Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Open Office 1.0

Expand Messages
  • Nadav Har'El
    Open Office, the free-er cousin of Sun s Star Office , has finally released version 1.0, with sources and binaries for Linux and Windows (see
    Message 1 of 2 , May 5 6:26 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Open Office, the free-er cousin of Sun's "Star Office", has finally released
      version 1.0, with sources and binaries for Linux and Windows
      (see http://www.openoffice.org/).

      While Open Office is somewhat smaller and more agile than Star Office 5.2,
      and also seems better and less buggy (and the "integrated desktop" is finally
      gone!), it is still a huge monstrosity: the installation takes up 200 MB,
      but this is nothing compared to the impracticality of compiling this monster
      on your own. Get this: (from their build FAQ):

      Q: How much hard drive space needed for a full build of OpenOffice.org
      including source?
      A: The current recommendation is 3GB.
      The source code is ~328MB
      The build requires 2GB
      The creation of an installation set requires ~300MB.

      Q: How long does an OpenOffice.org build take?
      A: Our current experience is that a full build of OpenOffice.org is
      approximately 20 hours on a single CPU Pentium III with 256MB of RAM
      running Linux.

      Q: How much source code is there?
      A: OpenOffice.org source will have approx. 20,000 source files.
      OpenOffice.org will have approx. 7,600,000 lines of code. The majority
      of the code is C++.

      For some reason, I'm getting the feeling there is no way that they couldn't
      have written something as good as openoffice with "only" 1,000,000 lines of
      code. Perhaps now that we have 1001 books hyping about "design patterns",
      "object oriented programming", "extreme programming", and similar stuff,
      someone should write a book on how to write *manageable* software!

      I'm guessing at least some of these 7.6 million source lines involve
      file-format conversion, help viewing, GUI framework, and a lot of other
      things that should never have been part of openoffice, but rather seperate
      packages that could be used without openoffice.
      The old UNIX pipeline paradigm, where utilities were relatively-small
      and worked together in various ways, was one way to create such manageable
      software and promoted reuse between different packages (e.g., these is
      no reason why Open Office, KOffice, and Abiword, for example, won't all
      use the same help system and file format convertors).

      --
      Nadav Har'El | Sunday, May 5 2002, 23 Iyyar 5762
      nyh@... |-----------------------------------------
      Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Snowflakes are very fragile, but look
      http://nadav.harel.org.il |what they can do when they stick together!
    • Nadav Har'El
      ... I think I jumped the gun with this rave review. After a few hours of using Open Office (viewing .doc files and making a presentation), here is my
      Message 2 of 2 , May 5 9:03 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        On Sun, May 05, 2002, Nadav Har'El wrote about "[hackers-il] Open Office 1.0":
        > While Open Office is somewhat smaller and more agile than Star Office 5.2,
        > and also seems better and less buggy (and the "integrated desktop" is finally
        > gone!), it is still a huge monstrosity: the installation takes up 200 MB,

        I think I jumped the gun with this rave review.

        After a few hours of using Open Office (viewing .doc files and making a
        presentation), here is my experience:

        1. It crashed 4 times, one time I lost about 30 minutes of work (now
        I know to save more often...).
        2. Open Office (133MB virtual memory used) and Mozilla (42 MB virtual
        memory) love to fight over my puny 128MB physical memory
        3. It is still not 100%, not even 99% compatible with reading MS-Word
        files. I saw especially bad results in doc files containing images,
        that messed-up all over the text.
        4. LaTeX is stil more convenient to use for long documents/presentations ;)

        --
        Nadav Har'El | Sunday, May 5 2002, 24 Iyyar 5762
        nyh@... |-----------------------------------------
        Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |This message contains 100% recycled
        http://nadav.harel.org.il |characters.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.