OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office

  • 28 Replies
  • 2823 Views
*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« on: June 06, 2010, 04:33:58 AM »
I've been an OpenOffice.org user ever since I first installed Ubuntu in 2008 (now a Debian unstable user). I just tried installing AbiWord and Gnumeric, and compared the startup times of AbiWord and OpenOffice.org Writer, on Debian sid with Xfce.

AbiWord: 3 seconds
OpenOffice.org Writer: 12 seconds!!!

As soon as I found that difference, I decided to use AbiWord and Gnumeric in place of their OpenOffice.org counterparts - although I've left Impress installed because as far as I know, there is no GNOME Office equivalent.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
  • It went wherever I did go.
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2010, 05:27:33 AM »
GNOME and GIMP. We need more of these programs.
I spent all of 5 minutes learning about bloody gods just before the exam and its bloody qeistions on fox hunting and abortions.

*

Johannes

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2755
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #2 on: June 06, 2010, 10:17:10 AM »
That is all cool until you realize that compatibility is the number one concern when picking an office suite.

OO >>abiword

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #3 on: June 06, 2010, 10:19:11 AM »
That is all cool until you realize that compatibility is the number one concern when picking an office suite.

OO >>abiword

Compatibility with what? AbiWord is compatible with the OpenDocument standard.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Johannes

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2755
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2010, 01:50:48 PM »
That is all cool until you realize that compatibility is the number one concern when picking an office suite.

OO >>abiword

Compatibility with what? AbiWord is compatible with the OpenDocument standard.
Cool, except the people that use OpenDocument consist of you and maybe 5 friends.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #5 on: June 06, 2010, 01:52:53 PM »
Cool, except the people that use OpenDocument consist of you and maybe 5 friends.

If people choose to use a non-standard document format, they can't expect me to read it.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #6 on: June 06, 2010, 01:53:43 PM »
Cool, except the people that use OpenDocument consist of you and maybe 5 friends.

If people choose to use a non-standard document format, they can't expect me to read it.

Question: What was the first Office software?

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2010, 01:54:56 PM »
Question: What was the first Office software?

Irrelevant.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #8 on: June 06, 2010, 01:56:05 PM »
Question: What was the first Office software?

Irrelevant.
So, you don't know. Thanks for sharing.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #9 on: June 06, 2010, 01:58:15 PM »
So, you don't know. Thanks for sharing.

It is true that I do not know. However, it is also irrelevant.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Johannes

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2755
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #10 on: June 06, 2010, 02:01:05 PM »
Cool, except the people that use OpenDocument consist of you and maybe 5 friends.

If people choose to use a non-standard document format, they can't expect me to read it.
Office Open XML is standardized by ISO, EMCA and IEC.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #11 on: June 06, 2010, 02:04:04 PM »
Office Open XML is standardized by ISO, EMCA and IEC.

Incorrect.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #12 on: June 06, 2010, 02:20:46 PM »
So, you don't know. Thanks for sharing.

It is true that I do not know. However, it is also irrelevant.

Irrelevant for what? I asked a simple question.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12682
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #13 on: June 06, 2010, 02:21:45 PM »
How many file formats can both read, convert and create?

This is the number one concern, everything else is a bonus.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #14 on: June 06, 2010, 02:23:34 PM »
Irrelevant for what? I asked a simple question.

Irrelevant to anything else in the thread.

How many file formats can both read, convert and create?

This is the number one concern, everything else is a bonus.

To say anything is "the" number one concern is ludicrous. What you need from a word processor might be different from what I need. In fact, I rarely send and receive documents, so being able to import or export formats I'll never use isn't important to me. I'd much rather have a faster, more lightweight word processor and sacrifice a few features.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #17 on: June 06, 2010, 02:32:13 PM »
Office Open XML is standardized by ISO, EMCA and IEC.

Incorrect.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument



What is your point?
If you can't deduce by reading through the link and tracing back your replies in the quoted text, then any attempt for explanation on my side would be useless.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #18 on: June 06, 2010, 02:34:03 PM »
If you can't deduce by reading through the link and tracing back your replies in the quoted text, then any attempt for explanation on my side would be useless.

The link states that OpenDocument is a standard document format, which is what I have been saying in this thread. OpenDocument and Office Open XML are two different things.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12682
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #19 on: June 07, 2010, 03:12:47 AM »
Irrelevant for what? I asked a simple question.

Irrelevant to anything else in the thread.

How many file formats can both read, convert and create?

This is the number one concern, everything else is a bonus.

To say anything is "the" number one concern is ludicrous. What you need from a word processor might be different from what I need. In fact, I rarely send and receive documents, so being able to import or export formats I'll never use isn't important to me. I'd much rather have a faster, more lightweight word processor and sacrifice a few features.

OK, but I'm wondering whether it's worth me getting it and I have to juggle files from different sources on a daily basis, so for me it is the number one concern.

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #20 on: June 07, 2010, 04:11:15 AM »
This thread is 100% parsifail.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #21 on: June 07, 2010, 06:54:53 AM »
OK, but I'm wondering whether it's worth me getting it and I have to juggle files from different sources on a daily basis, so for me it is the number one concern.

File formats

AbiWord is packaged with several import and export filters for formats including HTML, Microsoft Word (.doc), Office Open XML (.docx), OpenDocument Text (.odt), Rich Text Format (.rtf), and text documents (.txt). LaTeX is supported for export only. Plug-in filters are available to deal with many other formats, notably WordPerfect documents. The native file format, .abw, uses XML, so as to mitigate vendor lock-in concerns with respect to interoperability and digital archiving.

Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_word_processors#Import_or_Open_capabilities

It looks like they're largely identical in this respect, except that OpenOffice supports UOF where AbiWord doesn't, and AbiWord's PDF export functionality only works on GNU+Linux.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12682
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #22 on: June 07, 2010, 11:46:40 AM »
Hrm, if it can handle different generations of .docs then I might have to try it out.

*

Johannes

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2755
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #23 on: June 07, 2010, 03:13:16 PM »
Office Open XML is standardized by ISO, EMCA and IEC.

Incorrect.
From wiki:

"Office Open XML (also informally known as OOXML or OpenXML) is a ZIP-based file format originally developed by Microsoft[2] for representing spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents. The Office Open XML specification has been standardised both by Ecma and, in a later edition, by ISO and IEC as an International Standard (ISO/IEC 29500).
Starting with Microsoft Office 2007, the Office Open XML file formats (ECMA-376) have become the default[3] target file format of Microsoft Office,[4][5] although the Strict variant of the standard is not fully supported."


*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #24 on: June 07, 2010, 03:40:49 PM »
"Office Open XML (also informally known as OOXML or OpenXML) is a ZIP-based file format originally developed by Microsoft[2] for representing spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents. The Office Open XML specification has been standardised both by Ecma and, in a later edition, by ISO and IEC as an International Standard (ISO/IEC 29500).
Starting with Microsoft Office 2007, the Office Open XML file formats (ECMA-376) have become the default[3] target file format of Microsoft Office,[4][5] although the Strict variant of the standard is not fully supported."

Wikipedia apparently doesn't understand what it means to standardise something. The OOXML specification contains references to things which are defined only in Microsoft's proprietary implementation.

Source: http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-50857/press-release:iso-captured-by-vendor-microsoft
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #25 on: June 07, 2010, 03:43:34 PM »
Wikipedia apparently doesn't understand what it means to standardise something.

See that [edit] box? Click it. Make the change ego boy.

*

Johannes

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2755
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #26 on: June 07, 2010, 03:46:12 PM »
Quote
The OOXML specification contains references to things which are defined only in Microsoft's proprietary implementation.


Irrelevant.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #27 on: June 07, 2010, 03:55:24 PM »
Quote
The OOXML specification contains references to things which are defined only in Microsoft's proprietary implementation.


Irrelevant.

It was perfectly relevant, actually.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39058
Re: OpenOffice.org vs. GNOME Office
« Reply #28 on: June 07, 2010, 10:03:12 PM »
"Office Open XML (also informally known as OOXML or OpenXML) is a ZIP-based file format originally developed by Microsoft[2] for representing spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents. The Office Open XML specification has been standardised both by Ecma and, in a later edition, by ISO and IEC as an International Standard (ISO/IEC 29500).
Starting with Microsoft Office 2007, the Office Open XML file formats (ECMA-376) have become the default[3] target file format of Microsoft Office,[4][5] although the Strict variant of the standard is not fully supported."

Wikipedia apparently doesn't understand what it means to standardise something. The OOXML specification contains references to things which are defined only in Microsoft's proprietary implementation.

Source: http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-50857/press-release:iso-captured-by-vendor-microsoft

Actually they do.  They also know about an old trick that Microsoft (among others) has been using for years.
Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish
"Embrace, extend and extinguish,"[1]  also known as "Embrace, extend, and exterminate,"[2]  is a phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice  found[3]  was used internally by Microsoft[4]  to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to disadvantage its competitors.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2010, 10:05:04 PM by markjo »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.