Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LibreOffice 24.8 Alpha 1 Open-Source Office Suite Released

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Old Grouch
    replied
    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post

    Sun didn't just buy StarOffice and leave it to rot, they bought StarOffice then they developed the ODF specification and forced it on the world. radically changing the product, including things like later forcing Java into OpenOffice.

    Was it ever a good product? ehhhhh
    Was it a Sun Microsystems product by the time most people touched it? yes it was 100%
    It was not only Sun Microsystems that developed the ODF specification.

    OpenDocument standardization:Participants

    The whole linked article is worth a read, as is:

    OpenDocument

    It is true to say that
    [the standard]was based on the Sun Microsystems specification for OpenOffice.org XML, the default format for OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice. It was originally developed for StarOffice "to provide an open standard for office documents.​"
    That statement has a citation to StarOffice XML File Format Working Draft, Technical Reference Manual, Draft 9, December 2000 (PDF), which in the preface says:
    This manual describes the StarOffice XML file format. XML is the new native file format for the StarOffice suite, replacing the old binary file format. Our goal is twofold: to have a complete specification encompassing all StarOffice components, and to provide an open standard for office documents​
    So Sun Microsystems developed an XML-based format for files produced by the StarOffice suite, which was subsequently used as the basis of the OASIS ODF standard, which had contributions from other parties. Sun did not 'force it on the world'. If anything, it was Microsoft that 'forced Office Open XML on the world' - see the Wikipedia article on the Standardization of Office Open XML.

    I was very peripherally involved in the process of standardization of both standards at the time. It was 'educational' to see how badly the ISO organization handled the Microsoft OOXML standardization process. It gave many people an insight into the governance of ISO standardization processes.

    Leave a comment:


  • pino
    replied
    Originally posted by chocolate View Post
    OnlyOffice works very well for Office Open XML formats (.docx...).
    LibreOffice works better than (any) Microsoft Office for Microsoft Office XML formats (.doc...) and, of course, is the best suite for OpenDocument formats (.odt...).
    Btw, nobody wants to hear or even believe that story, but anyways: A few years ago (4? 5?) I worked on an .odt file, and at some point in time, the file was somehow corrupted. Without any obvious reason. LO was not able to open the file anymore. No matter how hard I tried. Guess what helped. I tried to open the file in MS Word. And, voila, it had no trouble at all. Everything was perfect.

    Leave a comment:


  • kurkosdr
    replied
    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
    Sun didn't just buy StarOffice and leave it to rot, they bought StarOffice then they developed the ODF specification and forced it on the world.
    I would use the term "forced" for a Microsoft Office-competitive document format which comes with its own reference implementation (OpenOffice). Meanwhile, with OOXML, you get a pile of text (that may or may not make sense) pretending to be a standard, and there is no reference implementation to refer to in case the text is ambiguous. This allows Microsoft to define the ambiguous parts of the standard in their closed-source implementation (Microsoft Office) as they see fit, and anyone else has to painstakingly reverse-engineer Microsoft's closed-source implementation to match the behavior (which is what The Document Foundation is doing).

    The fact governments accepted the "standard" known as OOXML without a single open-source (or at least visible-source) implementation says a lot about the systemic corruption going on in most governments (for details, see here).

    But anyway, back on topic, before ODF, nothing like this existed (a Microsoft Office-competitive document format with a reference implementation). And no, the native formats of mini-editors like AbiWord don't count.
    Last edited by kurkosdr; 22 May 2024, 02:04 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • kurkosdr
    replied
    Originally posted by chocolate View Post
    OnlyOffice works very well for Office Open XML formats (.docx...).
    LibreOffice works better than (any) Microsoft Office for Microsoft Office XML formats (.doc...) and, of course, is the best suite for OpenDocument formats (.odt...).
    If I am going to upload files to some server, I might as well use the Microsoft 365 (which is free) than something called "OnlyOffice" which I've never heard of before and which promises excellent OOXML compatibility.

    The whole point of LibreOffice is that if you have a bunch of OOXML or binary Microsoft Office files lying around on your harddrive you can double-click on them and open them.
    Last edited by kurkosdr; 22 May 2024, 02:05 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Luke_Wolf
    replied
    Originally posted by Old Grouch View Post

    The origins of LibreOffice lie in Star-Division Star-Writer, released in 1985 as a CP/M application for the Amstrad CPC Z80A-based computer. It was later ported to DOS.

    ( See the history of LibreOffice here: LibreOffice timeline )

    So while it was a Sun Microsystems product, it wasn't originally developed by them - Sun bought Star-Division in 1999, and were themselves bought by Oracle in January 2010, so you could also call it a previously Oracle product, although I think the LibreOffice fork didn't include any Oracle-originated code
    So:
    1985-1999: Star-Division
    1999-2010: Sun Microsystems ( OpenOffice open sourced in 2000 )
    2010-2011: Oracle ( LibreOffice forked off OpenOffice in 2010 )

    Sun didn't just buy StarOffice and leave it to rot, they bought StarOffice then they developed the ODF specification and forced it on the world. radically changing the product, including things like later forcing Java into OpenOffice.

    Was it ever a good product? ehhhhh
    Was it a Sun Microsystems product by the time most people touched it? yes it was 100%

    Leave a comment:


  • chocolate
    replied
    To those that lament general "slowness" in LibreOffice: I'm genuinely curious what your baseline is. Is it Microsoft Office? In my recent (months old) experience, Microsoft Word literally could not save a document with certain changes, as Word would take too much time and eventually crash. In the end, I was actually unable to do it despite my best efforts and those of one IT technician; I had to put the changes into another document, move the two documents on somebody else's machine and try again, until it eventually worked. How can software that costs a fortune for any professional client be so unreliable? With the resulting document finally working again with subsequent changes, saving it would still take more than one minute (Intel 10th gen or 11th, can't remember what that laptop packed anymore, but 4+ physical cores and 16GB RAM for sure), and you were left wondering whether it would succeed or not, possibly losing or corrupting something in the process.

    I have no horse in this race, as I despise writing and revising technical documents in any office suite under the sun, but I believe LibreOffice would probably improve my work life if everyone collaborated via OpenDocument formats. I'm not even accounting for FOSS vs. proprietary, as Office Open XML is a pseudo open format, and the libre (AGPL version 3) OnlyOffice suite works well enough that nobody will notice if you're going about your business on Linux.

    Leave a comment:


  • cthart
    replied
    Originally posted by mirmirmir View Post
    24 already? Damn, Last time I used it, it was 7.
    24.2 was the next version after 7.6
    They switched to a year.month version number scheme like Ubuntu uses, with 2 releases per year like Ubuntu does.

    Leave a comment:


  • Old Grouch
    replied
    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post

    It's a Sun Microsystems product. All of their non-OS software were always crap. Unfortunately ODF and OOXML are standards that are too big and complex for anyone that's not running a company to want to implement outside of the LibreOffice ecosystem. These days I'm not sure a markup based formatting language (especially in XML) was really ever the right move as opposed to something similar to LaTeX if not LaTeX, certainly things like Markdown are a straight up downgrade vs LaTeX.
    The origins of LibreOffice lie in Star-Division Star-Writer, released in 1985 as a CP/M application for the Amstrad CPC Z80A-based computer. It was later ported to DOS.

    ( See the history of LibreOffice here: LibreOffice timeline )

    So while it was a Sun Microsystems product, it wasn't originally developed by them - Sun bought Star-Division in 1999, and were themselves bought by Oracle in January 2010, so you could also call it a previously Oracle product, although I think the LibreOffice fork didn't include any Oracle-originated code
    So:
    1985-1999: Star-Division
    1999-2010: Sun Microsystems ( OpenOffice open sourced in 2000 )
    2010-2011: Oracle ( LibreOffice forked off OpenOffice in 2010 )


    Leave a comment:


  • Luke_Wolf
    replied
    Originally posted by guiaiolfi View Post
    I had high hopes for the project. I even tried to migrate all machines in my work to use it. But after years of bugs, slowness and ugly interfaces I gave up. I don't think it's worth for me anymore. It's a shame and I hope in the future I can be proven wrong. But after reading another change log I can't stop thinking: too little, too late. AGAIN!
    It's a Sun Microsystems product. All of their non-OS software were always crap. Unfortunately ODF and OOXML are standards that are too big and complex for anyone that's not running a company to want to implement outside of the LibreOffice ecosystem. These days I'm not sure a markup based formatting language (especially in XML) was really ever the right move as opposed to something similar to LaTeX if not LaTeX, certainly things like Markdown are a straight up downgrade vs LaTeX.

    Leave a comment:


  • Old Grouch
    replied
    I wish the graphing module could handle time-series with data-points at irregular intervals better. And better axis division labels. It could almost do with a separate graphing language.
    Last edited by Old Grouch; 21 May 2024, 06:55 PM. Reason: Missing 'could'

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X