Hmm, well, he should be very happy soon. (Sorry, I can't recall if that's been talked about publicly by Apple or not, so I'm going to be light on details.)
Thanks for telling us..um...I mean not telling us.
The number of companies that never understood the precepts of that argument is staggeringly huge. Lotus, Novell, Corel, IBM and now OpenOffice have all been bested by Microsoft because their founders/engineers never understood that simple fact that Bill Gates knew all too well.
Put another way, every Mac user sends his work to at least 10 PC friends.
To succeed in the Office space, you need a good Mac counterpart to your Windows suite.
Bill Gates also had a head start. Steve Jobs approached Microsoft before the Macintosh was released to port Microsoft Word to the Macintosh, they were very happy to after seeing what the Mac was all about. So it's not that they really understood it, it's just that MS-DOS wasn't so important, especially when compared to the Apple II, that they couldn't justify the small market share of the Mac, especially since it was an unreleased product at the time. Either way, Word on the Macintosh and eventually Macintosh Office became very large cash cows for the company so they could never justify just dropping it altogether.
OpenOffice.org has exactly one good thing about it: Open Document Format. I hated using it even on my PC when I had to, it's User Interface is pure crap, and I just hate having anything to do with it. It's slow, it's bloated, and it's like Java: You can run it anywhere (on computer operating systems) but it's just not very good at anything. I highly doubt even Sun's Mac port will be all that great, and Nisus Writer Pro Beta has been very good to me.
I'm guessing you're bound by an NDA and have probably said too much already.
Still, you've given me enough information to speculate as to what you were implying.
My educated guess is that Apple will abandon X11 in favour of a new application emulation layer (which will probably encompass an improved boot camp) that will enable X-Window apps written for Linux to run natively as OS X programs with little or no tweaking. That's the only logical conclusion that I can gather from your comment, since:
1) Apple, according to their M.O. has no interest in maintaining a native version of OpenOffice or taking over the NeoOffice project.
2) Better developer toolkits will have little or no impact on how well OpenOffice or NeoOffice run sufficiently on Mac.
3) OpenOffice's code base makes it difficult to port to OS X.
4) FreeBSD already includes a Linux emulation layer. Apple will most likely leverage that existing work and add its own technologies on top of it.
5) Apple has put very little work into X11 for the last few years, essentially allowing it to stagnate.
6) Apple wants to sell more Macs by allowing more existing software to run on it, expanding the universe of existing third party software.
Again, this is total speculation on my part.
Kickaha, I know you'll either confirm or deny the above in total silence. I understand and that's cool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha
Hmm, well, he should be very happy soon. (Sorry, I can't recall if that's been talked about publicly by Apple or not, so I'm going to be light on details.)
I'm guessing you're bound by an NDA and have probably said too much already.
Still, you've given me enough information to speculate as to what you were implying.
My educated guess is that Apple will abandon X11 in favour of a new application emulation layer (which will probably encompass an improved boot camp) that will enable X-Window apps written for Linux to run natively as OS X programs with little or no tweaking. That's the only logical conclusion that I can gather from your comment, since:
1) Apple, according to their M.O. has no interest in maintaining a native version of OpenOffice or taking over the NeoOffice project.
2) Better developer toolkits will have little or no impact on how well OpenOffice or NeoOffice run sufficiently on Mac.
3) OpenOffice's code base makes it difficult to port to OS X.
4) FreeBSD already includes a Linux emulation layer. Apple will most likely leverage that existing work and add its own technologies on top of it.
5) Apple has put very little work into X11 for the last few years, essentially allowing it to stagnate.
6) Apple wants to sell more Macs by allowing more existing software to run on it, expanding the universe of existing third party software.
Again, this is total speculation on my part.
Kickaha, I know you'll either confirm or deny the above in total silence. I understand and that's cool.
Or he could have just meant that Apple is coming out with iWork 07/08 which will be much faster and come with a spreadsheet. Frankly, I'd prefer that myself.
Hmm, well, he should be very happy soon. (Sorry, I can't recall if that's been talked about publicly by Apple or not, so I'm going to be light on details.)
Was this discussed publicly at the WWDC, or is this still under NDA?
OpenOpen office switching to Cocoa as Carbon is being depreciated.
Quote from the link above: "So what did we learn ? Well foremost: Carbon is a dead track, we really need to change our application to utilize the Cocoa framework. This will cause us quite an effort, especially since our native widget framework won't work with Cocoa. The reason is simple: unlike Carbon which has a themed drawing API with HIToolbox, Cocoa won't let us simply draw controls (buttons, menus and so on), so either we have not native look (completely unacceptable) or we use real native controls".
What is wrong with this picture... these guys are porting an app to the Mac and they didn't know this? Hmmm. How encouraging.
Quote from the link above: "So what did we learn ? Well foremost: Carbon is a dead track, we really need to change our application to utilize the Cocoa framework. This will cause us quite an effort, especially since our native widget framework won't work with Cocoa. The reason is simple: unlike Carbon which has a themed drawing API with HIToolbox, Cocoa won't let us simply draw controls (buttons, menus and so on), so either we have not native look (completely unacceptable) or we use real native controls".
What is wrong with this picture... these guys are porting an app to the Mac and they didn't know this? Hmmm.
Why can't they move to NeoOffice and work on something that is already working on the Mac?
Comments
Hmm, well, he should be very happy soon. (Sorry, I can't recall if that's been talked about publicly by Apple or not, so I'm going to be light on details.)
Thanks for telling us..um...I mean not telling us.
Here's an excellent article on why OpenOffice on Mac has a long way to go:
http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/why-vrml-f...or-openoffice/
That is a truly excellent piece.
The number of companies that never understood the precepts of that argument is staggeringly huge. Lotus, Novell, Corel, IBM and now OpenOffice have all been bested by Microsoft because their founders/engineers never understood that simple fact that Bill Gates knew all too well.
Put another way, every Mac user sends his work to at least 10 PC friends.
To succeed in the Office space, you need a good Mac counterpart to your Windows suite.
Otherwise, you'll always remain a niche player.
Here's an excellent article on why OpenOffice on Mac has a long way to go:
http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/why-vrml-f...or-openoffice/
Bill Gates also had a head start. Steve Jobs approached Microsoft before the Macintosh was released to port Microsoft Word to the Macintosh, they were very happy to after seeing what the Mac was all about. So it's not that they really understood it, it's just that MS-DOS wasn't so important, especially when compared to the Apple II, that they couldn't justify the small market share of the Mac, especially since it was an unreleased product at the time. Either way, Word on the Macintosh and eventually Macintosh Office became very large cash cows for the company so they could never justify just dropping it altogether.
OpenOffice.org has exactly one good thing about it: Open Document Format. I hated using it even on my PC when I had to, it's User Interface is pure crap, and I just hate having anything to do with it. It's slow, it's bloated, and it's like Java: You can run it anywhere (on computer operating systems) but it's just not very good at anything. I highly doubt even Sun's Mac port will be all that great, and Nisus Writer Pro Beta has been very good to me.
Sebastian
Does this help with either native OpenOffice or NeoOffice?
Well there's a new Word Processor is OS X land called Bean
Does this help with either native OpenOffice or NeoOffice?
Good find... it doesn't support the Open Document Format though. It does default to RTFD which is good
Sebastian
I fail to see how Bean differs significantly from Textedit, with the exception of word count.
Try the User Interface.
Sebastian
Still, you've given me enough information to speculate as to what you were implying.
My educated guess is that Apple will abandon X11 in favour of a new application emulation layer (which will probably encompass an improved boot camp) that will enable X-Window apps written for Linux to run natively as OS X programs with little or no tweaking. That's the only logical conclusion that I can gather from your comment, since:
1) Apple, according to their M.O. has no interest in maintaining a native version of OpenOffice or taking over the NeoOffice project.
2) Better developer toolkits will have little or no impact on how well OpenOffice or NeoOffice run sufficiently on Mac.
3) OpenOffice's code base makes it difficult to port to OS X.
4) FreeBSD already includes a Linux emulation layer. Apple will most likely leverage that existing work and add its own technologies on top of it.
5) Apple has put very little work into X11 for the last few years, essentially allowing it to stagnate.
6) Apple wants to sell more Macs by allowing more existing software to run on it, expanding the universe of existing third party software.
Again, this is total speculation on my part.
Kickaha, I know you'll either confirm or deny the above in total silence. I understand and that's cool.
Hmm, well, he should be very happy soon. (Sorry, I can't recall if that's been talked about publicly by Apple or not, so I'm going to be light on details.)
I'm guessing you're bound by an NDA and have probably said too much already.
Still, you've given me enough information to speculate as to what you were implying.
My educated guess is that Apple will abandon X11 in favour of a new application emulation layer (which will probably encompass an improved boot camp) that will enable X-Window apps written for Linux to run natively as OS X programs with little or no tweaking. That's the only logical conclusion that I can gather from your comment, since:
1) Apple, according to their M.O. has no interest in maintaining a native version of OpenOffice or taking over the NeoOffice project.
2) Better developer toolkits will have little or no impact on how well OpenOffice or NeoOffice run sufficiently on Mac.
3) OpenOffice's code base makes it difficult to port to OS X.
4) FreeBSD already includes a Linux emulation layer. Apple will most likely leverage that existing work and add its own technologies on top of it.
5) Apple has put very little work into X11 for the last few years, essentially allowing it to stagnate.
6) Apple wants to sell more Macs by allowing more existing software to run on it, expanding the universe of existing third party software.
Again, this is total speculation on my part.
Kickaha, I know you'll either confirm or deny the above in total silence. I understand and that's cool.
Or he could have just meant that Apple is coming out with iWork 07/08 which will be much faster and come with a spreadsheet. Frankly, I'd prefer that myself.
To succeed in the Office space, you need a good Mac counterpart to your Windows suite.
Otherwise, you'll always remain a niche player.
Cross-platform apps that run well on Mac and have been accepted by Mac users:
1) Firefox (not perfect, slightly ugly and bloated, but totally usable)
2) NetBeans (few quirks, but otherwise, very Mac-like)
3) MPlayer
Cross-platform apps that run poorly on Mac, and because of that, have gained little or no traction:
1) Eclipse IDE
2) OpenOffice
3) Yahoo! Messenger
Kickaha, I know you'll either confirm or deny the above in total silence. I understand and that's cool.
Surprise!
(Oh, and the post directly above's quote was from Frank777, not me.)
Surprise!
Ah, so you can't confirm rumours, but you can deny them.... hmmmm.
If I were to use process of elimination, I could probably figure out what you meant
Ah, so you can't confirm rumours, but you can deny them.... hmmmm.
If I were to use process of elimination, I could probably figure out what you meant
Not at this rate.
Besides, I didn't say anything about the validity of your speculation, only that it wasn't what *I* was thinking of. Ha! Take that, you scalawag!
Hmm, well, he should be very happy soon. (Sorry, I can't recall if that's been talked about publicly by Apple or not, so I'm going to be light on details.)
Was this discussed publicly at the WWDC, or is this still under NDA?
Don't mean to speak for Kick, but it's my understanding that aside from the Keynote, WWDC is generally under NDA.
Kick... could it be this?
http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/...pple_wwdc_2007
OpenOffice switching to Cocoa as Carbon is being depreciated.
Nice to see them finally get the hint about Carbon though. Yeesh.
Kick... could it be this?
http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/...pple_wwdc_2007
OpenOpen office switching to Cocoa as Carbon is being depreciated.
Quote from the link above: "So what did we learn ? Well foremost: Carbon is a dead track, we really need to change our application to utilize the Cocoa framework. This will cause us quite an effort, especially since our native widget framework won't work with Cocoa. The reason is simple: unlike Carbon which has a themed drawing API with HIToolbox, Cocoa won't let us simply draw controls (buttons, menus and so on), so either we have not native look (completely unacceptable) or we use real native controls".
What is wrong with this picture... these guys are porting an app to the Mac and they didn't know this? Hmmm. How encouraging.
Quote from the link above: "So what did we learn ? Well foremost: Carbon is a dead track, we really need to change our application to utilize the Cocoa framework. This will cause us quite an effort, especially since our native widget framework won't work with Cocoa. The reason is simple: unlike Carbon which has a themed drawing API with HIToolbox, Cocoa won't let us simply draw controls (buttons, menus and so on), so either we have not native look (completely unacceptable) or we use real native controls".
What is wrong with this picture... these guys are porting an app to the Mac and they didn't know this? Hmmm.
Why can't they move to NeoOffice and work on something that is already working on the Mac?