Seriously. IF Sun manages to get a stable Carbon version of OO out of the door and Carbon-OO performs better, would you adopt it?
Of course we will take the parts that we find interesting and discard the rest. But those two items are very big "ifs". Getting a stable version has been promised repeatedly over the last two years and nothing has materialized. Sure, their demo may be fast, but huge swaths of code is missing at this point. From what I've seen of their code so far, they are repeating many of the strategies that I used throughout the old NeoOffice/J releases and, since then, have refactored since then. There is nothing magic about Carbon versus Cocoa. They both talk to the same code that pushes pixels to your screen.
Of course they’re big ifs. But hey, without that dickhead Scott McNealy as the boss of Sun, Sun-Mac relationship seems to have improved.
Many people say that NeoOffice’s use of Java makes it slow. I don’t know if that’s true, but I’m excited to compare the performace of NeoOffice and Carbon-OO by myself (I don’t care about Base so I’d disable Java alltogether in OO).
Even if you kick your Java based effort and use Carbon-OO, there stay a lot of areas where you can be better than OO. Bundling every dictionary (even GPLed ones) you can get as you do today is one of them.
BTW: Have you ever thought about using KOffice 2 as base for NeoOffice 3?
1. I am not sure referring to Scott McNealy in this way is helpful, regardless of his attitude.
2. There is not Carbon-OO stable enough to use at the moment, so the comparison is pretty moot.
3. RTFW - there are good reasons why the dictionaries are not included. Prime one is that NeoOffice is a download, not a DVD, and the dictionaries are rather costly in terms of bandwith.
4. Using KOffice 2 would require Ed and Patrick to throw away all of their existing code (years of work) and also familiarize themselves with a new environment. Seriously, what are you thinking?
Please consider before you post.
Best wishes,
Oscar _________________ "What do you think of Western Civilization?"
"I think it would be a good idea!"
- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
1. I am not sure referring to Scott McNealy in this way is helpful, regardless of his attitude.
Whatever. Now another guy is Sun’s boss so past experiences with Sun don’t necessarily mean that Sun will act the same as before.
ovvldc wrote:
2. There is not Carbon-OO stable enough to use at the moment, so the comparison is pretty moot.
Where did I write that Carbon-OO is stable at the moment? I was refering to the future.
Once (if) Carbon-OO is stable, I’d like to compare the performance to NeoOffice. What’s wrong with that?
ovvldc wrote:
3. RTFW - there are good reasons why the dictionaries are not included. Prime one is that NeoOffice is a download, not a DVD, and the dictionaries are rather costly in terms of bandwith.
Dictionaries are included (German being one of them). Language packs translate the GUI, but do not install dictionaries.
ovvldc wrote:
4. Using KOffice 2 would require Ed and Patrick to throw away all of their existing code (years of work) and also familiarize themselves with a new environment.
So? I was asking this question from a technical standpoint, not from a sentimental one.
I thought I might get an answer like
“We didn’t have the time to look into it yet†or
“We had a look at it and we came to the conclusion that KOffice doesn’t yet offer what we like. We’ll stick to the OO code base.†or
“We had a look at it. Overall it’s nice, clean code. Using KOffice as our base might reduce our workload in the long run. Let’s see how KO2 developes.â€
Whatever the technical answer might be, at least it’s a technical, rational answer. What you wrote sounds more like granpa saying “No, I can’t leave this house and move into another one. I don’t care that the foundation is shaky, the pipes leak, and mold spreads all over. I put years of work to build this house.â€
I asked that question, because I’ve read very often that OO’s code base is messy, monolythic, and thus hard to maintain. OTOH I’ve read lots of good things about the code quality in the KDE project (eg. why Apple chose KHTML for Safari instead of Gecko).
May I please get an answer covering the technical reasons from Ed or Patrick and not you? Thanks.
May I please get an answer covering the technical reasons from Ed or Patrick and not you? Thanks.
I'm not going to give you a technical reason as that requires use of very limited resources. All I will say is that we have set our scope to implementing a native version of OpenOffice.org for Mac OS X and we spend our very limited resources on direct work of our existing product, not researching every grand scheme that is proposed. Now that we have accomplished that goal, we will implement what users decide they will fund.
If you think using KOffice is a great idea, then go fund it and do it. Our view is that NeoOffice is GPL so there really is no restriction that prevents anyone from taking the NeoOffice code and trying to build a new product (as long as it is GPL, of course).
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
