Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 11th Apr 2006 20:16 UTC, submitted by Mitarai
KDE "The KOffice team is proud to announce KOffice version 1.5. With this release, KOffice starts its ascent into the office suite hall of fame. This version sports OpenDocument as the default file format, accessibility, a new project planning tool KPlato, professional color support and adjustment layers in Krita and the long awaited Kexi 1.0. You can read more about it in the press release and the full announcement. Packages are available for Kubuntu and SUSE."
Order by: Score:
...
by Mitarai on Tue 11th Apr 2006 20:25 UTC
Mitarai
Member since:
2005-07-28

KOffice, Kontact and Amarok are the applications I'd really like to see ported to Windows.

Reply Score: 2

RE: ...
by Hands on Tue 11th Apr 2006 20:34 UTC in reply to "..."
Hands Member since:
2005-06-30

[sarcasm]Why would you ever want to run a Linux application in Windows?[/sarcasm]

It would be very nice to have the ability to run my favorite applications regardless of the OS that is installed on the computer, and that definitely includes some of the KDE-based apps.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: ...
by Mitarai on Tue 11th Apr 2006 21:07 UTC in reply to "RE: ..."
Mitarai Member since:
2005-07-28

[sarcasm]Why would you ever want to run a Linux application in Windows?[/sarcasm]

I'd like to run Linux on my pc all the time but I simple can't.

Reply Score: 2

RE: ...
by korpenkraxar on Tue 11th Apr 2006 20:37 UTC in reply to "..."
korpenkraxar Member since:
2005-09-10

Yeah... but I would miss the GNU toolkit, iptables,udev, some good source/binary package manager, Xorg and the kernel. Better port them as well :-)

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: ...
by kaiwai on Wed 12th Apr 2006 02:26 UTC in reply to "RE: ..."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah... but I would miss the GNU toolkit, iptables,udev, some good source/binary package manager, Xorg and the kernel. Better port them as well :-)

Just to be a little annoying: MSI is just as good as RPM/Apt and the likes - the problem is, software companies have this fixation about having their own 'custom installer', even though it adds more problems than the so-called perceived 'branding' which they use to justify.

Oh, and as for the GNU toolkit, and the likes - download SFU (Services for UNIX) 3.5 from the Microsoft website; as I understand, there is a port on, or already done for X11/Xorg.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: ...
by phoenix on Wed 12th Apr 2006 03:04 UTC in reply to "RE: ..."
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Eewww! You would willing subject yourself to the horrors known as udev and iptables? You are seriously sadistic. ;) Give me devd and ipfw/pf anyday. If someone sat down and ported those to things over from FreeBSD/OpenBSD, then Linux would actually be worth using on a full-time basis.

Reply Score: 0

Runing KOffice under Windows
by gehersh on Tue 11th Apr 2006 21:48 UTC in reply to "..."
gehersh Member since:
2006-01-03

There is a blurb on slashdot that states that KOffice 2.0 (planned for release somewhere around 2007) will be runing natively on Linux, Windows, and MacOS. Of course, anything posted on slashdot should be taken with a grain of salt, but may be someone who's more familiar with KDE future plans can confirm (or deny).

Reply Score: 2

RE: Runing KOffice under Windows
by smitty on Tue 11th Apr 2006 22:48 UTC in reply to "Runing KOffice under Windows"
smitty Member since:
2005-10-13

That is the plan. They're really waiting on kdelibs to be ported, which I think is being done at the same time as KDE4 development.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Runing KOffice under Windows
by Nathan O. on Wed 12th Apr 2006 01:49 UTC in reply to "Runing KOffice under Windows"
Nathan O. Member since:
2005-08-11

Qt4 can be used under Windows with the GPL license. KDE4 and KOffice2 will both use Qt4. Therefor, porting them should be a simple recompile (plus a lot of reconfiguration, some porting of small dependancies, etc).

Software doesn't usually excite me, but Qt4 is going to do a lot of great, little things for KOffice and KDE. KOffice2 should see all font kerning problems disappear. For some reason, that excites me more than Queen coming to town with Paul Rogers :-)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Runing KOffice under Windows
by cm__ on Wed 12th Apr 2006 04:08 UTC in reply to "RE: Runing KOffice under Windows"
cm__ Member since:
2005-07-07

> Qt4 can be used under Windows with the GPL license.
> KDE4 and KOffice2 will both use Qt4. Therefor, porting
> them should be a simple recompile (plus a lot of
> reconfiguration, some porting of small dependancies, etc).

It's not that easy. You *can* write X11- and *N*X-dependent code with Qt, and KDE contains such code.

But that is being worked on.


> but Qt4 is going to
> do a lot of great, little things for KOffice and KDE.
> KOffice2 should see all font kerning problems disappear.

I'm waiting for that, too.

Reply Score: 3

Nathan O. Member since:
2005-08-11

I packed a little extra in my "etc" for brevity :-)

Reply Score: 1

Kudos to the KDE theme!
by korpenkraxar on Tue 11th Apr 2006 20:47 UTC
korpenkraxar
Member since:
2005-09-10

I like the software and wouldn't mind replacing OOo with this, but one office app that is still seriously lacking (in both suits) is a decent presentation tool. It feels like KOffice, OOo and MS Office is lightyears behind Apple's Keynote. I ususually end up making a pdf and use the OpenGL python script KeyJnote over at http://keyjnote.sourceforge.net/ to present my talks. It works, sort of, but is cumbersome. How long before we can have decent visual effects and speaker aids like slide timers and notes on Xinerama screens?

Reply Score: 5

RE: Kudos to the KDE theme!
by Mitarai on Tue 11th Apr 2006 21:08 UTC in reply to "Kudos to the KDE theme!"
Mitarai Member since:
2005-07-28

That application looks cool, thanks for the link.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Kudos to the KDE theme!
by cyrilleberger on Wed 12th Apr 2006 07:27 UTC in reply to "Kudos to the KDE theme!"
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

maybe you can fill wish list to http://bugs.kde.org, I see one wish related to what you want : http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107299, vote for it, and add comment on what you want, and maybe you will get a higher chance to see it implemented ;) (better would be if you could give a patch, but I fear that this is a big chance to achieve this, but as a lot of changes are going to happen for KOffice 2.0, it's a good time to push those ideas).

Reply Score: 4

KOol
by mOOzilla on Tue 11th Apr 2006 21:58 UTC
mOOzilla
Member since:
2006-04-11

But can I run it on Windows or OS X?

So, is this the year of the Linux Desktop?

Edited 2006-04-11 21:59

Reply Score: 1

RE: KOol
by Soulbender on Wed 12th Apr 2006 05:34 UTC in reply to "KOol"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"But can I run it on Windows or OS X?"
Who cares?

Reply Score: 4

RE: Runing KOffice under Windows
by cm__ on Tue 11th Apr 2006 22:04 UTC
cm__
Member since:
2005-07-07

> but may be someone who's more familiar with KDE future plans can confirm (or deny).

Well, there's http://dot.kde.org/1127515635/ : "Last, but not least: Within a year, KOffice will likely run on Windows as well."

The "within a year" has been too optimistic, I think that's clear by now. First there needs to be a KDE 4.

Reply Score: 5

KOffice and OpenDocument
by amadeo on Tue 11th Apr 2006 22:09 UTC
amadeo
Member since:
2005-07-06

KOffice is making a great contribution to open standards. Not only they are replacing their own native format with OpenDocument, but they are improving the OpenDocument specification itself (David Faure is part of the group) and contributing with specifications for applications which has no OpenOffice counterpart, such as Krita, Kivio and KPlato.

Go, KOffice, go!

And don't forget to check the KOffice tour:
http://www.koffice.org/tours/1.5/index.php

Reply Score: 5

Web Office
by Drune on Tue 11th Apr 2006 23:41 UTC
Drune
Member since:
2005-12-04

For sure KOffice is a good suite just like OO.org. But things are changing very fast in this world. OnLine suites came to reality next few 2 or 3 years. Just Check last Google moves about this topic. For now, we've got http://www.ajaxwrite.com/ and http://writely.com/. Both in AJAX, both with some nice features (not a bloated boat). Online is the future ;-)

Edited 2006-04-11 23:41

Reply Score: 0

RE: Web Office
by dylansmrjones on Tue 11th Apr 2006 23:46 UTC in reply to "Web Office"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

No it's not.

It's going to handle some of the functionality in desktop systems today, but it won't replace the local installation - at least not as long as the latency is so high.

But perhaps when grid computing becomes increasingly normal. But only perhaps. The Web Office is a wet dream for many companies, but so far all attempts the last 2 decades has failed miserably. And the newest versions are miserable too.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Web Office
by Celerate on Tue 11th Apr 2006 23:53 UTC in reply to "Web Office"
Celerate Member since:
2005-06-29

True, but KOffice will continue to appeal to people like me who preffer to be in control of the software we use. If it's online chances are your documents are too, and you need internet access to use it. The internet is not dependable, the last thing you need is to be hours away from a deadline without internet access.

OpenOffice.org works very well as a locally installed office suite too, but KOffice is lighter and quicker.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Web Office
by Wrawrat on Wed 12th Apr 2006 04:00 UTC in reply to "Web Office"
Wrawrat Member since:
2005-06-30

Not really. For the average Joe needing something simple to write papers, maybe. But for professional work?

There is a reason why office suites are huge : what you claim as being a bloated boat are must-have features for others. I just took a look to AjaxWrite and while it's cool, it's just useless to me. Not that it was unexpected, since the authors are not claiming to be a complete alternative.

I have no doubt they are going to improve, but the advantages of using an online writer over free suites are rather dim. Don't use many features? So what, don't use them. They're slow? Not as much as a 100-page document rendered in Firefox... That is without saying that I wouldn't trust a private, confidential or sensible document to a third-party.

These web applications are going to be useful for those who require a simple RTF editor on steroids, but they're not going to shape up the world. Not unless there is some radical changes of the Internet paradigm (like a complete abandon of the current HTML-based platform).

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Web Office
by Soulbender on Wed 12th Apr 2006 05:41 UTC in reply to "Web Office"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"OnLine suites came to reality next few 2 or 3 years."
Uh, did you travel to the future and found this out?
But seriosuly, I'm sure online apps has their place but for most people on this planet it's not a realistic option. Latency, packet loss and lack of connectivity are a few reasons it wont happen.
I'm sure a lot of companies want you to think that soon everyone, everywhere will have low-latency broadband available to them at all times, in any place but that's 90% irrational marketing hype.

"Online is the future ;-)"
Not for getting work done those times that you dont have a network connection.

Reply Score: 1

Question...
by Torrance on Tue 11th Apr 2006 23:53 UTC
Torrance
Member since:
2006-04-05

Why do we have both OOo and KOffice? Why the separate programs? Is it merely for the sake of diversity, or are there quite different approaches?

I like OOo in the fact that it runs on just about anything and looks the same - so why have a special offcie suite just for KDE?</newbie>

Reply Score: 0

RE: Question...
by RenatoRam on Wed 12th Apr 2006 04:32 UTC in reply to "Question..."
RenatoRam Member since:
2005-11-14

Utterly different approach.

Koffice is based on kde technology, is a suite of independent and (relatively) small programs that share a lot of functionality through a technology called KParts.

OOo is a huge behemoth that implements its own widgets, is essentially a single program with 4/5 frontends, and is only recently being integrated with the rest of the systems it runs on (think about file dialogs, print system, icons, copy/paste outside the app, etc).

Reply Score: 3

Congrats to KOffice Team
by zeppelin on Wed 12th Apr 2006 00:07 UTC
zeppelin
Member since:
2005-07-08

I wish Abiword was not stalled

Reply Score: 0

RE: Congrats to KOffice Team
by cm__ on Wed 12th Apr 2006 04:11 UTC in reply to "Congrats to KOffice Team"
cm__ Member since:
2005-07-07

> I wish Abiword was not stalled

Oh, is it? I didn't know.

Any information as to why?

Edited 2006-04-12 04:13

Reply Score: 2

RE: Congrats to KOffice Team
by megabyte405 on Thu 13th Apr 2006 20:19 UTC in reply to "Congrats to KOffice Team"
megabyte405 Member since:
2006-04-12

Your wish was pre-emptively granted - AbiWord is not stalled in the first place. We're just days away from releasing 2.4.4, the next version in our current stable series, and development continues on our development tree which will become AbiWord 2.6.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Question...
by theine on Wed 12th Apr 2006 01:29 UTC
theine
Member since:
2005-09-29

Why do we have both OOo and KOffice?

Why do we have both Ford and Toyota?

(Apologies for silly car analogy implied)

Reply Score: 5

yay
by amaze_9 on Wed 12th Apr 2006 01:29 UTC
amaze_9
Member since:
2005-11-12

woohoo

Reply Score: 1

RE: Question...
by m_abs on Wed 12th Apr 2006 01:36 UTC
m_abs
Member since:
2005-07-06

For the same reason we have more then one desktop environment and window managers. Diversity is a good thing, it promotes growth. And different people have different needs and wants.

KOffice has different goals then thoose of OOo.
It's worth checking out, especially if you're a KDE user.

KOffice unlike OpenOffice, provides full integration into KDE. It is a lot lighter then OpenOffice. And it has a different approach to document editing.

Personally I still use OOo writer over KWord, but I've startede using several components from KOffice, like krita (image editor).

Reply Score: 3

v RE[2]: Question...
by CVDpr on Wed 12th Apr 2006 04:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Question..."
RE[3]: Question...
by Soulbender on Wed 12th Apr 2006 05:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Question..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"More diversity, the more lower cuality ..."
Yes, because the standard of music would be much higher if everyone didnt bother with what they like and just listened to britney spears all the time.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Question...
by elsewhere on Wed 12th Apr 2006 13:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Question..."
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

More diversity, the more lower cuality ...

Absolutely! The only way OSS apps can hope to succeed is if the elite among the community arbitrarily decide for us what applications we should be forced to use otherwise we'll all be tempted to try crazy new things and risk encouraging development of ideas and concepts that may run afoul of the ideals so rigidly held by people who presume to know much better than we plebian users.

That can only lead to change, and change is anarchy. OSS developers should be forced to work on a single project as dictated to them and users should not stray from what the community has dictated are the proper applications for their requirements, nor should they even consider having requirements different from what the community has decided they should be.

It is vital that we berate people that don't get it and that we criticize alternative projects as being unnecessary and wasteful because they will utlimately draw attention and resources away from those applications and projects that the community has decided are the ones we should all be using.

If people are going to foolishly insist on using whatever new application comes along and tickles their fancy, and developers are going to keep wasting time on projects just because they and their non-community sanctioned users alone see value and potential in them, how are we ever going to break away from stagnating monoculture-driven environments like Microsoft propogates? Choice and freedom must be stamped out for good if OSS is going to succeed.

Right?

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Question...
by chris_dk on Wed 12th Apr 2006 22:35 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Question..."
chris_dk Member since:
2005-07-12

Developers shouldn't be forced to anything.

Are you paying them?

You do not seem to understand open source.

I wonder who modded you up for such a uninsightful comment.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Question...
by cm__ on Thu 13th Apr 2006 06:04 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Question..."
cm__ Member since:
2005-07-07

> Developers shouldn't be forced to anything.
> Are you paying them?
> You do not seem to understand open source.
> I wonder who modded you up for such a uninsightful comment.


It seems that things like irony and sarcasm are totally lost on you ...

Reply Score: 3

UH.
by kurenai on Wed 12th Apr 2006 03:20 UTC
kurenai
Member since:
2006-01-24

MSI is just as good as RPM/Apt and the likes -

I tend to favor windows myself and that I simply can't agree with. There's a world of difference...

Yeah... but I would miss the GNU toolkit, iptables,udev, some good source/binary package manager, Xorg

UH. Of the things I miss from linux when using anything else, the sheer utter hell of configuring xfree/xorg is NOT on my list.

Reply Score: 3

RE: UH.
by Slapo on Wed 12th Apr 2006 07:43 UTC in reply to "UH."
Slapo Member since:
2005-07-06

"Of the things I miss from linux when using anything else, the sheer utter hell of configuring xfree/xorg is NOT on my list."

Pardon my ignorance but what's so hellish about configuring xorg? I find it rather easy (unless I want some Xinerama goodness).

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: UH.
by dylansmrjones on Wed 12th Apr 2006 10:41 UTC in reply to "RE: UH."
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

<sarcasm>
It's because it's very difficult to run a setup script, or using autoconfiguration, or - God forbit it - read the fabulous "manual". Or perhaps googling for information on your monitor, if you don't have them at your side.

You know, the devs should really know everything about any possible device ever existed or ever to exist. Even 1000 years in the future. And of course we all expect it to work without a hassle, even when using buggy hardware.
</sarcasm>

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: UH.
by Ookaze on Wed 12th Apr 2006 12:21 UTC in reply to "RE: UH."
Ookaze Member since:
2005-11-14

Pardon my ignorance but what's so hellish about configuring xorg? I find it rather easy (unless I want some Xinerama goodness)

He doesn't want to use a distro auto-configuration, and then he has to know how to read to configure it.
Well, I'm not completely fair, as the configuration tools seem to be broken in latest XOrg 7, and there is no configuration information for the newest keyboard scheme.
But there is no hell in configuring XFree/XOrg, everything else being explained with examples in the default configuration sample.

Reply Score: 2

Gobe Productive
by chekr on Wed 12th Apr 2006 03:46 UTC
chekr
Member since:
2005-11-05

It is ver unfortunate that the whole plan to buy and open Gobe Productive: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/2403 never came to fruition.

OpenOffice is definitely shaping up as a viable competitor to MS Office but what about something on par with iWork for the rest of us...Gobe would have hit this market very well.

Reply Score: 1

v Yeah!
by CVDpr on Wed 12th Apr 2006 04:03 UTC
Congratulations KOffice
by Lovechild on Wed 12th Apr 2006 04:04 UTC
Lovechild
Member since:
2005-06-29

While I'll remain a GNOME Office user, it is good to see KOffice make progress and use the OASIS Open Doc standard.

Reply Score: 1

KWord
by alcibiades on Wed 12th Apr 2006 05:38 UTC
alcibiades
Member since:
2005-10-12

Looking forward to trying the latest one, and wish them well, but so far there have been three critical flaws for me:

1) Frame oriented WP is not what I want in WP. In desktop publishing maybe. But not in WP, it just adds extra complexity. By way of defect in WP, there is no decent outliner in KWord.

2) OO is not wonderful with big spreadsheets, but KCalc is ludicrously slow as soon as something gets even medium sized. At least in previous verions, I tried to load a sheet 2,000 by 50 on a reasonably fast machine with enough memory, and it took minutes.

3) Krita is not in the same space as Filemaker, even Filemaker 4.x, without an awful lot of work. I know Filemaker has its critics on technical grounds. But it remains the quickest and simplest way to put together an end user/small office database. Scripting is easy, layouts are easy, adding UI by buttons and controls is a snap. An afternoon in Filemaker, for the non-programmer, is worth two or three weeks hard work in Krita (if you can do it at all) or even in Base. Even the little flat file functionality in an old Appleworks package will do better for end users than Krita.

I could get over (1) probably. (2) is essential to being competitive at all, even with AppleWorks. And (3) done right is what it will take to surpass it.

Now, if someone would just open Appleworks, and let it loose on Linux!

Reply Score: 1

RE: KWord
by Soulbender on Wed 12th Apr 2006 05:47 UTC in reply to "KWord"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"3) Krita is not in the same space as Filemaker, even Filemaker 4.x,"

Uh, of course it isnt. Krita is a paint application, not a database application. Maybe you ment Kexi?

Reply Score: 1

RE: KWord
by cm__ on Wed 12th Apr 2006 06:11 UTC in reply to "KWord"
cm__ Member since:
2005-07-07

And now seriously:

> 1) Frame oriented WP is not what I want in WP. In
> desktop publishing maybe. But not in WP, it just adds
> extra complexity. By way of defect in WP, there is no
> decent outliner in KWord.


You may not want the frame orientation but I've read *lots* of comments from users who liked that very feature.

Personally I don't care much because I only need very basic stuff. Ugly fonts in printouts are a bigger problem for me, or strange table handling. The developers know about that and I'm waiting for this to be fixed with Qt4 (that means KOffice 2.0).




> 2) OO is not wonderful with big spreadsheets, but
> KCalc is ludicrously slow as soon as something gets
> even medium sized.

IIRC the developers are well aware of that and the kspread engine is scheduled for bigger changes before 2.0.



> 3) Krita is not in the same space as Filemaker, even
> Filemaker 4.x, without an awful lot of work.

I can't comment on *Kexi* because I'm not using it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: KWord
by andrewg on Wed 12th Apr 2006 08:39 UTC in reply to "RE: KWord"
andrewg Member since:
2005-07-06

You may not want the frame orientation but I've read *lots* of comments from users who liked that very feature.

I would be one of those users. And it really is dead easy and simpler than managing text boxes in Word.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: KWord
by Ronald Vos on Wed 12th Apr 2006 12:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: KWord"
Ronald Vos Member since:
2005-07-06

I would be one of those users. And it really is dead easy and simpler than managing text boxes in Word

Probably the same reason I used to use Adobe Pagemaker for my word-processing needs instead of Word, which never wanted to place what I wanted to place in the right position.

I'm assuming frame-orientation works similarly though...I must say I just got doubly interested in KOffice..

Reply Score: 1

RE: KWord
by cm__ on Wed 12th Apr 2006 05:58 UTC
cm__
Member since:
2005-07-07

> KCalc is ludicrously slow as soon as something gets even medium sized.

kcalc is a pocket calculator. You're talking of kspread.



> Krita is not in the same space as Filemaker, even Filemaker 4.x, without an awful lot of work.

I can imagine. Putting these data sets into those gif and png images is quite a chore. And don't let me get started on them jpgs! Hint: You're talking about kexi.

kword is indeed what you think it is. 1 out of 3, not that bad.

SCNR.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Runing KOffice under Windows
by boudewijn on Wed 12th Apr 2006 07:33 UTC
boudewijn
Member since:
2006-03-05

We've already started porting to Qt4/KDE4, and Adrian Page has seen Krita starup and show the initial screen. And we've started on the4 next gneeration object embedding technology, too.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: KWord
by superstoned on Wed 12th Apr 2006 09:03 UTC
superstoned
Member since:
2005-07-07

>>You may not want the frame orientation but I've
>> read *lots* of comments from users who liked that
>> very feature.

> I would be one of those users. And it really is
> dead easy and simpler than managing text boxes in
> Word.

Hell, yeah. after using kword for some time, going back to MS Word had some nasty surprises for me...

Reply Score: 1

RE: KWord
by mmarshall on Wed 12th Apr 2006 11:54 UTC
mmarshall
Member since:
2005-07-12

> (2) ... spreadsheets ... KCalc ....
> (3) Krita ... Filemaker ...

Normally I don't have a problem with weird open source project names, but I can see where it can pose a problem. You wouldn't have people mixing up names like 'KPaintBench' and 'KData'.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: KWord
by Ookaze on Wed 12th Apr 2006 12:30 UTC in reply to "RE: KWord"
Ookaze Member since:
2005-11-14

Would you rather have :
...spreadsheets... KSpread...

Because that's how it actually is right now, KCalc is not a spreadsheet, a mistake made from oocalc I think.

I don't even think Krita is a Filemaker equivalent.

Of course, in some languages, Krita has a lot of meaning, even more than KSpread could have for american speaking people. But KSpread does not mean anything to most of people in the world actually.
This stupid war on names among there only with egocentric native english speaker, who think english is natural to everybody.
I'm sure most non-native english speakers find this just silly, people arguing about a name and how it can change the popularity of the product.

Edited 2006-04-12 12:44

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: KWord
by Soulbender on Wed 12th Apr 2006 14:49 UTC in reply to "RE: KWord"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"(2) ... spreadsheets ... KCalc ...."
That's like confusing Calculator and Excel.

"(3) Krita ... Filemaker ..."
I really dont see how you could get confused by this.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: KWord
by alcibiades on Wed 12th Apr 2006 20:08 UTC in reply to "RE: KWord"
alcibiades Member since:
2005-10-12

Yes, do apologize for mixing it all up so dreadfully. Thank you all for your forbearance!

Al

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: KWord
by Torsten Rahn on Wed 12th Apr 2006 14:02 UTC
Torsten Rahn
Member since:
2005-08-20

The reason frame based layout appeals to many people is that lots of people creating documents expect their word processor application to also preserve their layout (that still wasn't the case for many word processors until recently even). In addition to the pure document structure those people also think in terms of page structure. So I guess its especially people who rather think "visually" who also prefer the frame based approach.
Their "excuse" for not using a true DTP application usually is that they really want to have a DTP tool that is as "easy" to use as a word processor. While usage of DTP applications isn't really that hard it's historically different enough from the word processor approach to make inexperienced people avoid them.

Reply Score: 5