OpenOffice is ‘Profoundly Sick’

[Terry Olaes]

GNOME & OpenOffice guru Michael Meeks posted a blog entry on why he believes the OpenOffice.org project is unhealthy and need some significant change before it’s too late. Check out his information, which includes a lot of pretty graphs, and sound off on what you think.

In a healthy project we would expect to see a large number of volunteer developers involved, in addition - we would expect to see a large number of peer companies contributing to the common code pool; we do not see this in OpenOffice.org. Indeed, quite the opposite we appear to have the lowest number of active developers on O since records began: 24, this contrasts negatively with Linux's recent low of 160+. Even spun in the most positive way, O is at best stagnating from a development perspective.

 

[SixtyWattMan]

OpenOffice is 'Profoundly Horrible'

 

[Phantoms]

OpenOffice is 'Profoundly Horrible'

Then learn how to program and help out.

 

[Surtrsflame]

OpenOffice is 'Profoundly Horrible'

open office is all that is needed for probably around 95% of computer users. And for somebody like me, who doesn't have the money to by M$ Office, it's just fine. Sure, I'd much rather have Office 2007, but for a free piece of software OpenOffice is just fine, and is good enough to the point where I'm not going to go buy M$ Office

 

[RussianHAXOR]

I like open office...

 

[Myg]

Its because OO has achieved its goal and no longer has anything higher to reach for...

They should just congratulate them on a job well done and let it be!

 

[Zellio2009]

At the very least the Linux cult could stop with the whole M$, it's overused and quite old.

 

[lewchenko]

I used the latest version for some simple work, but it really does have limitations. Its like using MS Office 97.

Then I tried MS Office 2007 with the new ribbon interface. Wow. Its light years ahead of open office, and I paid for the student/home version which was reasonably priced and came with 3 licences.

Sometimes its just best to pay a little bit if you want 10 years of progress.

 

[Surtrsflame]

Its because OO has achieved its goal and no longer has anything higher to reach for...

They should just congratulate them on a job well done and let it be!

you have a good point, although they could work on things like a slimmed down version that can open quickly as just a reader, or a mobile version. Just because they reached their goal doesn't mean they can't continue the project to improve it or make it into something more than what the goal intended.

 

[Concentric]

you have a good point, although they could work on things like a slimmed down version that can open quickly as just a reader, or a mobile version. Just because they reached their goal doesn't mean they can't continue the project to improve it or make it into something more than what the goal intended.

QFT.

 

[SockMan!]

you have a good point, although they could work on things like a slimmed down version that can open quickly as just a reader, or a mobile version. Just because they reached their goal doesn't mean they can't continue the project to improve it or make it into something more than what the goal intended.

I'm almost tempted to go back to Office 2000 because Word loads up almost instantly. If OO improved performance considerably and maybe include full support for Access documents then I'd be happy; at least for home use. So yeah, there's still work that can be done.

 

[kac77]

I used the latest version for some simple work, but it really does have limitations. Its like using MS Office 97.

Then I tried MS Office 2007 with the new ribbon interface. Wow. Its light years ahead of open office, and I paid for the student/home version which was reasonably priced and came with 3 licences.

Sometimes its just best to pay a little bit if you want 10 years of progress.

Yeah uh huh, I wasn't aware that Access 97 supported MYSQL, MSQL, JSQL backends. Nor do I remember stylesheets being prevelant in Word 97. I'm sure XML support was all the rage back then too

 

[bholstege]

I'm almost tempted to go back to Office 2000 because Word loads up almost instantly. If OO improved performance considerably and maybe include full support for Access documents then I'd be happy; at least for home use. So yeah, there's still work that can be done.

Since it is programmed in Java instead of C, I have found it to be much lower speed. That and a poor spellcheck have stopped me form switching.

 

[ordovician]

The OpenOffice team can start by EASILY (keyword EASILY) supporting the new XML files....

 

[Surtrsflame]

agreed, at least version 3 can open the new xml files, but if they are looking for something to fix in the next patch, the ability to save in the new formats would be very useful, and could be very damaging to the browser if they don't get around to it soon.

 

[abovedefault]

I really like OpenOffice. It's times like these where I wish I knew how to code

 

[cyclone3d]

OO isn't that horrible...

It would be light years better if it didn't use Java though.

Java = sloooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwww!

 

[matrix563]

i thought this meant 'sick' as in 'damn that app is sick epic win lulz ? '

 

[TechieSooner]

Its because OO has achieved its goal and no longer has anything higher to reach for...

I call BS.

Have you tried Office 2007?

Open Office cannot begin to TOUCH Office 2007.

I don't think it ever will either, think about this: Microsoft has thousands of full-time staff working on Office. You've got hundreds (if that??) of volunteers working on free time on Open Office.

Microsoft Office will almost always win.

All that said though, from a BASIC needs standpoint, Open Office is great. I've put it in at schools and it's wonderful.

 

[ianken]

Yeah uh huh, I wasn't aware that Access 97 supported MYSQL, MSQL, JSQL backends. Nor do I remember stylesheets being prevelant in Word 97. I'm sure XML support was all the rage back then too

Way to cherry pick and just not get it.

Now, back to reality: OO feels like ten year old software and looks like it. That was the original posters point.

 

[Manaknight]

i use open office at work... i PREFER office 2007, however this is a primarily wordperfect based workplace so it's more cost effective to use open office for basic document needs. For that it works fine

 

[eloj]

Isn't MS pretty much out of ideas too? Most home users have no use for whatever new bells and whistles they add to MSO. So they change the UI around every now and then so that their support system get something to do (new books, new classes, etc). Big whooop. Documents still look like ass compared with the output of LaTeX for instance.

There's something the OO guys could do instead of chasing MS.

 

[ZenOps]

Microsoft has been pushing Office Home and Student 2007 (3 user license) *really* heavy up here in Canada for the Boxing day specials.

Its on sale everywhere between $47.99 and $49.99 Cdn or about $39US, which after you spread it out to 3 PC's means $13 per PC.

It seems to be true that Microsoft does target specific countries for specific products.

 

[TechieSooner]

Isn't MS pretty much out of ideas too? Most home users have no use for whatever new bells and whistles they add to MSO. So they change the UI around every now and then so that their support system get something to do (new books, new classes, etc). Big whooop. Documents still look like ass compared with the output of LaTeX for instance.

It offers a whole lot better than just a new interface.
Backend database capabilities is one. Formulas and other items that OO cannot touch.

Secondly, most folks don't realize than in Office 2007 you almost never have to touch your mouse. It can be run almost entirely from the keyboard.

 

[eeyrjmr]

OO isn't that horrible...

It would be light years better if it didn't use Java though.

Java = sloooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwww!

&&

Since it is programmed in Java instead of C, I have found it to be much lower speed. That and a poor spellcheck have stopped me form switching.

...
*sigh*
Its not the 1st time I have heard that internet myth/FUD that OpenOffice is written in JAVA, I am pretty sure it won't be the last...

OpenOffice.org is NOT written in JAVA, it is programmed in C++ with JAVA parts to it (alot more C++ then JAVA mind)
Has anyone that has actually propogates this FUD actually looked at the source? even the build directory or Makefile?

FluidMotion ooo # pwd
/var/tmp/portage/app-office/openoffice-3.0.0/work/ooo
find | wc -l
117477
FluidMotion ooo # find | grep -i -c "\.java$"
3700
FluidMotion ooo # find | grep -i -c "\.jar$"
5
FluidMotion ooo # find | grep -i -c "\.cpp$"
169
find | grep -i -c "\.cxx$"
10753
FluidMotion ooo # find | grep -i -c "\.c$"
308
find | grep -i -c "\.cxx$"
10753
FluidMotion ooo # find | grep -i -c "\.h$"
1049

This is showing the number of files with these extensions, as you can see the VAST majority are CXX (C++) files, and JAVA files are a distant second

size=0;for file in $(find | grep -i "\.java$"); do size=$((size+ $(du  $file | cut -f 1))); done; echo $size
33668

size=0;for file in $(find | grep -i "\.jar$"); do size=$((size+ $(du  $file | cut -f 1))); done; echo $size
96
size=0;for file in $(find | grep -i "\.cpp$"); do size=$((size+ $(du  $file | cut -f 1))); done; echo $size
1900

size=0;for file in $(find | grep -i "\.c$"); do size=$((size+ $(du  $file | cut -f 1))); done; echo $size
4244

size=0;for file in $(find | grep -i "\.h$"); do size=$((size+ $(du  $file | cut -f 1))); done; echo $size
8784

size=0;for file in $(find | grep -i "\.cxx$"); do size=$((size+ $(du  $file | cut -f 1))); done; echo $size
224260

Now these shows the TOTAL number of lines of code for each of these file types. AGAIN CXX exceeds JAVA by a looong shot

So as you can see OOo is not written in JAVA, it has JAVA components (mostly for the OOo-VB like language)




OOo is a very good piece of software and in some cases is better then what MS pushes out and in other its not. IF you are someone that gets along with MSO then it doesn't matter wtf OOo does, said person is just gonna rag on OOo "because it doesn't do x when I do y..."
Well just a thought STOP TRYING TO TREAT IT LIKE MSO AND TREAT IT AS A NEW APP...
There are things that OOo does that fuck me! MSO just cannot do and likewise.

OOo is really good and gets the job done.



Also SUN hold OOo back alot. There is a project called: Go-oo ( http://go-oo.org/ ) that add extra stuff that hasn't made it into OOo yet (better filter support etc). IF you don't like stock OOo look at the more "bleeding-edge" OOo

 

[Dew]

It seems to be true that Microsoft does target specific countries for specific products.

Even at that, it costs $75 from newegg for it anyways. I am much happier with Office Home and Student 2007 for $75 than the free O. Lets face it people, I didn't like the ribbon bar interface for all of 5 minutes. Now I love it. Besides, MS Office is fast to do everything I need and I don't have to worry about shit looking different on other machines.

 

[TechieSooner]

OOo is a very good piece of software and in some cases is better then what MS pushes out and in other its not.

What's better? As I recall the last thread we had on this, the only thing anyone came up with was it sometimes formats documents better when designed through other programs.

 

[bholstege]

All I know is it installs the Java runtime, which would lead me to believe it uses Java. It is also indisputably slower than Office.

 

[eloj]

It offers a whole lot better than just a new interface.
Backend database capabilities is one. Formulas and other items that OO cannot touch.

Home users don't crave 'backend database capabilities', and I would hope everyone here knows LaTeX reigns absolutely supreme on formatting math.

 

[Grentz]

Although OO is good enough for most users that barely use any features of the full Microsoft Office programs, the fact remains that many do not know about it and most of the "power users" that do need the features of full Microsoft Office.

I dunno, its a decent product but those who I have recommended it to usually tend to upgrade to Microsoft Office eventually for one reason or another.

 

[gaspah]

yep.. OO is horrible..they should scrap it...

 

[Evil]

I use Open Office 3.0 in Ubuntu but only because it appears to be the best thing I can find to use on this platform. I actually like Microsoft's $39.99 Microsoft Works package better but I don't feel like using a wrapper or a virtual machine to run it.

There is nothing inherently wrong with Open Office to me but it is definitely not as easy to use as Office, Works, or even Corel's Office Suite. It is however free and that is a definite plus.

 

[SmokeRngs]

I've been using OpenOffice exclusively for a few years now because it's free and does everything I need it to do. As stated, the vast majority of people have no use for the advanced features of MS Office. I wouldn't be surprised if the vast majority of people using Office at home switched to OpenOffice and noticed no real difference in capabilities.

That said, I don't give a shit what you use but calling OpenOffice worthless or a piece of shit because you don't like it or it doesn't do what you want it to do or how you want it to do it is probably not a good opinion.

 

[TechieSooner]

Home users don't crave 'backend database capabilities',

No, but they do like the "categorized" ribbon a heck of alot more than your classic "File" menus.

Training for new users, there's corporations everywhere that would tell you they spend less time training new users on Office 2007. Everything fits in a much more logical place.

Granted for most of us here, it is a major pain to get used to. Once you get used to it, it's actually so much EASIER to use.

That's why I really think, from a usability standpoint, Office 2007 kicks OO all over the block. It really does.
Once you factor in just needing font sizing, bold, italic, and underlining capabilities, Open Office would work great for your casual person. But once you start getting into the more Intermediate stuff, it cannot hold a candle to Office 2007.

 

[Evil]

No, but they do like the "categorized" ribbon a heck of alot more than your classic "File" menus.

Training for new users, there's corporations everywhere that would tell you they spend less time training new users on Office 2007. Everything fits in a much more logical place.

Granted for most of us here, it is a major pain to get used to. Once you get used to it, it's actually so much EASIER to use.

That's why I really think, from a usability standpoint, Office 2007 kicks OO all over the block. It really does.
Once you factor in just needing font sizing, bold, italic, and underlining capabilities, Open Office would work great for your casual person. But once you start getting into the more Intermediate stuff, it cannot hold a candle to Office 2007.

Yeah I totally agree with the majority of that as well. Office 07 is definitely much more user friendly than Open Office. You would think if the OO team wanted their product to get much more widely recognized they add easily usable templates as standard instead of making you hunt and search for them as well as simply making the interface more intuitive, especially if they want to topple the big M who has been dominating in the Office productivity market for quite some time now. They may actually not even be wanting to compete and simply want to give end users a alternative but if you have the money it seems Open Office is simply not what I'd choose to use if I had a choice.

 

[kac77]

Way to cherry pick and just not get it.

Now, back to reality: OO feels like ten year old software and looks like it. That was the original posters point.

What something "feels like" doesn't actually equate to anything. That's reality. What software actually does is more important. A Mac might feel like it's running non-PC hardware, but the reality is that it's not.

 

[DudeItsMe]

While I have no problem with the "idea" of OpenOffice (free open source software), I don't have much use for it. I couldn't go to OpenOffice over Office '07 (which I use daily, tons of different files). From a contribution standpoint, it's easier for me to contribute $60 to Office Ultimate than do anything for Open Office.

 

[Skrying]

OpenOffice is just another example of open source's state in general. Very few quality programmers have the time or desire to work on the project and push it forward. Not to mention like almost all major open source projects it is largely controlled and funded by a corporation (Sun in this case) who hold it back for whatever political/economic reasons. Many of the best open source programs are still light years behind their commercial counterparts, a few exceptions do exist of course but they're fewer and fewer these days.

As for Office 2007 vs OpenOffice... well, I hate OpenOffice but I do absolutely admire what the project offers to those who have basic uses out of a office suite. It just simply doesn't do what I want in a friendly manner, I'm willing to pay for a piece of software that does. However, I think everyone should at least hold some respect for OpenOffice and what it has achieved, and hopefully will continue too with some luck.

 

[kac77]

. Many of the best open source programs are still light years behind their commercial counterparts, a few exceptions do exist of course but they're fewer and fewer these days.

While I agree that Open Office is definitely no Office 2007. Open source in general offers more bleeding edge features than most commercial software. Aside from productivity software, once you step into the enterprise arena especially, open source wipes the floor with commercial software. I would say 80% of Internet content is based off a open source counterpart (blogs, web servers, commerce software, email servers).

 

[Skrying]

While I agree that Open Office is definitely no Office 2007. Open source in general offers more bleeding edge features than most commercial software. Aside from productivity software, once you step into the enterprise arena especially, open source wipes the floor with commercial software. I would say 80% of Internet content is based off a open source counterpart (blogs, web servers, commerce software, email servers).

While true, I was specifically speaking more in the realm of consumer level applications, sorry for not making that distinction clear. There are even exceptions in that arena, certainly, but many popular open source applications still leave a lot to be desired. GIMP is another major example that comes to mind, as well as many of the open source media players are majorly lacking in some way or another. They tend to have one really must-have like feature but have a major fault. Which is really not surprising considering the background that many of these projects form from. I guess I like to experiment with open source software but always find myself going back to closed source applications to get something actually done.