Open Office without X11

ClintEastwood · General User Joined: 02 Oct 2007 Posts: 5

I've read something about an "Open Office 2007"-Release working without X11

is that true? is such a release scheduled?

keme · Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 4:01 am Post subject:

Sure!
On MS Windows... (In case you didn't know, you don't need X11 on MS Windows. AFAIK: not ever, not for any software.)

And there's a low price too ::-) (Why donate to the developing community when you can actually pay someone else for the software instead.)

http : //www.openoffice2007.com/

or should I say "spamspamsp..."?

ClintEastwood · General User Joined: 02 Oct 2007 Posts: 5

okay. it'S quite clear that i dont need x11 on Windows.

the openoffice2007.com-page doesnt sound seroius to me.

let's change my question:
is there a OOo-release coming that works on mac without x11?

or (another question)

is ther a release for the new OsX leopard scheduled?

keme · Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 4:36 am Post subject:

Thanks! Then it was the right choice to not tag your post as spam. No offense intended by either that comment or the rest of my post (except a slight offense towards the OOO2007 "team" perhaps).

For Mac, the native (Aqua) release is in development. See the OS-X port main page for details.

ClintEastwood · General User Joined: 02 Oct 2007 Posts: 5

so if i understand you right, "aqua" is the mac-alternative to the microsoft-x11 and the OOo-Tema is currently working on a "aqua"-OOo without x11 fpr mac?

is there already a release date?

I'm actually no spam Wink

thanks

keme · Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 4:48 am Post subject:

ClintEastwood · General User Joined: 02 Oct 2007 Posts: 5

thanks a lot so far

ClintEastwood · General User Joined: 02 Oct 2007 Posts: 5

no. i forgot one question.

what's the problem with x11?
why are they coding a verson without x11?
why so many macusers dont want to use OOo, because they dont want to install x11?

mobi-doc · Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 8:27 am Post subject:

No offense, But I'll try to be a little bit sarcastic...

Mac users (also known as iTards) always try to follow the rules of the One and Only iGod (also known as S. Jobs). And if iGod says that everything on a Mac has to follow the Aqua rules, then anyone who runs OOo under X11 will burn in hell forever.

And of course nobody wants to burn in hell forever, thats why they spend thousands of manhours to bring OOo under water Smile

noranthon · Super User Joined: 07 Jul 2005 Posts: 3318

Try searching the forum, especially the "Setup and Troubleshooting" board. I forget why there are objections to X11. I've seen them on the users' list as well. Installing it just for one piece of software would go against the grain. Using software designed for other platforms is not an ideal solution. There is a fork for the Mac called NeoOffice. I wish there was a fork for Linux.
_________________
search forum by month

mobi-doc · Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 1:58 pm Post subject:

Don't forget the the history of java on MacOSX. Apple provides (with a lot of delay for every version) it's own forked java just to have an AQUA Look and Feel (LAF). Actually, it doesn't use AQUA, it just looks like AQUA.

Isn't these enough for someone to believe that there is some degree of obsession about the AQUA thing in the OSX platform?

noranthon · Super User Joined: 07 Jul 2005 Posts: 3318

I don't even know what "the Aqua thing" is. Is it a "look"? There's a sizeable group of Linux users who have an obsession with a particular desktop environment (Gnome). One of the less understandable (to me) claims they make is that the most popular desktop (Kde) "looks like" Windows. I use a different desktop again (Xfce) and I have that and one alternative (Kde) set up to look the same. Xfce is supposedly "similar to" Gnome. IOW, I have no idea what the fanatics are talking about and believe they don't either. Does that sound like the "Aqua thing"?

Be that as it may, we in the Unix sphere like to have choice. Perhaps Mac users are the exception to that rule but, even so, if they want Aqua, I believe they should have it.
_________________
search forum by month

keme · Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 12:51 am Post subject:

Aqua is the GUI, so LAF (which is a major reason for choosing Mac in the first place) is certainly one reason.
AFAIK Aqua is more than the GUI, and there are some features of Aqua that could be useful. Take this as hearsay...
Font handling: Some Mac fonts are unavailable under X11
File names: Names using locale specific characters aren't rendered consistently between X11 and Aqua
Printing: When using some print features, the result is not as expected. (Mostly page formatting, such as portrait/landscape mixing and double sided output for top binding when you ordered printout for binding at left.)

X11 is an additional "abstraction layer", and takes some resources, so making the application "native" should improve performance, too. That'd be my major reason for wanting an Aqua version. I have no trouble using the X11 version, though, running on an iBook with 700 MHz G3 with 256 MB RAM and OSX version 10.3.9. The Aqua development version requires 10.4., which I don't need. (Much like I don't need Vista.)