Joined: Apr 25, 2006 Posts: 2315 Location: Montpellier, France
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 4:49 am Post subject:
So I downloaded the second development snapshot of OpenOffice.org Aqua.
I haven't played with it much and I do have many applications open simultaneously, but while the first snapshot felt quite snappy, I'm asking myself where the super-fast application they promised us has gone ... scrolling speed, in particular, is appalling.
Joined: May 25, 2003 Posts: 4752 Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 8:49 am Post subject:
Samwise wrote:
So how did the copyright holder & UUID issue turn out ?
The UUID was only in some preliminary version I was looking at and never made it into OOo CVS so it wasn't an issue. Since Apple only allows one Spotlight plugin to handle each UUID, however, installing their forked Spolight plugin may prevent current and future upgrades of our Spolight plugin from being recognized by the system. The same thing happens if you have the old standalone NeoLight plugin installed.
I guess the last thing they'll get around to addressing is the ShapeShifter theme compatibility that you guys have been able to implement, so I can't even really assess the aqua snapshot - I'm wasting too much time trying to guess/remember what the black text on the black dropdown says
Joined: Dec 08, 2005 Posts: 291 Location: Berlin, Germany
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 1:12 am Post subject:
yoxi wrote:
I guess the last thing they'll get around to addressing is the ShapeShifter theme compatibility
You could file an OpenOffice.org issue and watch its life: How it's being ignored, discarded, discussed, closed, reopened, declared fixed, closed, reopened and ignored again ...
I have some of these, and they really grew to my heart.
Joined: Jan 04, 2005 Posts: 36 Location: Planet Earth
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:28 am Post subject:
OOo has posted a second Mac OS X Aqua developer preview. They've made a lot of progress in some areas, mainly appearance, but it's still quite crude in terms of functionality. I guess they're choosing form over function as they continue to reinvent the proverbial wheel.
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:38 pm Post subject: pull a Tony? --
Just to clear things up... I Tony Siress never said Sun was working on a secret version of StarOffice with Apple. This story has always been a huge misunderstanding.
I tried to apologize back when I was at Sun, and I will do so again here! As with any community project it is near impossible to know who is contributing what to the project. The Apple development and NeoOffice work are and have always been from the community.
I hope we can close this one down...
Tony Siress
OPENSTEP wrote:
Well, at the time it wasn't as much that Sun didn't want to do a native version, it was more that they claimed they were working with Apple on a secret version of a native StarOffice. StarOffice isn't open source and Sun made no mention of the work we had been doing in the community (or that they'd give theirs back), so in a few months Dan and I got the existing native code running and thus Neo/C was born. The GPL ensured that no company could try to "pull a Tony", Sun or otherwise. Go google "tony siress staroffice" and you'll still be able to see the fun PR mess he created. Neo itself was born out of hatred of SISSL and, at that time, hatred of Sun and Sun PR for making my life a real hassle for a few weeks.
I originally worked on the X11 stuff in OOo for years to get a release out because, well, it worked. There were already more than enough compilation errors and other bugs in sal etc. that sticking with X11 removed a major variable and allowed me and Dan to get the code to a point where it was stable and we could integrate the Mac support into the mainline. Plus there were people who really wanted OOo to look identical on all platforms. It eases support
By the time Patrick had come along (and there's some irony there if Patrick wants to elaborate), we were in the OOo 1.1 era, we pretty much had a fully functional native Mac version of OpenOffice already running. Heck, the initial Neo/J releases were already mostly fully functional and were engineered in a much more maintainable fashion than my hack (which duplicated all of OOo CVS...led to some nasty syncing problems when I tried to move the old Carbon+Cocoa stuff to OOo 1.1 from 1.0). I saw no reason to duplicate Patrick's work just for the sake of duplicating it or doing it in a slightly different way, especially when there were only a handful of us even working on the OS X support at the time. So OOo existed for X11 and I directed all of my native work to Neo and its code.
At the end of the day what was true then is still true now: users just want something that works; they really don't care about a name, a license, or the technology.
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:11 pm Post subject: Re: pull a Tony? --
Tony,
tsiress wrote:
Just to clear things up... I Tony Siress never said Sun was working on a secret version of StarOffice with Apple. This story has always been a huge misunderstanding.
While I think that whole incident probably wasn't pleasant for anyone involved and I will admit that I was not involved with OOo at the time so the incident only seems like standard intercompany politics, it does seem to be important to you. So, in the interest of balance, I'd recommend anyone who still cares about this to read what Ars Technica and CNET reporters wrote and make your own judgment.
Even if Tony's claim is true, it really doesn't change the fact that Ed's opinion of the event was a catalyst for the initial formation of NeoOffice. Good, bad, or ugly, it is part of NeoOffice's history.
All times are GMT - 7 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum