Reply to: Open Office

[Doggy Styles]

I need the full and proper functionality of MS Office for my job. 95% of my clients use MS Office.

I occasionally have to use Adobe applications (which are Heath Robinson packages bursting with shyte that even make MS applications look sleek), and I've used several other packages that are probably extinct now, but so far no-one has had or wanted Open Office.

So even if I wanted to use Open Office for work there would be absolutely no point.

[d000hg]

The trouble with MS is that they don't just argue for their format to be standard, they fight for their format to be standard and not available to anyone else. That is the antithesis of how I like to see computing.

Maybe, but all I really care about is that if I save my file as a .doc and email it, the other person can open it... and vice versa. Any system that allows this with ZERO problems is fine with me, but as OO have shown, going the multi-application route is not easy. The modern (eg docx) formats from MS and OO are actually quite similar at a high level but both are horrifically complicated.

[expat]

I didn't say an official (de jure) standard, I said an industry (de facto) standard e.g what everyone actually uses.

Also, didn't MS finally get their docx format accepted as an official standard, or are they still working on it?

The trouble with MS is that they don't just argue for their format to be standard, they fight for their format to be standard and not available to anyone else. That is the antithesis of how I like to see computing.

[d000hg]

The "industry" doesn't have a standard for this one. There are industry standards for other things (e.g. HTML, Java) but MS usually break them.

I didn't say an official (de jure) standard, I said an industry (de facto) standard e.g what everyone actually uses.

Also, didn't MS finally get their docx format accepted as an official standard, or are they still working on it?

[milanbenes]

there's currently a lot of a-wdp going on in the hr area

Milan.

[milanbenes]

he he

roots

congratulations

Milan.

[minestrone]

How many MS employees does it take to change a light bulb?

None, they just define darkness as the new standard

[expat]

OO has to support MS or nobody would ever even try it. MS doesn't have to support OO because it is the industry standard and this would be helping their competitor.

The "industry" doesn't have a standard for this one. There are industry standards for other things (e.g. HTML, Java) but MS usually break them.

MS Office is the sheep standard. FFS when people put "Office skills" on their CV and mean that they use MS Office, as if that is in itself a technical skill, I'm ever happier to use something else, since I see monopoly as a bad thing, and that's what it is; monopoly-seeking on the part of MS and ignorance on the part of most users.

[d000hg]

Shall we have a quick poll? Which reads the other's data format better, MS Office or Open Office?

Nah, let's not bother.

OO has to support MS or nobody would ever even try it. MS doesn't have to support OO because it is the industry standard and this would be helping their competitor.

[rootsnall]

I'll concur - now is good time to get into a-wdp. If you've done any swing or the like, (anything MVC) then it's a doddle. But many old style a developers won't be able to cope - it's the same with a-objects. ( Similar to the difference between vb and .net).

walld have been investing a lot in a over the recent years. At the .net (ahem) developer network community day there were some fairly interesting demos of the stuff that can be done with a-wdp. flex islands et. al. readily integrable.

I'm stuck with bsp at the moment, but start a project in april with hopefully lots of a-wdp.

I've just done my first a-wdp !!!! The tutorials are half way understandable but now I've not a clue how it all fits together. I suspect it is just learning what and when to click, piece of p*ss !!!!!

I've done plenty C++ so the a-objects aren't that daunting.

I can feel the next train coming my way, toot toot !!! All aboard !!!

ps. might not get here until late 2010 though

[milanbenes]

no no, no competition,

development is all yours

i'll stick to keeping the J components landscape running

which as you know also presents ENOUGH challenges :-)

Milan.

[NotAllThere]

...
I never got the hang of internal tables though what a confusing nightmare, developing an app was fun but wouldn't like to do it full time...

Good. You're not competing with me... I've no problems with itabs, even deep ones. It's just a question of being able to visualise the data structures. But judging by the number of questions on .netDN, I think you're not the only one who finds it confusing.

[milanbenes]

morning NotAllThere

I've had a play with .net's version of jsp's

he he in i think 2004 blogged the .net developer with a how to !! something like to how to make your first x-sp for .net

I never got the hang of internal tables though what a confusing nightmare, developing an app was fun but wouldn't like to do it full time


Milan.

[NotAllThere]

I'll concur - now is good time to get into a-wdp. If you've done any swing or the like, (anything MVC) then it's a doddle. But many old style a developers won't be able to cope - it's the same with a-objects. ( Similar to the difference between vb and .net).

walld have been investing a lot in a over the recent years. At the .net (ahem) developer network community day there were some fairly interesting demos of the stuff that can be done with a-wdp. flex islands et. al. readily integrable.

I'm stuck with bsp at the moment, but start a project in april with hopefully lots of a-wdp.

[TheFaQQer]

It's not great IMO. Styles are terrible, and import/export to MSWord format is sucky - you can love it but if you can't communicate with the rest of the world why bother.

WHS - I use it on my Linux laptop, but not anywhere else.