mathtype.com]. KOffice is still behind even what Lotus and Wordperfect used to have, though I do agree it has a very nice graphic UI. And yet we still accuse the Windows people of liking style over substance?

    If you want to do professional business or academic work, there are only two options. TeX or Microsoft Office. Right now, KOffice is still in Microsoft-Works league. Features DO matter and we need them on teh desktop office suite (not the browser :P)

    • If you want to do professional business or academic work, there are only two options. TeX or Microsoft Office.

      Well thats funny, cos here I am writing some very complex documentation with tables, figures and the like, and I'm not using either of those.

      StarOffice (what will become OpenOffice) is very usable, if you're prepared to put up with the size of the thing. I've been using it regularly since 5.2 and its imported any .doc I've thrown at it, and crashed maybe 3 times in all that time.

      If you just want to be productive under Linux, then StarOffice is the only choice at the moment. Supporting the open source programs is a noble cause, but nobility doesn't get work done. Give it time though, give it time...

    • Re:features DO matter (Score:2, Informative)

      by naeger ( 136710 )
      Hi,

      there is one alternative you forgot when saying TeX or Office are the only options: LyX (www.lyx.org) combining the best of TeX and WYSIWYG.

      Currently, the LyX team is working on GUI independence. Once this is accomplished, there will be several frontends (xforms, QT, GTK) and LyX could be easily integrated in KOffice. Then you've got Kword for letters, memos and the like and K-LyX for your professional needs (thesis, scientific papers, ...). I am looking forward to this !!! LyX is the KILLER app when it comes to professional document processing!
    • >frankly, there's a REASON that Office became the behemoth it is, and
      >that is solely due to features, not monopoly.


      While most of what you wrote makes sense, this is just nonsense. Word and Excel became dominant on the mac because they were better than any of their competition. They utterly failed on the dos and windows side. They failed in the market and consistently placed last in reviews.


      And then something happened: Office suddenly started shipping pre-installed on everything from several major hardware manufacturors--the same thing that happened to DR-DOS. With office already installed the difference between office and competitors was no loner the difference in purchase price, but the entire purchaseprice of the competitng product. On top of that, the "free" installation of office that everyone had meant that files started flying around in that format, forcing others to use it. As we type, law firms across the US are being dragged kicking and screaming away from word perfect and into office--not because word is appropriate for their use (it isn't), but because clients keep sending everything in word and difficulty hring secretaries because of a notion that using WP will pigeon-hole them into that field.


      Otherwise, you raise good points. Footnotes are critical (are you serious? It really doesn't support these???). The functional footnote is one of microsoft's three innovations. A "word processor" without this is simply a toy.


      hawk

      • They utterly failed on the dos and windows side. They failed in the market and consistently placed last in reviews.

        Maybe on DOS, Microsoft apps were a joke, but your statement is complete bullshit on Windows. You want to see bad reviews -- look up WordPerfect's and Lotus' early attempts at GUI applications (whether on Mac, OS/2, or Windows). Pathetic!

        (And the business world figured fairly quickly that going with a GUI environment had enormous advantages, so much so that they were willing to deal with Windows 3.x.)

        And then something happened: Office suddenly started shipping pre-installed on everything from several major hardware manufacturors

        Your conspiracy theory is totally wrongheaded. Office was not preinstalled on anything until it had by-in-large become the business standard office suite in the mid-90s. Your theory doesn't even make any sense because Microsoft has always viewed Windows as the loss-leader for Office (it was Windows that was being pre-installed for free, not Office).

        You want conspiracy? Office became popular essentially due to a 'user rebellion' against crappy and obscured DOS applications. This rebellion included tons of casual piracy, which of course Microsoft did absolutely nothing to discourage until they had the market more than locked up.

        Office wasn't pre-installed until Microsoft figured that if the users were going beg-borrow-steal a copy no matter what, they might as well get a little bit of money for it.
    • If you want to do professional...academic work, there are only two options.

      Correct.

      TeX or Microsoft Office.

      Incorrect. (La)TeX or FrameMaker. MS Word is completely inappropriate for scientific academic work and I suspect for most other fields as well. List numbering doesn't work, figures behave horribly and formatting is a pain in the neck. Word may be great for the office, but a professional publishing package it is not.


      • i disagree - everyone in my research department and at my institution (MD Anderson Cancer Center) uses Word 97 for all grant proposals, theses, dissertations, and journal articles. We all use POwerpoint for our conference posters, presentations, and talks, and use Excel to pretify our MATLAB data. Look at EndNote and MathType - these are seriously powerful add-ons which we obtained with educational volume discounts. I'd pay full price for them in a heartbeat because they are so useful, and I hope KOffice takes notice because if thye can support them, thats a major bonus.
    • Right now, KOffice is still in Microsoft-Works league.

      You were expecting otherwise? Come on, this is a 1.1 release. MS Office is at what, 12?

      But lacking endnotes/footnotes? mail merge is gone? These are SERIOUS problems.

      And what do you think is on the roadmap for KOffice development? Have patience, maturity will come in time. KOffice development is proceeding at a blistering pace, as always seems to be the case with KDE projects.

      In the meantime, don't ignore what KOffice has already got: A nice set of applications for non-demanding use as a basic office suite. I've used MS Works for years and never needed anything else. As soon as KWord gets footnotes, I'm switching.


      • of course I will ignore KOffice - there isnt any REASON to be patient. I can use Word now, and get all eth features I want. If KOffice has the functionality I require later, great. They can try to lure me as a user when they are ready. Until then I am gonna use what gets my work done, and not suffer through less functionality solely out of some principle or vague rationale or belief system :)
    • Suprisingly enough, the only essential function for a word processor is to produce readable, reproducible output.
      Everything else is a frill - like power windows on a car, "features" as you call them are essentially non-essential functions.
      There are an infinite number of potential features. For example, my word processor could activate a mechanical arm to wipe my butt when I get off the toilet - what a timesaver!! Obviously, nobody will ever buy an office suite again that doesn't have this incredibly useful feature.
      The things you are saying are "essential features" that "DO matter" are those things you are used to using. Most of them are available in StarOffice, but you are not sufficiently experienced in SO to understand the different methods used to achieve the same ends.
      So, maybe you should choose your tools on their cost-effectiveness - an evaluation that should include reliability, maintainability, as well as any other factors unique to your goals - rather than just the features you've become addicted to. If you don't care about cost, or efficiency, you don't need a word processor, you need a ghostwriter/secretary.
      I'm not saying KDE is right for you (maybe you really need Professional Write) but the "features features features" mantra by itself means little.
      --Charlie
      • oversimplification - you are projecting your needs into the Rest of World. if you think all a word processor needs to do is just create readable and reproducible output, then you shoudl just use Notepad.

        people in professional fields, in business, and in academia need a LOT more than that.

        do you realise how important mail-merge alone is? or typesetting? or automatic section numbering to create sub documents to organize your thesis? if that sounds like "wiping your butt" then hey thats great, your best cost effective solution is apparently VIM. But if KOffice wants to impact the real desktop market, they better deliver the features that the real desktop market needs.

  • The LyX way ... (Score:3, Informative)

    by bockman ( 104837 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2001 @10:04AM (#2229917)
    While I am glad for any improvement of Linux office tools, I would like that WordProcessor designer would consider the good points of LyX approach to creating document, namely What You See Is What You Mean.

    What I like of LyX:

    • contents is separated from presentation; the users specify the semantic of the document and the computer (instructed by layout programmers) does the typesetting; this ensure uniform document appearance and less headhaches reformatting documents;
    • The on-screen appearance of a document is not forced to be equal to the on-paper appearance, as well as it carries its semantic value.

    Things that I would like added to LyX:

    • A graphical layout editor for people that like me don't know TeX;
    • An open-source layout repository (I know there is one for TeX/LaTeX but ... see point above).
    • Better on-screen presentation: some of the document semantic is not well represented in the on-screen presentation; some is a bit ugly.
    • Lyx is awesome. I love it. It's easy to lay out documents, it's easy to use source control, it's easy to import pictures, and the appearance of the document looks professional even if the content is fluff. My only gripe with it (and this could very well just be a clueless user problesm) is the inability to import a table of data. I still haven't figured out a way to bring in an MxN table without cutting and pasting every single entry. Oh well.

      To get back on topic, I have tried to install Koffice several times over the last six months. I've never been successful in compiling it. I just gave up
    • What I would like added to LyX:
      • Unicode/UTF-8 based processing. TeX can do that now, why can't LyX? That would give us a truly international document processor.
      • SGML, XML or at least GellMU-compliant output so that I can have the document in some kind of structured abstract representation.
      • A working Windows version for your average academic Micro$oft-minded office slug.

      Otherwise, it's a lovely word processor.

  • Why MSOffice filters are a pain (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Fencepost ( 107992 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2001 @10:51AM (#2230166) Journal
    I suspect that much of the problem with creating filters for Word and the other MS Office products is that Word documents aren't flat files - they're OLE documents. What that means in practical terms is that each .DOC, .XLS, etc. can be considered its own filesystem in a way with the core drivers for that filesystem included with Windows.

    I'm sure a lot of Word docs are very simple internally, but a filter that can't deal with the more complex ones is likely to have acceptance problems.

    Finally, is there any possiblility of the StarOffice/OpenOffice filters being used as the basis for more widely available filters? I wasn't all that impressed with them a couple years ago when I tried StarOffice, but if nothing else they might serve as a starting point.

    • Apparently information on the Word file formats either is or was available on MSDN. I pulled up a 560K HTML file spec from Wotsit's Format [wotsit.org], a file format information site.

      Also of interest may be LAOLA [tu-berlin.de], which is "a collection of documentations and perl programs dealing with binary file formats of Windows program documents." The link to that came from Wotsit's as well.

    • Actually the OLE structure is documented (this is the stuff that people claiming that MicroSoft "documents the Word format" are pointing at).

      As I understand it, with this documentation (and also with MFC source code that reads these files), splitting the OLE structure is not too difficult. The problem is that the individual pieces you get are undocumented, at the point where MFC says "block of data".

      I have not worked with this, though, so I may be wrong.

  • A lot of you folks following up to this post today have been bashing KOffice (mostly KWord) for not having all of the features a professional word processor needs, for not having all the features you want and for not being able to properly import MS Word documents.

    It's pretty easy to trash someone's software while it's still in development, and it's easy to point out the faults of someone's software because hey, we're used to finding fault in everything.

    I'd like everyone to take a moment and find what's good about KOffice. I know the authors put in a lot of time and a lot of energy since 1.0 into squashing bugs, adding better support for MS filetypes, making it all around more stable, etc. Instead of bashing it, ask yourself if you've ever written a word processor. If you haven't, then don't comment. Have you ever written a spreadsheet editor? Thing is, you can find fault with someone else's software and yell and scream about it. But if you don't like it, fix it. If you can't do that, use Word or Excel and shut up. :)

Slashdot Top Deals

Ummm, well, OK. The network's the network, the computer's the computer. Sorry for the confusion. -- Sun Microsystems

Close