Why Google Should Embrace OpenOffice.org 277
CWmike writes "Preston Gralla has a decent idea that could move the office needle: If Google really wanted to deliver a knockout punch to Microsoft, it would integrate OpenOffice with Google Docs, and sell support for the combined suite to small businesses, medium-sized business, and large corporations. Given the reach of Google, the quality of OpenOffice, and the lure of free, it's a sure winner. Imagine if a version of it were available as a Web service from Google, combined with massive amounts of Google storage. Integrated with Google Docs, it would also allow online collaboration. For those who wanted more features, the full OpenOffice suite would be available as a client — supported by Google. wouldn't be at all surprised to see this happen. Just yesterday, IBM announced that it was selling support for its free Symphony office suite. It's not too much of a stretch to imagine Google doing the same for OpenOffice, after it integrates it with Google Docs."
Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
And why would Google use OpenOffice to fill that gap when they could just improve Google Docs?
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
you can swap back and forth. You can use google docs to store your files pass US customs and download them again quickly and easily once you have passed customs.
i am not seeing the point of the article.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not running in a browser on AJAX, the stupidest application 'platform' ever congealed?
Working reliably when offline?
Working reliably with large documents, with embedded images etc?
Performance? Even if you thought OO.o was slow, you'll be amazed at how badly you can bog things down if you implement it in mighty javascript, inside a browser.
And why would Google use OpenOffice to fill that gap when they could just improve Google Docs?
You mean by making google docs a real application instead of a gimped web based browser hosted mess? Why re-invent the wheel? Just enhance oo.o to store docs to google's servers and call it a day.
Personally though, I don't know why anyone would even BOTHER with google docs. If you want web based document access I think we should be striving for remote desktop hosting and application publishing.
Citrix already has this, and if you've ever used MSOffice as a published Citrix web application, you'll know what I'm talking about. None of this flaky ajax crap. Accessible from anywhere. Documents exist on the corporate server. It costs a bundle to license though and I don't know if it supports linux. -- but isn't that where FLOSS shines? I'd rather see this over another half baked AJAX app.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I know there is a citrix client. But can host one publish Linux Applications from a Linux Server? That is what I was referring to. And if not with Citrix... with anything?
Re: (Score:2)
The main disadvantage of X11 is that it doesn't handle latency well, unlike Citrix. NX helps this a bit - a FOSS equivalent would be nice.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Web apps are shit, period. If you want security, run in a virtual environment, or just stick with apps from people you trust, like Google.
Otherwise you get flaky, embarrassing, unresponsive bollocks which fails the second there's a network problem anywhere between the servers in the States, thousand of miles away from me, right up to my ISP and the little bits of metal connecting to me. Plus my data isn't being sent halfway around the world for some spotty bedroom boy to packet sniff and/or fuck about with. That's the worse possible solution.
Surely you want the opposite - apps downloaded from the net, run locally, with internet access as and when needed - infrequently, probably.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)
And if you want to take it to another level, you can implement something like this...
http://www.sonicwall.com/us/products/Secure_Remote_Access.html
It will do RDP or Citrix connections via a web browser, no VPN client software required. So anywhere you have a web browser and internet access, you have access to your applications and documents. Of course it isn't free, but when it comes to IT, I find that you get what you pay for.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Informative)
X11 is a wonderful thing, and extensions to it like FreeNX are quite incredible.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Granted, not a whole lot of people need that kind of functionality most of the time. For what I do, it's actually a great asset - it sure beats the hell out of emailing a document back and forward a dozen times over the space of ten minutes. And the functionality, again for what I do, is plenty - I'm just sharing lists of ideas with colleagues and clients 95% of the time. All of your points against Google Docs are very much valid, and I was going to point them out myself. The accessibility during offline time is the real killer for me, as I don't have a cellular card for my laptop and can't be bothered to pay for wifi at hotspots, so it certainly can't replace a desktop text editor. Some combination of a desktop editor, the "push FTP" of DropBox, and the realtime collaboration of Google Docs would be THE winner, but that's asking for a lot.
At the end of the day, there's no one tool that's right for everyone right now. OOo is free, functional, and will get the job done for most people. Word is expensive, more functional and stable, somewhat faster, and has advanced features for power users that most people will never go near. Google Docs is free, limited in functionality, but doesn't require installation or local storage.
(Yes, I know I didn't really address the whole Word/Citrix thing; however, assuming you have VPN access then you're already able to get to the central repository and then there should be no reason to bother with the published web app through Citrix thing since you could just locally install OOo/Word - the file access is the crucial thing there more so than the app itself. Yes, this still isn't quite what you meant, but humor me)
Re: (Score:2)
If you use the US English version of google docs and if you check the box that says you're willing to try their advanced features, you can work on google docs while off-line. It downloads a google client to your machine and allows you to work off-line using your internet browser, and when you get
Re:Why? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Where it shines the most is with client-server applications over high latency WANs. Most client-server apps aren't designed to handle latency - but Citrix is and it isolates the app from the link. I've seen client-server apps that took seconds to respond to entries that went t
Re: (Score:2)
Citrix, when configured properly by people who know what they are doing is a joy to use.
Trying to host incompatible software from an under powered server on an inadequate network by people who don't know what they are doing? Yeah, I've wanted to throw my laptop out the window too.
Citrix done right, and the average user doesn't even really know the app isn
Re: (Score:2)
Okay maybe not joyful
I'm sure you would agree that maintaining any kind of servers take a lot of effort and money. Now Google has no former experience or desire to go in application hosting business. They do have a lot of webserver on their disposal though and they can, without investing significant amount, host all sort of web applic
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No. No its not. Google Docs isn't as full featured, and javascript in a browser isn't remotely as powerful or as flexible as what can be done with a native app either run locally, or even hosted via Citrix. There really is no comparison.
Now Google has no former experience or desire to go in application hosting business.
Really? I'll buy the no former experience, but pretty much everything they do lately is
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to see and OO.org plugin to directly go to Google Docs... I think there already is one from some third party. If Google goes any further for companies they'll go the "appliance" route. They sell google servers you can
Re: (Score:2)
Yawn. Why would I -care- if I can run 'google docs' offline? I -already- have multiple free offline office suites to choose from for -that-, and they don't run in a ridiculous mess of javascript on a browser.
GoogleDocs really mak
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not the point.
We need a Linux based application *server*, preferably one that is FLOSS.
Publishing OO.o from Windows 2003 Server and Citrix Presentation Server to a linux client almost defeats the point if you ask me.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
It isn't remotely on par with a native app either. And even google's flagship gmail -- it isn't that hard to confuse the UI to the point buttons stop working, context menus won't appear/disappear or render funny, while javascript is just grinding along in the background away slowing it all to a crawl, while the page loading icon spins endlessly...
Sure I've seen MUCH worse. But really all AJAX 'web2.0' apps just aren't very robust.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Second, it provides an interface that's familiar to people, better than google docs. For a nerd like me or most of the people on slashdot, google docs works just fine; for people like my parents, OpenOffice is more familiar. Google can make internet browsers sing and dance, but the browser just can't replicate the experience as well.
Third, it gets existing OpenOffice users to switch to google docs. The ability to save to google docs as easily as to the hard drive would be a compelling feature, at least to me. I run a DnD game online and I use google doc's spreadsheet to manage characters; this would make it a lot easier for me and my players to use it all.
I would use this for my DnD game and most of my documents that I could possibly want in multiple places (and that wouldn't be interesting to law enforcement or identity thieves).
Exactly (Score:3, Insightful)
lowest common denominator software (Score:3, Insightful)
>user that Google Docs is lacking?
Why should we ever improve on software? Why should software ever do more than perform basic tasks poorly?
These are the attitudes behind your statement. Google docs is not as good as open office. Open office is not as good as microsoft office.
The arguments that people usually make are, "do you really need those extra features?" and to some extent it is true. I don't *absolutely* need everything that Microsoft Office has to offer,
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And why would Google use OpenOffice to fill that gap when they could just improve Google Docs?
Whether Google can put these into their online Docs is a valid question, but it doesn't look easy.
Re: (Score:2)
What works to some degree is a shared gmail account to send documents as email attachments.
Better than having a script running under a browser (assumed this is google docs) would be a server having the actual applicaton and some interface shooting user input and server output encryp
Re: (Score:2)
1. Point 1 1.1. Point 1.1 1.1.1. Point 1.1.1 1.1.2. Point 1.1.2 1.1.3. Point 1.1.3 1.2. Point 1.2
AFAIK, it's not possible right now.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Point 1
1.1. Point 1.1
1.1.1. Point 1.1.1
1.1.2. Point 1.1.2
1.1.3. Point 1.1.3
1.2. Point 1.2
Re: (Score:2)
Basically, they already do (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, if Google wanted to give OOo a nice grant, that would be most welcome
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Since they aren't, we carry bigger devices around and do a poor job securing them, but we live with it, because it makes the most sense given current
Re: (Score:2)
Furthermore, I doubt that Google would gain much from taking sides. They are the premier provider of web services and that is where they should stay. Desktop applications are the past, web services are the future.
How is that not taking sides? In the unlikely event web services eclipse desktop apps, Google will have an enormous head start, and they'll most likely allow and even encourage folks to use ODT.
More likely is that the line between desktop and webtop apps will gradually blur (e.g., "cloud computing"), and... Google will still have an enormous head start. Rather than OOo and Google Docs trying to replace each other, they will probably fade into each other over time.
Re:Basically, they already do (Score:4, Insightful)
Google earth. Google desktop search. Google Chat.
Their goal is not producing web services, it's making data more accessible. Making it easier to access google docs from a desktop office application may very well fall within that scope.
As others have noted here, google docs does not perform terribly well. For performance-intensive things, desktop applications are still better solutions than web-based ones. Office applications are one of those things -- they have tons of functionality.
Google would do well to:
* make it trivial to save and load google docs docs from within OO.o
* add real-time collaborative editing of google docs to OO.o
It's just not possible to get all the functionality of OO.o into a web app, and have it perform comparably on the same hardware.
What a stunning revelation... (Score:5, Interesting)
They could twin its codebase with their own corporate version [sun.com] and then the sky would truly be the limit.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I think the article completely ignored Sun's role in the OpenOffice.org project. Of course, this would be great thing if it wasn't already happening...or was the suggestion to also do a corporate takeover of Sun?
OpenOffice just isn't very good. (Score:5, Insightful)
So far from a knockout punch, I think OpenOffice barely registers in terms of it's disruptive influence. I don't use it, my employees don't use it and everyone I know who has to use it hates it. Perhaps it's time as a community we considered alternatives. The "quality" of OpenOffice isn't something I think people are particularly happy with.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure it's right to call it the "quality" of OpenOffice that people have a problem with. Sure, people dislike qualities of the software, but they don't dislike it for being "poor quality".
There are probably still people who are stuck on Word/Excel because of some particular feature. The rest of people who aren't happy with it, in my limited experience, it's because it doesn't look great and it runs slowly.
The first could be done with an interface facelift. Probably not a huge deal, if there's th
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not a heavy office user.. I mainly use it to write an occasional report... maybe draw a diagram.
But it's SO damn buggy I can barely use it! For example, I was illustrating a graph algorithm with Draw, and it was working quite nicely until I had to undo several levels.. then the alignment of everything went screwy. Nothing that moved during the undoing was anywhere it should have been. A redo didn't fix it either. (Not that alignment is ever quite right in that th
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I've tried using OOo on and off since, including quite a major project recently. It's just so buggy! Write would never apply my user-defined styles properly
Re:OpenOffice just isn't very good. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
To reiterate what the GP said, OpenOffice.org is not a Java GUI program. What Java components it might [optionally] use have nothing to do with screen rendering.
Of course, the downside of my point is that OpenOffice.org manages to be sluggish on its own, with or without Java.
Re:OpenOffice just isn't very good. (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe under ideal conditions - like, oh, the same sort of environment that would make Crysis happy -it's "fine", but it's not an Office killer.
It's a bloated pos that's nothing more than a clone of Office. Not a very good one, at that.
Show me an Office-compatible suite than I can install on a PII / 300MHz (one of the boxes within my reach), that doesn't have performance issues, and I'll show you The Office Killer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm creating a screenplay/dialog management tool in it, and the regrettable thing is there is no stand-alone executable, and no way to simply run the finished files by end-users unless they have the fu
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
OpenOffice is too big and slow compared to MS Office 2003. Office 2003 ran fine on the eeePC, but it was way too big for what I actually need.
I would rather buy MS Office than use OOo for free (Score:3, Interesting)
(And no, I won't try to help them make it better just because it's open source. I'm busy enoug
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I used to use WP 5.1 and I'm not sure what you're talking about. Word will show you all of the underlying formatting for your document. In Word 2003 you can simply Shift+F1.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Also Impress seem to be the worse part of OpenOffice, Write and Calc are pretty good, at least for the last two y
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You could say I'm impressed
Re:OpenOffice just isn't very good. (Score:4, Insightful)
I like OOo since Writer and Calc do what I need, Base is rock-solid where it counts, and Draw is at least adequate.
But I am one of the few clear seers who know that the first and biggest step to improving an organization's performance is to ban the use of PowerPoint. (The second step, which would also result in a significant boost in efficiency, is to limit the use of MS Access to persons who have the training to know when it is actually the right tool for the job-- which, in corporate America, is roughly 3.72% of its current usage.)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:OpenOffice just isn't very good. (Score:4, Interesting)
When I was a student, before getting assimilated by MS (I am now a MS employee), I ran Linux exclusively on my school laptop and used OpenOffice full time. There's no way around saying it, it was a terrible experience. When it wasn't crashing, losing my documents, or in some other way completely failing to function, it was painfully slow, bordering on unusable.
I stuck by it and fiddled with it until one day in a lab I had to do some extensive spreadsheet work. Specifically, getting data out of a tab-delimited file, approx 15,000 rows and ~5ish columns. Every way I could possibly attempt to open, paste, import this file would throw OpenOffice into a seemingly endless loop. I'd wait 20, 30, 40 minutes, but it couldn't handle this 100kB file no matter how I diced it. I made all sorts of excuses as other students were doing the same thing in mere seconds on their Windows PCs or Macs. It was the last straw for me and I gave up, and used the lab machine with MS Office to do the same thing in about 5 seconds. A similar lab experience only a few weeks later, and I ended up dual-booting my laptop "just for Excel", and before I realized it, I liked the whole Office suite better than OpenOffice. I still used Linux primarily at that time, but every time I needed anything remotely Office related, I simply found OpenOffice to be inadequate.
Sorry, I'm really not trying to be a troll about this, and I know many folks will scream bloody murder at me for even posting because of my bias. But before I had such a bias, I tried so very hard to love OpenOffice, and just couldn't. Like Wulfstan said, the quality of OpenOffice is just not very good.
If I were Google, I'd be working hard to carve out this niche market for online services and stay out of desktop apps beyond perhaps plugins for better online integration. OpenOffice doesn't fit with Google's business model, and frankly, I think Google could probably crank out something superior to OpenOffice from scratch anyways.
Re:OpenOffice just isn't very good. (Score:5, Informative)
Needing MS Office is a bad reason to switch away from Linux. It runs quite well on wine.
Personally, I do not use either because latex covers almost everything I would use an Office suite for. In the rare occasion I need a spreadsheet, I use gnumeric because it works a lot better than OOo Calc. That said, Excel is a great piece of software. A good replacement for it would be quite a project.
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding is that Office 2007 doesn't even install properly under WINE (which, IMHO, is the version you'd want).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Office 2003: Garbage (apps at Gold but doesn't install)
Office XP: Silver
Office 2000: Bronze
Office 97: Garbage (apps at Gold but doesn't install)
Office 95: Garbage (apps at Bronze but doesn't install)
May I ask what you consider "quite well"? The AppDB guys at wine seem to disagree with you.
Re:OpenOffice just isn't very good. (Score:4, Informative)
Regarding performance, years ago, when I voiced the same complaint here on
The performance may not be stellar (although I really don't recall noticing a substantial difference), but in terms of functionality, there are many areas where OO.o outshines MS Office.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I was working with a teacher on Sunday night trying to prepare a presentation in OpenOffice (it was running incredibly slowly) and she said "I hate OpenOffice". She isn't a geek, she doesn't particularly like computers, but to her it was a huge disappointment to have to use OpenOffice instead of being able to use PowerPoint.
Really? My non-geek fiancee has used Open Office on my laptop to do presentations for school and hasn't had any complaints, other than the default save format is not ppt (which I think I could change if the hard drive on that laptop didn't die).
Nope, thats a bad idea (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just a random thought. Now, take that tin foil hat off.
you mean like this? (Score:5, Informative)
I wonder why they didnt name the extension... (Score:3, Funny)
Knockout punch? How about 10% market share first? (Score:2)
Google docs - pdf tags. (Score:2)
File -> Download File As -> pdf
Used to give OpenOffice.org as the pdf creator (within pdf tags), it now gives "Prince 6.0 (www.princexml.com)". So IMHO Google docs are moving away from OpenOffice.orgI'm not an openoffice fan (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
core business (Score:2)
The article mentioned IBM. IBM is in the business
Re: (Score:2)
Google is primarily an advertising company, but they have all kinds of differnt products and services.
The Problem with OpenOffice (Score:3, Insightful)
All these improvements could be contributed upstream, but because of Sun's tight gripped control, they won't be. Sun isn't just going to hhand it over to Google, and I doubt Google is just going to sell Sun's product, unless Google felt like they had a strong-enough influence in the product's development.
I agree that Google Docs is poor in its execution, but I doubt that OOo is the way to go for them. I see a product like Zimbra, that was developed with the web in mind, not an app forced into a browser, and that is where the future lies.
When Google has an office suite that was designed with a web interface in mind, that works as fast as Zimbra, please let me know.
Google and OpenOffice.org already happened (Score:5, Informative)
You can see a C|Net article about their hiring from a while back:
http://news.cnet.com/Google-throws-bodies-at-OpenOffice/2100-7344_3-5920762.html [cnet.com]
OpenOffice as a web service (Score:2)
http://www.ulteo.com/ [ulteo.com]
You have 1GB of storage with the free account and can use OO.org as a webservice. They also have a "Virtual Desktop" which is a stripped-down KDE environment with OO in Windows thanks to CoLinux.
I tried it out and found the Virtual Desktop fairly impressive- the sort of thing that Joe Schmoe can use well; but unfortunately adding programs to it is a hassle which makes it unsuitable for my (admittedly fairly specific) needs. Their "online desktop" has
I'd rather they developed a word processor... (Score:5, Interesting)
I am SO tired of every word processor out there, including the one by the white kool aid clan, mimicking the worst drawbacks of word because it makes it a bit easier to roundtrip documents to and from Word. I'd rather have the native format something like Docbook, but I'll take HTML if that's the only way to get real nested document structures and markup as THE native format.
If selling support makes money... (Score:2)
Why should Google care? (Score:4, Insightful)
Were there a lot of people running around in 1980 saying Apple Computer had to start building mainframes in order to knock out IBM? I mean, that would make just as much sense.
IBM tried to knock out Microsoft with OS/2. How'd that work out?
Novell tried to knock out Microsoft with its purchases of Unix, Digital Research, and WordPerfect. How'd that work out?
Sun has been trying to out Microsoft with Java and StarOffice and whatnot. How's that working out?
And now, Microsoft's been obsessively focused with trying to knock out Google, pouring billions more into MSN. How's that working out?
Not that difficult to implement, actually. (Score:2)
Anyway, given the architecture of OOo it really would be easy to get its full functionality running inside a web browser. Remember that in order to be cross-platform, OOo contains a UI layer that abstracts and decouples the operating system's widget set from the core applic
OOo sucks (Score:3, Insightful)
OOo is a piece of crap. No, really. I do not think you could come up with a worse productivity suite without specifically designing it that way, and you certainly wouldn't have as much adoption.
OOo is a (bad) clone of Word, mixed in with XML-pedantry and a really bad case of the second-system effect (made all the worse because none of the people involved had anything to do with the first system, which is Word itself).
It, in a nutshell, shows the reason why getting free software onto the desktop has been so difficult: half the community is focused on feature-for-feature competitiveness and replication of the original product, and measures its success in market-share, and the other half of the community just hates MS software and tries to do the exact opposite, under the guise of "doing it right the first time." As a result we get something that actually manages to be slower than its MS equivalent in every respect, because on top of all the original features we copied without trying much in the way of procedural abstraction or optimization, we have even more stupid ideas bolted on, like using compressed XML files for the native data format, questionable default parameters that someone decided are "more correct", and the occasional bizarre bug.
The same sort of thing is starting to happen to Firefox, too. It started out just trying to be fast, but then a number of advocates got on board and decided that more people should use it, and in order to get them to do that the browser should try to be all things to all people. Now Firefox is getting bigger, more bloated, and slower, and in a few years will just be another bald, fat, middle-aged, useless browser program that got passed by.
All this is a long way of saying that Google shouldn't touch OOo with a ten-foot pole. It goes against everything they stand for: simplicity, usability, obviousness.
[1]: Except Orkut. Sorry.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Sun and Google actually cooperating? (Score:5, Informative)
Never! When satan skates to work!
Google Adds Star Office to Google Pack [readwriteweb.com]
You can get Google Pack Here. [google.com]
Re:quality? (Score:4, Funny)
Now hands up all you home users using MS Office that have legally purchased a copy rather than copying it from work or downloading a torrent... anyone?
I rest my case.
So... your point is that OO is so crappy, people would rather break the law than use it?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just trying to make sense of your reply to the original post in this thread. The AC (not I) on the original post stated:
to which you replied with a post about millions of people pirating MS Office. What's that got to do with the quality of Open Office?
Do you own any music CDs? Can you download any of them on BitTorrent?
I suggest that you probably can
Re: (Score:2)
-ellie
Re:Sounds like a (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sounds like a (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)