LibreOffice has added more Calc functions than AOO. LO also has patched up UNO allowing for faster run and has added wrappers for VBA scripts into UNO calls. OOXML support in AAO is horrible, LO has greatly improved OOXML since the split. The backends for Base in LO is moving away from Java, slowly, but eventually Java will not be needed unless you need JDBC connectivity. LO included recent ODF updates that allow font embedding in documents, AOO lacks this ability. AOO is using the old IBM Symphony libs for the sidebar and some other UI elements. LO has redone these to move away from the dependency on IBM libs. IBM has also deprecated those libs.
So yeah AOO might be finished and focuses on just polishing the features they have, but at the same time LO is adding features which because of the licensing differences between the two any LO updates cannot be imported into AOO. But any AOO updates can be merged into LO.
I have a 10 year old computer that used to lag running OO, but the past few years it runs libreoffice without any problems.
The thing Sun wrote was bloated and slow. OO added a lot of features. LO is basically "finished" IMO.
One of the great things about IBM, when their old software sucks, they deprecate it. There was a time they were even bribing their professional services clients to switch from AIX to Linux, because AIX didn't have any use case other than "change is hard." Not very much of the software I use is from IBM, but when it is I welcome it. They don't always have my interests in mind, but that's OK because they're honest about their technology in a way that few companies are. I'm not going to use DB2, but they don't try to force me; their stuff integrates fine with PostgreSQL! $lt;3 But yeah, let Lotus Symphony die. There are still people who love Lotus Notes, which is fine for them, but who loves Lotus Symphony? It was like Geocities website builder but for creating proprietary apps. That works better for having semi-technical people write custom report apps than for real software that would get distributed.
>The thing Sun wrote was bloated and slow. OO added a lot of features. LO is basically "finished" IMO.
sun didn't write it, but rather bought it.
It was part of their vision of a return to more powerful central servers with smart terminals. OO would run on the center, and display, with your sun-session able to follow you from machine to machine.
OO originally came from a german company whose name slips mind, and was free for commercial and academic use, with a paid commercial version.
Sun didn't write it; they bought StarOffice from the german companyStarDivision (or some such)
I''d used StarOffice since 1.x, except for the horrific 4.x with the "feature" of its own desktop.
Sun's vision was a return to powerful central computers, but this time with smart to very smart terminals. Your session could follow you from one to another, as it was really running centrally.
They needed an office suite to run on the center, and StarOffice already ran on X.
except for the horrific 4.x with the "feature" of its own desktop
Oh I'm pretty sure I'm the odd one out when I say, that I hated that feature, but then it really grew on me. But looking back, I totally understand why everyone hated it. But still, I really started to enjoy it but yeah it was bad. I think it took a special kind of masochist to like it.
What made it s unusable was not just the grab of scree space, so that empty "desktop" blocked access sot other application, but that this effectively brought *all* of its documents to the front, and took away focus-follows-mouse access to other documents.
I thought that losing focus-follows-mouse would be the hardest part of switching back to mac, but it turned to be only #2--not being able to select and middle-click to paste was the biggest.
Done! (Score:2)
Re:Done! (Score:5, Informative)
Depends on what you mean by finished?
LibreOffice has added more Calc functions than AOO. LO also has patched up UNO allowing for faster run and has added wrappers for VBA scripts into UNO calls. OOXML support in AAO is horrible, LO has greatly improved OOXML since the split. The backends for Base in LO is moving away from Java, slowly, but eventually Java will not be needed unless you need JDBC connectivity. LO included recent ODF updates that allow font embedding in documents, AOO lacks this ability. AOO is using the old IBM Symphony libs for the sidebar and some other UI elements. LO has redone these to move away from the dependency on IBM libs. IBM has also deprecated those libs.
So yeah AOO might be finished and focuses on just polishing the features they have, but at the same time LO is adding features which because of the licensing differences between the two any LO updates cannot be imported into AOO. But any AOO updates can be merged into LO.
Re: (Score:0)
I know this is a serious and informative post, but it reads like something that came from a random jargon generator. Acronym soup!
Re:Done! (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a 10 year old computer that used to lag running OO, but the past few years it runs libreoffice without any problems.
The thing Sun wrote was bloated and slow. OO added a lot of features. LO is basically "finished" IMO.
One of the great things about IBM, when their old software sucks, they deprecate it. There was a time they were even bribing their professional services clients to switch from AIX to Linux, because AIX didn't have any use case other than "change is hard." Not very much of the software I use is from IBM, but when it is I welcome it. They don't always have my interests in mind, but that's OK because they're honest about their technology in a way that few companies are. I'm not going to use DB2, but they don't try to force me; their stuff integrates fine with PostgreSQL! $lt;3 But yeah, let Lotus Symphony die. There are still people who love Lotus Notes, which is fine for them, but who loves Lotus Symphony? It was like Geocities website builder but for creating proprietary apps. That works better for having semi-technical people write custom report apps than for real software that would get distributed.
Re: (Score:2)
>The thing Sun wrote was bloated and slow. OO added a lot of features. LO is basically "finished" IMO.
sun didn't write it, but rather bought it.
It was part of their vision of a return to more powerful central servers with smart terminals. OO would run on the center, and display, with your sun-session able to follow you from machine to machine.
OO originally came from a german company whose name slips mind, and was free for commercial and academic use, with a paid commercial version.
I used it from version
Re: (Score:2)
Sun didn't write it; they bought StarOffice from the german companyStarDivision (or some such)
I''d used StarOffice since 1.x, except for the horrific 4.x with the "feature" of its own desktop.
Sun's vision was a return to powerful central computers, but this time with smart to very smart terminals. Your session could follow you from one to another, as it was really running centrally.
They needed an office suite to run on the center, and StarOffice already ran on X.
As their plan was to make the money from the
Re: (Score:2)
except for the horrific 4.x with the "feature" of its own desktop
Oh I'm pretty sure I'm the odd one out when I say, that I hated that feature, but then it really grew on me. But looking back, I totally understand why everyone hated it. But still, I really started to enjoy it but yeah it was bad. I think it took a special kind of masochist to like it.
Re: (Score:2)
What made it s unusable was not just the grab of scree space, so that empty "desktop" blocked access sot other application, but that this effectively brought *all* of its documents to the front, and took away focus-follows-mouse access to other documents.
I thought that losing focus-follows-mouse would be the hardest part of switching back to mac, but it turned to be only #2--not being able to select and middle-click to paste was the biggest.
hawk
Re: (Score:2)
In college they taught single document interface and multiple document interface as a personal preference, with no best practices.
Now they teach some nonsense about how even having features confuses the user.