Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Native KOffice for Mac OS X

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the microsoft-office-not-good-enough-for-you dept.

KDE 335

bsharitt writes "A preliminary version of KOffice has been built natively on Mac OS X. It looks like a lot of the hard part is over, and now a lot of cleaning up and bug fixes stand between Mac OS X and a free full featured office suite." There's also a story on the dot.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Don't forget... (-1)

SCO$699FeeTroll (695565) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863828)

...to pay your $699 licensing fee you cock-smoking teabaggers.

Before everyone say WHY BOTHER? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863830)

I've made the transition from Mandrake on a Desktop to OSX on a Powerbook. Surprisingly, KDE has some apps that are very good and designed well enough to compliment an OSX environment.

Example 1: KMail! If you haven't ever tried this email client, try it NOW. It has some of the most killer email filtering speed I have ever seen in an email application. It nicely integrates with GnuPG. It has good keyboard shortcuts. It's set up not to download images from emails. It stores emails with maildir by default. It's pretty. Did I mention that it's fast? Up until 10.3's much improved mail.app, I would have killed to have KMail running naitively on OS X.

Ex 2: KOffice. I've never used it, but it's absolutely essential that OS X has a free naitive-running office package. Unless the OO.org aqua port gets back up, this package will likely be KOffice.

Ex 3: Konqueror is a very good file manager. While the OS X file manager is very good, there are a couple of areas that it misses. For example, I can use konqueror to select all items matching the file pattern '*foo*.bar'. In OS X, I have to drop to a terminal, and loose the trash can functionality, or switch views and sort by type, which takes longer. As another poster said, SMB apparently works better in konqueror than Finder (thanks, I'll have to try that!). If konqueror can run, then so can any other KDE app, especially when you consider that Konqueror is the most (featureful | bloated) app in KDE.

So that's why people bother. Props to them!

--gnaa

Re:Before everyone say WHY BOTHER? (-1, Troll)

Zero_K (606548) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863858)

Why Bother? No seriously, I mean OpenOffice is already ported to MAC OS X, and I think this just a waste of developer time, I mean yes there should be choice and all that, but not to the point that there are several redundant programs, of which none of them work very well. (Not specific to Koffice btw)

Re:Before everyone say WHY BOTHER? (1)

CoolMoDee (683437) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863986)

except that Openoffice on mac requires an X server...

Re:Before everyone say WHY BOTHER? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863874)

Parent is GNAA troll (-1, Informative)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863890)

The text of this post is swiped from the "Konqueror on OS X" discussion here. [slashdot.org]

MOD DOWN - PARENT IS A "TADDLE" TROLL (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863939)

Do not mod this guy up. He is posting a blatant ripoff troll as AC, then using his logged in account to point out it is a troll to collect Karma points for being the "Good Samaritan"

Re:MOD DOWN - PARENT IS A "TADDLE" TROLL (-1, Offtopic)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863993)

Sorry pal, my karma hit the cap years ago.

See, if GNAA *really* knew how to troll, they would have changed something in that repost so it was actually funny, and pulled the wool over the eyes of the people who mod posts up before they actually read them. Simple cutting and pasting just increases the signal/noise ratio. It's redundant without being entertaining.

Shame on you.

P.S. Real trolls don't post AC.

Karma in jeopardy (-1, Offtopic)

Slowtreme (701746) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864067)

Is there a limit to how much karma you can accumulate? [slashdot.org]

Yes. Karma is now capped at "Excellent" This was done to keep people from running up insane karma scores, and then being immune from moderation. Despite some theories to the contrary, the karma cap applies to every account.
Answered by: CmdrTaco
Last Modified: 1/24/02

Re:MOD DOWN - PARENT IS A "TADDLE" TROLL (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864072)

Well, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are at the cap.

However, when you reply to say its a troll, you are just as bad as they are because you are lowering the signal-to-noise ratio along with them.

So this is why your posts, and mine should be modded down.

Re:MOD DOWN - PARENT IS A "TADDLE" TROLL (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864081)

Thanks for the wonderful idea.

What about KPost? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863927)

It copies and pastes [slashdot.org] lame responses to any story with iKrap in them.

OpenOffice.org (5, Informative)

Valegor (693552) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863835)

There already is free full-featured office suite that runs on Mac OS X. Openoffice.org has run on Mac for a couple releases now. Having used both open office and Koffice(koffice on Linux, openoffice on Linux and Windows), I find openoffice to be more versatile. It is all a matter of opinion though

I'VE GOT A TURD THAT'S COMING OUT SIDEWAYS! OUCH! (0, Informative)

Subject Line Troll (581198) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863853)

THAT'S NO TURD, THAT'S MY GREASED UP YODA DOLL! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863872)

HOW DO YOU DO THAT? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863901)

Re:OpenOffice.org (5, Insightful)

Hanji (626246) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863891)

Yes, OOo is a `` free full-featured office suite that runs on Mac OS X''. However, the important difference is that this port of KOffice runs natively on OS X - it does not require you to be running an X11 server.

For some people, that may not be a big deal, but most of us on OS X hate to have to use X11, and would *much* rather use native apps if we can at all avoid X11. It's not that it's bad, it's just that it's an inconvenience and doesn't blend in well with the rest of the environment.

Re:OpenOffice.org (2, Interesting)

Valegor (693552) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863919)

Unfortunately I posted that before reading the fine print on OpenOffice's website about having to load X Server. I admittingly have never tried to use openoffice on Mac. Ok, even more honestly I haven't been able to use a mac more than 10 minutes without wanting to throw it out a window. I am curious about OS X so it does bother me that I get so annoyed by it.

Re:OpenOffice.org (4, Interesting)

j-pimp (177072) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864011)

What annoys you about it? Granted, it took me a while to get used to my iBook, but I love it now. Sure its a little weird not having a differentiation between a maximized window and one thats just the size of the screen. However, once you embrace the Jobs way its useable.

Re:OpenOffice.org (0, Troll)

ctxspy (94924) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864138)

HAHAHAHAH It's you!!! :)

Re:OpenOffice.org (3, Interesting)

ir0b0t (727703) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863911)

OpenOffice [openoffice.org] is the best! I use it in my office every day to produce tons of heavily formatted documents. It saved me. I'm never going back to Microsoft Office. Koffice was not as useful as OpenOffice when I tried to switch before. Why not just concentrate on making OpenOffice better and better?

Re:OpenOffice.org (4, Interesting)

aergern (127031) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863948)

Well, since there is a project underway to develop a QT interface for OO then OO/QT will compile natively on OSX and all is well. KOffice never seemed to deal well with MS Office docs as far as saving them correctly but OO rocks..and with a QT UI for OO then QT/Mac will be the God sent for OSX users. :)

Re:OpenOffice.org (1)

big tex (15917) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863995)

As I understand it, once they get a QT interface they still have to hack it to remove the X deps, much in the same way that KDE had to be hacked to run natively on OSX. So, 2 steps away from working, much further from 'rocks'.

Re:OpenOffice.org (4, Interesting)

WatertonMan (550706) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864034)

I'm not sure what you mean by "KDE had to be hacked to run natively on OSX." So far as I know KDE doesn't run "natively" on OSX. Unless you mean the KDE that is part of Fink and runs under X11. I'm not sure what dependencies were there. I know Fink still doesn't have the latest version of Gnome running yet. (Although I believe DarwinPorts does) So I admittedly am not familiar with other low-level features.

The port of Konquerer and KOffice is using the native QT/Mac port. This is great for two reasons. For one it helps find bugs and missing features in QT/Mac. That'll make porting future projects easier and make using QT/Mac for cross platform development better. Secondly it will enable a lot of fairly good programs to run native.

I agree that KOffice isn't that great, although it holds promise. But having it native is a big deal. Open Office might be more powerful, but because it is an X11 app, it really doesn't have an Aqua look and feel. Further cutting and pasting of graphics or drag and drop don't work. That's a rather large failing with Open Office. (I also think Open Office is weak compared to MS Office and further Apple is expected by some to be releasing its office suite this winter or spring)

I'd kind of like to have a native Konquerer, if only to deal with directories with lots of files. Something the Finder doesn't deal well with. Using it to organize my web directories would be very nice as well...

Re:OpenOffice.org (1)

j-pimp (177072) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864054)

Well if X11 has to be running, but the interface is AQUA/QT/Carbon and feels like a native then thats half the battle. My OSX OO experience would be so much better if the Menu was on the top bar of the screen and there was a real seperate OO icon in the dock. And lets keep things in perspective here. Free office suite that reads and writes MS OFFICE Files.

Re:OpenOffice.org (5, Informative)

geoffspear (692508) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864083)

Projected OS X native availability of OpenOffice.org 2.0 is currently Q1 2006. - from porting.openoffice.org [openoffice.org] . I'm not holding my breath.

Re:OpenOffice.org (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863913)

When I judge on a pruely objective basis, regarding the abilities of various office products (not I am looking at the product only) then MS Office wins every time, every application.

Re:OpenOffice.org (5, Funny)

Valegor (693552) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863990)

When I judge on a pruely objective basis, regarding the abilities of various office products (not I am looking at the product only) then MS Office wins every time, every application.

When I judge a post based on proper spelling and punctuation vs. the message you are trying to get across, your post loses every time.

Re:OpenOffice.org ... wash repeat rinse (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864020)

When I judge a post based on proper spelling and punctuation vs. the message you are trying to get across, your post loses every time.

When I see a post citicising another for spelling (and incorrectly for grammar) then I see they have little contribution other than to bait the parent. Certainly nothing valuable, on topic or intelligent.

Re:OpenOffice.org (1)

fastidious edward (728351) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864131)

Cut them some slack! Clippy probably ate their dictionary, or maybe VBA decompiled their syntax.

Seriously, I am not a fan of MS as a company (mainly due to the Windows product/philosophy/attitude surrounding it), but Office (Word, Excel, Access) are good productivity apps.

In word processing (cum report presentation) I see little functional difference in MS Word and OO's wordporcessor, good on you OO for doing so well. MS's Access database is a powerful relational database which is very well documented and well supported, there is not an OO alternative and things like mySQL are better compared to products like Oracle (i.e., 'real' databases, not a non-expert development environment, though Access can also act heavy when front/back are split). As an intensive spreadsheet user (OK, spreadsheets only manipulate data, I use Mathematica for real math) I assure you OO's spreadsheet isn't there yet (no multi-dimensional pivot tables and poor integration wih 3rd party services, but the 3rd party thing being a bit of a chicken and an egg). VBA isn't the nicest language but it does get a task done fast and migration to another language is a massive headache (I considered it once, but decided to leave it to the next lemming).

Re:OpenOffice.org (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863984)

At it's core, this is simply a UI choice. Do you like how Safari renders, but don't like the interface? Now you've got another choice. Not too thrilled with Mozilla? Again, another choice.

This also signals the beginning of an infusion of KDE apps into Mac OS X. Basically, this proves it can be done and more are likely to follow.

Re:OpenOffice.org (2, Insightful)

j-pimp (177072) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864134)

One of my favorite aspects of Open source is this just because it can be done interoptability. Alot of people like KDE and also like OSX. Now they can have both. Some people like their bash prompt, but want win32 functionality. They have cygwin. Like playing diablo II but Run SuSE, WineX. While sometimes this type of thing is just a pointless academic exercise like running wine in cygwin, sometimes it gives us a genuine increase in choice liek this.

asdfafsdafdfasdg (-1, Redundant)

YoJaUta (67458) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863839)

Finally, an alternative to Micro$oft Office!

Praise be to the gods!

HAHAHA THE $ IS TEH FUNAY +5 FUNAY (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863849)

actually .. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863914)

Koffice still very buggy and the project needs more developers.

Yes, terribly "insightful" (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863946)

How about /. just be honest and put a "+1, anti-Micro$haft" category for moderation, if not an additional automatic bonus, like the karma one?

I'm ignorant... (0)

Aviancer (645528) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863841)

Isn't there a build of OpenOffice.org for osX? Wouldn't that be considered a "free, full-featured office suite"?

Re:I'm ignorant... (4, Informative)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863866)

There is a build of OpenOffice under X11 on OS X.

KOffice doesn't require X11. KWord, for example, runs natively under OS X.

Re:I'm ignorant... (5, Informative)

Boltronics (180064) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863956)

OpenOffice on OSX has fallen behind. They are only up to 1.0.3, when other supported platforms are up to 1.1

The installation process on the Mac is much harder than other platforms also. X11 (and a few other dependencies) are included in the download, making it a whopping 173MB! That's roughly 100MB more than Windows and GNU/Linux versions.

I'm certain if KOffice was ported better than OpenOffice on OSX, it would be a more popular choice for those looking for a free office suite.

Re:I'm ignorant... (4, Informative)

Alex Reynolds (102024) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864140)

According to the developer list, most of the bugs have been worked out and OO team are fairly close to finishing an installer for 1.1 for OS X. I wouldn't be surprised at a release next week for the SF expo.

-Alex

Re:I'm ignorant... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863961)

If you had ever used OpenOffice, you would understand why people are still seeking alternatives to it.

Re:I'm ignorant... (1)

Aviancer (645528) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863991)

I do use OOo -- on a regular basis. It may be imperfect, but it's a far cry better than MSOffice in many ways and defecient in only unimportant features. It definately comes out ahead in the cost-benefit calculation.

Re:I'm ignorant... (3, Interesting)

sugar and acid (88555) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864091)

Yes there is an openoffice port for OS X, well sort off. As other people has said there is only a X11 dependent version of version 1.03. There is no plan to port version 1.1, instead they are working to get the necessary hooks into version 2.0 port for a native port, maybe by 2005 -2006. Till then it's a long wait.

Now that porting KDE apps is seemingly straight forward it may be easier for the OS X porters to piggy back on the KDE intergration effort so things will shift along a bit faster.

I really expected OpenOffice.org to be first... (5, Informative)

Fortunato_NC (736786) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863847)

But no, a version that requires you to load an X server doesn't count.

Congratulations to everyone who's worked on this.

LET ME ADD (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864015)

Well, the reasons for porting KDE to Mac OS X natively and the reasons why someone would want to use Konqueror on OS X may be different.

Konqueror is not just a browser. It is also a file manager (kind of like Windows Explorer on SuperMan steroids). It suppors io-slaves, which gives Konqueror network transparency that I do not think is paralleled by any other file browser right now. Also, some people dislike the OS X Finder and would prefer to use Konqueror instead.

Konqueror is pretty cool - it has all the latest features such as tabbed browsing, but it also allows to split any view into two (and then again) - you can make it look like Norton Commander if you like.

Konqueror also supports archiving web pages as .war files (I do not know if this is an exclusive Konqueror feature or not, and I don't care - it is extremely useful).

So, there are many reasons someone would want to use Konqueror, and not just on OS X or Linux.

The reason to port to OS X could be so that KDE were less dependent on X11 hacks and used Qt API more thoroughly, I don't know. The thing is - the more portable the code is, the fewer bugs there are (unless of course they start #ifdef-ing everywhere, then it just turns into a mess of duplicated non-portable code).

Paul.

I'm afraid you have it backwards... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864076)

An unreleased partial hack port doesn't count. what counts is a fully funcitonal version, tested and available to the general public. ie, its OO.o who was first. a few quotes: "Bits of KOffice work now!" *bits* ... ie: not the whole thing. "For those of you wondering how to get it, there's no binaries yet, probably won't be for a bit until things get cleaned up more." sorry... who was first??

Re:I really expected OpenOffice.org to be first... (2, Funny)

Greger47 (516305) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864141)


Please enlighten me, why do they insist on calling it Mac OS X if it doesn't even include a X server...

/greger

Free not important? (-1, Troll)

Robotdog (669611) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863859)

Given the price of a Mac, is *free* that big of a deal? Open source I understand, but it doesn't seem that anyone who can afford a Mac can't afford an office suite.

Re:Free not important? (1)

RatBastard (949) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863870)

Why shouldn't Mac users be able to get free software? Or is this some bullshit class warfare?

Re:Free not important? (0, Offtopic)

Queuetue (156269) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863904)

You're using the wrong definition of free.

Re:Free not important? (4, Insightful)

ahbe (621886) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863930)

Ok, you do have a point there. Most people who buy a Mac could afford MS Office. But here's my question, do you want to use MS Office? And this is my point. I us a Mac (I'm on my 12" PB right now) because I DO NOT want anything from Microsoft! I personally intend to give what I can (I'm poor after all) to help support the KOffice team. I really appreciate the hard work they guys and gals have done to make this happen. In the Mac world a native non MS full featured office suite is huge.

Re:Free not important? (1)

Robotdog (669611) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863999)

I was working with a self-publishing physics professor over the summer who used Macs exclusively and used Adobe software. While not exactly the same, it worked similarly. I'm saying that having more choice or a free option is a bad thing, just perhaps not an important thing.

Re:Free not important? (1)

Robotdog (669611) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864013)

Errr... that should say "not saying"

Re:Free not important? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863932)

An eMac costs 899 . Office:Mac costs 509 . So, yes.

Re:Free not important? (4, Insightful)

Trurl's Machine (651488) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863985)

Given the price of a Mac, is *free* that big of a deal? Open source I understand, but it doesn't seem that anyone who can afford a Mac can't afford an office suite.

Consider the example of lack of Hebrew support [theregister.co.uk] in Microsoft Office for Mac. There is no technical reason for it; the Unicode-based MacOS X is ready to support Hebrew out-of-the-box. It's just a political decision of the vendor [microsoft.com] of this particular office suite trying to force Israeli Mac users to abandon their platform of choice. I think this example is enough for you to understand why *free* (as in speech) office suite is a big deal indeed, after all.

Re:Free not important? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864006)

Man, is that ever an uniformed post. How does being able to afford a Mac equate to being able to afford Microsoft Office too? After paying $2600 for a Powerbook, the last thing I need is to pay another $400 for software I rarely use. Just to make it perfectly clear to you, the idea of people who buy Macs being rich is a STEREOTYPE. I'm not rich, but I did get a Mac, because it is a very worthwhile expense. Every aspect of it is well designed, from the hardware to the software. Based on what I've heard from people using sub-500 MHz Macs, and from what I've seen with Panther, I fully expect this system to only improve over time. I bought a Mac because I want a high quality computer, not because I had pocket change to burn.

I expect I'll use a word processor on my personal system four or five times a year. Therefore, spending $230 on Word would be a complete waste. I welcome a free word processor.

Re:Free not important? (1, Flamebait)

InternationalCow (681980) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864017)

You're ignorant. Macs are NOT more expensive than peecees, get that misconception out of your head. Go to the Applestore and configure a nice PB. The configure a comparable Dell and see who's more expensive. Second: why should OSX (= a BSD UNIX lest you forget) users not want to participate in Open Source? I know I want to.

And by the way - I can afford a Mac but I refuse to buy Office to go with it - it would raise the price of my current mac by as much as 30-40 percent! I do not want to pay such an insane amount of money for a piece of crap. I guess many more mac users think that way.

Re:Free not important? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864148)

Macs are NOT more expensive than peecees, get that misconception out of your head.

Maybe it's just me, but I sincerely and truly hate it when Mac users call PCs "peecees". And I'm a 100% Mac user myself. But about your comments on the pricing, I agree. The only market in where Apple cannot currently compete with PCs pricewise is the /$ ~700 pricegroup, where cheap self-assembled mongrels are the only real choise.

My take on KOffice, and how it might be on OSX (-1, Insightful)

Clorox Bleach (737370) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863865)

KOffice comprises the customary litany of applications: KWord, a word processor, KSpread, a spreadsheet, KPresenter, for making presentations, KChart, for converting data into pictures, KIllustrator, for making vector graphics, and KOShell, which provides a unified workspace for all the applications, ala StarOffice (though unlike StarOffice before version 6.0, KOShell is optional--the applications can run without it). These are the applications that by default consensus are thought to be required by businesses. Whether these, beyond word processor and spreadsheet, actually are what businesses typically need is probably debatable, but they seem to be the applications necessary to achieve the official stamp of approval of the Office Suite Advisory Council or whoever it is who decides these things.

It is in this respect that in its initial versions KOffice seemed to me to be a little bit unfocused, (and maybe a little unsuited for OS X in that regard). Yes, there are applications that fall into all of the Official Office Suite categories, except for a database application, which, fortunately, is under development (I'd bet money that more companies use databases than make charts and presentations or, for that matter, draw pictures). Vector graphics are great for computer artists and hobbyists, but they're scarcely essential to business.

I am not a spreadsheet expert by any means. I rarely use them and never use their advanced features. In discussion with people who do use spreadsheets a lot and who have taken KSpread for a spin, I've gotten the impression that it's a very nice little application that does not match the features of Excel, or 1-2-3, or late versions of Quattro Pro, or even the spreadsheets in StarOffice or Applix. This is not necessarily a bad thing, in my view, because such applications have suffered from such feature bloat that their original intent often seems lost.

But I do use word processors, a lot. I've written these columns in KWord for months now, and KWord has steadily gotten better. I haven't explored all its features by any means. But I have used many word processors on many platforms, and not just Macintosh.

It has a couple of attributes that annoy the hell out of me. First, its import-export filters are all but useless. (When I finish this comment, as I comprise them before posting in alternate applications, I'll save it as a text file, then open StarOffice to format it before saving it there as HTML. When opening the text file, I'll have to go through it and replace the pound signs it uses to denote tabs with actual tabs.) Second is an ease of use problem that is inexcusable.

It is now standard pretty much everywhere: when one is editing a document, if one highlights a word or section and then begins typing, the new typing replaces the highlighted text. This is true largely throughout KDE2 as well, in such applications as KMail and Konqueror. Not so in KWord. Highlight some text, start typing, and you're typing next to the highlighted text. This is inconsistent with every modern word processor--and for no good reason.

Likewise, it would be nice to be able to actually configure the thing and save the configurations from session to session. Here, at 1280x1024, I need the magnification set to 200 percent. Not sometimes but all the time. I use a U.S. Letter layout, not sometimes, but all the time. Yet there is no way of making these the defaults--indeed, the only things one may semi-permanently set is whether or not a couple of toolbars appear.

I simply cannot imagine any business that has a choice electing to use KWord at this point in its development.

So, really, who is KOffice's target audience? Is it Mac users?

Sometimes this can be determined by playing around with an application for awhile, but this doesn't work with KOffice: It's not especially easy to use, but it's also not so feature rich that it can be said there are rewards in store for those who master it. It's plenty stable, so it can't be thought of as a beta. No, the impression is that it is a competently executed thing that nobody devoted much time to designing. But that doesn't mean it's bad.

Re:My take on KOffice, and how it might be on OSX (2, Informative)

big tex (15917) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863949)

Yet another troll.

Even a 3-year old reposting [linuxplanet.com] from a October 2000 review of Koffice in KDE 2. A for style, F for brains.

Re:My take on KOffice, and how it might be on OSX (2, Informative)

gwernol (167574) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863960)

KOffice comprises the customary litany of applications...

This posting is plagarism of the worst sort. Cut and paste in its entirety from: LinuxPlanet [linuxplanet.com] . Taking someone else's work and presenting it as your own without attribution is simply dishonest. It is not informative or insightful.

Re:My take on KOffice, and how it might be on OSX (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863972)

I am not a KDE or an OSX developer. (Well, I do some OSX administration, and port our apps to the platform. But that isn't the same thing.)

I'd say that covering platforms is important, because when someone says, but do you suppot Blah, you can answer that yes, indeed, you do.

Keep in mind that short term tactics are great, but strategy is what frequently offers tactical brilliance a place to shine. If KDE is everywhere, people will start to use it. That's useful. for KDE. See? Think companies, down the road.

-j, who really can't stand such heavyweight stuff.

Re:My take on KOffice, and how it might be on OSX (1)

painandgreed (692585) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864041)

(I'd bet money that more companies use databases than make charts and presentations or, for that matter, draw pictures)

I'd take that bet.

There are plenty of executives and managers that could go without the need of a database, but do without their Powerpoint presentations and charts? Never! That would be like suggesting that they do without pointlessly long meetings which everybody is required to attend even if they aren't allowed to contribute..

Screenshots (-1, Troll)

James A. C. Joyce (733782) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863867)

I managed to get some nice pretty Aqua screenshots of KDE and KOffice on Mac OS X. http://212.229.115.84/tripod/images/kofficemac/ [212.229.115.84] .

SIT YOUR FAT ASS DOWN FAGGOT TROLL (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863900)


you lick GNAA sweat

Re:Screenshots (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863923)

so how is Drew ? still doing lame things i see

looks nice... (2, Interesting)

alienhazard (660628) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863871)

it looks nice but why would they use kde toolbar icons if they're porting it to OSX?

Re:looks nice... (1)

Aqua OS X (458522) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863992)

Because iconography takes time and money

FACE IT APPLE IS GHEY (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863878)

Eat cock mac fagotry

The plot thickens... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863880)

So, will Microsoft continue to snub the Mac or is will Redmond try to counter this move? Free software on Linux is one thing, spreading to other platforms is another. We could hope they will take the opportunity to improve their products and approach, but I'm rather cynical these days, I expect dirty tricks -- maybe they'll invest in some company hanging on by a thread who claims some intellectual property made it's way into KDE/KOffice and start suing.

Re:The plot thickens... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864001)

MS gave up on Mac after Apple announced their own product line. Apple is probably more worried than MS about lost revenue on the Mac platform due to free software.

Re:The plot thickens... (3, Informative)

Andy_R (114137) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864040)

Snub the mac??!?!? Office for OSX has a better feature list than the PC version.

Re:The plot thickens... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864133)

I disagree. In a way, this is good news for Microsoft. I say this because ultimately Microsoft's major enemy is hardly Apple, it is the very concept of "open source". On this front, Apple corporation and Microsoft corporation are really on the same side. They both use closed source code to leverage sales in their user base, and anything that increases the use of OS X (still a closed source operating system, despite the existence of Darwin) decreases the possibility of people using an open source operating system, which is very good news for Microsoft.

OSX Theme (5, Informative)

IceFox (18179) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863883)

And the *really* important feature: The native OSX theme I got working the other day: here [rit.edu]

So even thought some of the other screenshots are in the ugly Motif theme they will soon be all re-taken using the OSX theme.

Also notice how in the Dock the KDE applications icons show up (and scale wonderfully!). We have a script that generates OS X .app directories of the KDE applications and also generates those directories with the proper icons. You can see some of them in the background of the screenshot in Finder.

-Benjamin Meyer

Look and FEEL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864073)

Even more important than the look is the feel though, and one example of something that needs to be fixed is the position of the OK and Cancel buttons in dialogs.

I know it's Gnome that uses the Mac style and KDE uses the Windows style, and that's fine on Linux when working with other apps in the same DE, but that won't fly in a native Mac app.

I'll bet these guys already have there inboxes filled with mail from Mac users about this.

Funny? (4, Funny)

Libor Vanek (248963) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863888)

"...hard part is over, and now a lot of cleaning up and bug fixes..."

Does only me finds this funny? NOW the hard BORING part starts...

Re:Funny? (0, Flamebait)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863942)

"...hard part is over, and now a lot of cleaning up and bug fixes..."

Does only me finds this funny? NOW the hard BORING part starts...

Be glad it's not written in asp.net, that's pure unadulterated aggrevation.

Opportunity (5, Interesting)

blackmonday (607916) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863892)

Perfect opportunity for Apple to do what they did with Safari and Darwin. Extend it, make it better, include it as an Apple branded product, and give the changes back to the community.

I wonder how long it will be before Appleworks is nixed in favor of a kOffice - based product. Microsoft Office for the Mac is actually a really good product, and Appleworks doesn't touch it. Get to work Apple!

Re:Opportunity (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863967)

On the other hand, AppleWorks includes a database manager (flat file, though) whereas the Mac version of Office does not. MS Access is Windows only....

Re:Opportunity (2, Insightful)

Nermal6693 (622898) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864046)

Apple has to be careful though, they don't want MS to stop development of Office. Look what happened after Safari was released - MS announced that they were halting development of IE for Mac.

Re:Opportunity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864117)

IE? WTF needs it anyway?

*twirls finger in the air* (2, Interesting)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864127)

Yeah, and look how it 'devastated' the Mac community. :)
I'd say MS needs Apple more than the other way around - I've heard the Mac business unit at MS is among the most profitable, compared to how much they spend on development. Probably a lot less piracy going on in Mac-land.

Re:Opportunity (1)

Spintronic (661144) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864114)

I thought embrace and extend is bad?

Wow! (4, Insightful)

K8Fan (37875) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863894)

This is going to potentially have more impact on the popularity of Open Source software than anything to date. Office X on OS X has some really annoying "features" like the finking on it's self through a LAN. If this is solid and "Mac-like" it could prove to be a very popular alternative for Mac users who want to be free of Redmond.

Re:Wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864121)

And see how Scribus will be received, it soon will be on OS X too. I'm looking forward to messing with it.

DUPE! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863898)

this story was posted here last week.


3 fucking dupes on the front page today, guess that "give a shit about my job" resolution didn't last long.

Wow! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863903)

This feels like an early christmas present to me.

(And I'm not even Orthodoc)

Koffice for OSX (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863905)

As a Mac user I like it that these apps don't require X-windows and that they already look quite a bit like native OSX applications.

really, excellent work.

A friend of mine has Openoffice running on his powerbook, indeed it "works" but since it doesn't look as slick as the native OSX apps, I am not that eager to try it.

I hope that now a lot of other K-software will be ported!

best regards, Tom

90/10 rule in effect (5, Insightful)

MrEd (60684) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863906)

It looks like a lot of the hard part is over, and now a lot of cleaning up and bug fixes stand between Mac OS X and a free full featured office suite.


Unfortunately, in almost all Open Source projects the 'hard' and 'easy' parts are reversed...


The challenge and glory is done, now all that's left is methodical, monotonous bug chasing. Who's up? :)

Apple should take care of this project (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7863974)

"now all that's left is methodical, monotonous bug chasing. Who's up?"

Apple? Like they did with khtml.

Why KOffice for OS X? I'll tell you why (1, Informative)

W32.Klez.A (656478) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863941)

Well, the reasons for porting KOffice to Mac OS X natively and the reasons why someone would want to use Konqueror on OS X may be different.

Konqueror is not just a browser. It is also a file manager (kind of like Windows Explorer on SuperMan steroids). It suppors io-slaves, which gives Konqueror network transparency that I do not think is paralleled by any other file browser right now. Also, some people dislike the OS X Finder and would prefer to use Konqueror instead.

Konqueror is pretty cool - it has all the latest features such as tabbed browsing, but it also allows to split any view into two (and then again) - you can make it look like Norton Commander if you like.

Konqueror also supports archiving web pages as .war files (I do not know if this is an exclusive Konqueror feature or not, and I don't care - it is extremely useful).

So, there are many reasons someone would want to use Konqueror, and not just on OS X or Linux.

The reason to port to OS X could be so that KOffice were less dependent on X11 hacks and used Qt API more thoroughly, I don't know. The thing is - the more portable the code is, the fewer bugs there are (unless of course they start #ifdef-ing everywhere, then it just turns into a mess of duplicated non-portable code).

Paul.

Standardization is what is needed (-1, Insightful)

RobertArnold (737412) | more than 10 years ago | (#7863988)

One missing thing is standardization accross OSS. When koffice supports oo files, then we might see increased usage. Also, i personally can't think of a use offhand that these software suites can't already do. Once they become standardized, then more people will actually try to bundle them with computers.

Re:Standardization is what is needed (1)

leonscape (692944) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864108)

KOffice will be using the same file format as OO, in the near future.

ahh yes... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864014)

what a great marraige... finnally the world renouned ease of use and power of KDE Office gets the wide distribution it deserves on the market dominating OS X platform.... oh wait...

Widgets need updating... (5, Interesting)

Kaypro (35263) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864021)

This is a great milestone but...

Trolltech needs desperately to update the OSX port of QT. The widget have a cumbersome appearance and need to be updated to Panther style. Text alignment is in need of some fixing up. This isn't a complaint... the OSX version is still in its infancy and I'm sure time will allow a more integrated look... I'm just anxious.. because QT really is a great toolkit / API.

Good Job!

Re:Widgets need updating... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864107)

TrollTech is partly owned by the Canopy Group.

Like it or not, widespread adoption of K-apps only fuels the SCO lawsuit machine, if only indirectly.

No, I don't support SCO. Anyone who uses KOffice, however, does support SCO. It's really that simple.

OpenOffice (0, Redundant)

r2q2 (50527) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864058)

Hasn't Openoffice been released for mac os x? Doesn't that count as a open office suite or am I missing something?

Re:OpenOffice (1)

Down8 (223459) | more than 10 years ago | (#7864143)

I think the release for OOo has been delayed for quite some time.

-bZj

Dosen't really matter... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864113)

If you can't even get your mac to work... www.blackcider.com

Re:Dosen't really matter... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7864149)

I submitted a story about this -- it's been pending for a day and a half now...

Odd that /. should sit on it like this..

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?