Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 327 posts

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#311

Post by addicted »

the_duke wrote: post #212
MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... clunky, unreliable clone of older Microsoft Office products. It was still better than a kick in the teeth though. That's exactly why i am using Open/Libre office; at some point Microsoft Office got such a complicate UI (ever since they pushed the ribbon bar - that's when they kicked me in the teeth) that i am unable to use it - the alternative uses a much less complicated UI so i am with it. Does the MS Office…

Am I alone here in actually liking the ribbon? I almost never use any MS Office product (Latex for serious writing, R for statistics, ...) but when I have to because of a client or whatever, I find the Ribbon to be convenient for a non-power user.

Love the ribbon too. OO/LO/iWork have become unusable for me since the ribbon.

The initial implementation of the ribbon sucked. It was too static, it didn't hide and took up a whole lot of space, and it didn't give you any pointers on KB shortcuts.

It also took MS some time of gathering data and telemetry to improve the layout. And frankly, it took users some time to adjust to the change.

The ribbon is much better now. But the people who like it, possibly still suffering from having to maybe defend it when it legitimately had flaws, are not as loud about it online.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#312

Post by addicted »

perlgeek wrote: post #246
the_duke wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I alone here in actually liking the ribbon? I almost never use any MS Office product (Latex for serious writing, R for statistics, ...) but when I have to because of a client or whatever, I find the Ribbon to be convenient for a non-power user.

When the ribbon works, which is most of the time, it's pretty good. When not, it can be a complete PITA. A few years ago I tried to change the scaling of an axis of a chart in Excel from linear to log, and it was so convoluted that I had to look up in the help each time I did it.

I guess the relevant question is whether this would have been easier if the ribbon didn't exist, and you had to do it through the menu bar.

It appears to me that the issue here is that Excel makes scaling the axis of a chart convoluted. Not that the ribbon makes it harder than the regular menu bar.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#313

Post by cyphar »

nxzero wrote: post #69
krylon wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think OpenOffice is a better name than LibreOffice. It rolls of the tongue more smoothly, and it is easier to explain to people. On the other hand LibreOffice has the lion's share of the developers (and probably of the users by now). So a "takeover" of OpenOffice by the LibreOffice project would probably be the best solution at this point (at least as far as I can tell).

>> "it is easier to explain to people" Which is why "Office for Free" (OfficeFree, oFree, O4F) would be a better non-Linux name. Average user doesn't care if something is "open" they care if it's free.

> Average user doesn't care if something is "open" they care if it's free.

The naming "Libre" is important (though maybe we shouldn't be using French as the language to describe the concept of freedom with a single word). It gives the opportunity to explain that not only will Libreoffice not cost you any money, you have freedom while using it. Calling it "Office for Free" is a _very_ bad idea as it will muddy the waters of the meaning of "free software" in the lexicon of people who aren't into technology.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#314

Post by cyphar »

jasonkostempski wrote: post #84
nxzero wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> "it is easier to explain to people" Which is why "Office for Free" (OfficeFree, oFree, O4F) would be a better non-Linux name. Average user doesn't care if something is "open" they care if it's free.

I think its a bad idea to even use the word "Office" because it sounds like a lame rip-off you'd download from CNet. In fact, Im suprised MS doesnt have a legal issue with it. Thats always bugged me about a lot of OSS projects and vegan dishes, they pick a name based on their competitor instead of something original that doesn't constantly remind the user they're not quite getting the "real thing".

> Thats always bugged me about a lot of OSS projects and vegan dishes

OT: A friend of mine recently called me a "software vegan" because of how much I've started to get passionate about free software. I'm not really sure how to feel about that description yet. :P

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#315

Post by weinzierl »

yoodenvranx wrote: post #12
verbify wrote: post #2

I thought everyone interested in a FOSS office suite was using libreoffice.

> libreoffice I hate that name. As a German I have no idea how to pronounce it and it's even harder for my non-techy friends. The name "Open office" has a very nice flow and everybody knows how to pronounce it, but "libre office"? They should have selected an easier name for that project.

As a fellow German I'm surprised at that. Given the amount of negative comments about the name I recognize that English speakers have a problem with the name, even if I don't understand exactly why (no one complains about Cuba Libre). For us Germans: pronounce it French, Spanish or even German if you like and it will roughly sound right.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#316

Post by weinzierl »

pmontra wrote: post #101
esrauch wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it would register no recognition to the majority of American English speakers. It is a French loan word used essentially only in open source contexts because we don't have an equivilent ("free" is way more ambiguous is meaning). The only negative connotation I know of is the association with some overzealous nerdy kids who find out the difference between libre and gratis and loudly bring it up all the time.

Italy here. "Libre" sounds spanish to me. I realized only now that french has the same word (and I read it many times), but probably the final e is silent. I pronounce it, so it's spanish. Apparently it's the correct way: https://lwn.net/Articles/408141/

I don't no much French but I think in this case the final e is not silent but also not stressed. Stress is on the i, same as in the Spanish pronunciation I think.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#317

Post by yrro »

imtringued wrote: post #94
okket wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody is using LibreOffice, except a poor few that get misguided by search services to the Apache OpenOffice website. IMHO there is no sane reason why Apache OpenOffice still exists. Edit: Looks like there are a lot more OpenOffice users out there than I thought, sorry. I really thought the world would have moved on, at least since 2013/14, see https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/St...

I'm using OpenOffice because Libreoffice for some inexplicable reason defaults to PDF for printing even though I constantly set it back to postscript. The PDF feature is broken and swallows umlauts forcing me to print everything at least twice.

Oblig: please file a bug about this if you haven't already!

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#318

Post by khaled »

imtringued wrote: post #94
okket wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody is using LibreOffice, except a poor few that get misguided by search services to the Apache OpenOffice website. IMHO there is no sane reason why Apache OpenOffice still exists. Edit: Looks like there are a lot more OpenOffice users out there than I thought, sorry. I really thought the world would have moved on, at least since 2013/14, see https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/St...

I'm using OpenOffice because Libreoffice for some inexplicable reason defaults to PDF for printing even though I constantly set it back to postscript. The PDF feature is broken and swallows umlauts forcing me to print everything at least twice.

Do you have bug reports about PDF printing issues, I’d like to have a look myself (I have some interest in streamlining LibreOffice text layout code and part of it would be killing PostScript printing support at some point, but if PDF printing is buggy then it has to be fixed first).

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#319

Post by dtardon »

jimjag wrote: post #283
mindcrime wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, I didn't say all LO developers. But from what I've seen (and to be fair, this recollection is a bit old) a lot of the LO people showed a lot of resistance to having code flow back the other way. OTOH, maybe things have changed since I formed that impression. At any rate, your willingness to do so is appreciated. As far-fetched as it sounds, I still hold out hope that one day the two projects can have an amicabl…

Sure, I didn't say all LO developers. But from what I've seen (and to be fair, this recollection is a bit old) a lot of the LO people showed a lot of resistance to having code flow back the other way I will share a story. Awhile ago I was employed by Red Hat and, as we know, Red Hat has a number of developers working on LO. I was talking w/ our CTO at the time and suggested that it would be a Good Thing if Red Hat al…

I got intrigued by your claims, so I dug up that old e-mail exchange. And I failed to find anything that would substatiate (2). So you misremember at best; at worst you're outright lying to make TDF the bad guys.

Btw, the claim that Red Hat's CTO (or anyone else at RH) "thought it was a great idea" seems to be a bit exaggerated as well. The words you yourself used at that time were "... saw the logic of it".

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#320

Post by arglwarg »

rectang wrote: post #210
sveredov wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Apache Foundation could simply have accepted the OpenOffice.org codebase+trademarks from Oracle, then donate to LibreOffice. But they did not do so. The Apache Foundation does not have experience with software that end-users use. They have experience with server software. That was their undoing.

At the time of the donation, The Document Foundation had an (understandably) antagonistic relationship with Oracle and legal foundations which were firming up but not yet solid. The assets were not going to TDF from Oracle directly. In accepting the proposal for a new Apache OpenOffice project, the ASF accepted not only the assets from Oracle but also a community, distinct from the LibreOffice community, that wanted…

Even at the time of donation, LibreOffice had already gained a substantial set of the former Sun/Oracle developers: Stephan Bergmann (to Red Hat), Bjoern Michaelsen (to Canonical), Eike Rathke (to RedHat), Michael Stahl (to Red Hat). Together with other former Sun developers like e.g. Thorsten Behrens and Caolán McNamara, LibreOffice had more of the old Sun developers than Apache OpenOffice had at any point in time. Incidentally, they also made a lot of contributions that allowed LibreOffice to strife past other derivatives: like build system cleanup, static code analysis and fuzzing, bibisecting.
Post reply on HN