From rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu
Received: (qmail 11329 invoked from network); 25 Apr 1998 23:30:40 -0000
Received: from haven.uchicago.edu (root@128.135.12.3)
by mail2.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Apr 1998 23:30:40 -0000
Received: from midway.uchicago.edu (root@midway.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.12])
by haven.uchicago.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA09867
for <gnome-list@gnome.org>; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 18:30:38 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from harper.uchicago.edu (4152@harper.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.7])
by midway.uchicago.edu (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id SAA14796 for
<gnome-list@gnome.org>; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 18:28:42 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from localhost (rhpennin@localhost) by harper.uchicago.edu
(8.8.5/8.8.3) with SMTP id SAA02443 for <gnome-list@gnome.org>;
Sat, 25 Apr 1998 18:28:40 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: harper.uchicago.edu: rhpennin owned process doing -bs
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 18:28:40 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert havoc pennington <rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu
To: gnome-list@gnome.org
Subject: StarOffice as idea source
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.980425180937.23846A-100000@harper.uchicago.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Hi,
I just downloaded StarOffice 4.0 (about a 7 hour process on my 14.4). It's
a reasonable application, for novice users it might be the best thing
going on Linux now, though it has many problems.
It implements its own environment, complete with window manager, file
manager, and applications. Functionally, this is pretty much what Gnome
should be, IMO. We might think of StarOffice as a competing environment.
Which means we should steal their ideas shamelessly, and avoid their
mistakes.:) The first obvious improvement Gnome will have is that
StarOffice is one big executable, including all the apps, file manager,
and window manager. Which is slow and removes the benefits of protected
memory. Clearly we don't want to copy the bloat aspect - with CORBA and
the power of free software we should be able to get integration without
having to replace all existing facilities.
If you want a demo of my simplified file system suggestion, they've
already done it. Here's how it works:
They have an Office40/explorer directory; in the file manager this shows
up as the root directory. Beneath it are .url files, which are text files
much like .desktop files (uncannily similar, actually). There is also a
funny binary file which links out to the real filesystem.
So the visible hierarchy is:
/Explorer
/Address Book
/Gallery
/Samples
/Recycle Bin
/Work Folder
/Bookmarks
/Workplace
/etc
/usr
... [entire real filesystem]
The implementation is:
$ls -R ~/.Office40/explorer
Trash adressen.sdb gallery.sga workplace.sdx
Work folder bookmarks samples.url
/home/hp/.Office40/explorer/Trash:
/home/hp/.Office40/explorer/Work folder:
/home/hp/.Office40/explorer/bookmarks:
internet soffice.url stardivi.url support.url
/home/hp/.Office40/explorer/bookmarks/internet:
acronyms.url howtodo.url smiley.url
cliparts.url htmlmanl.url textures.url
I think we want to avoid their rather unsubtle ripping off of Windows -
"Explorer", "Recycle Bin" :)
Anyway, add this to the list of platforms to scrounge for ideas on.
Havoc Pennington
http://pobox.com/~hp
From pseelig@goofy.zdv.Uni-Mainz.de
Received: (qmail 10421 invoked from network); 27 Apr 1998 00:10:21 -0000
Received: from trudi.zdv.uni-mainz.de (HELO mail.Uni-Mainz.DE) (root@134.93.8.159)
by mail2.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Apr 1998 00:10:21 -0000
Received: from dialin79.zdv.uni-mainz.de (news@dialin79.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE
[134.93.174.79])
by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA32606
for <gnome-list@gnome.org>; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 02:10:12 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from news@localhost)
by dialin79.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.8.8/8.8.8/Debian/GNU) id CAA26018
for gnome-list@gnome.org; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 02:10:50 +0200
To: gnome-list@gnome.org
Path: not-for-mail
From: Paul Seelig <pseelig@goofy.zdv.Uni-Mainz.de>
Newsgroups: local.gnome
Subject: Re: StarOffice as idea source
Date: 27 Apr 1998 02:10:49 +0200
Organization: En Casa S.A.
Lines: 25
Sender: pseelig@goofy.zdv.Uni-Mainz.de
Message-ID: <87lnssf7jq.fsf@dialin79.zdv.uni-mainz.de>
References: <Pine.GSO.3.95.980425180937.23846A-100000@harper.uchicago.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.zdv.uni-mainz.de
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Server-Date: 27 Apr 1998 00:10:49 GMT
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.5/XEmacs 20.3 - "Vatican City"
rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu (robert havoc pennington) writes:
> It implements its own environment, complete with window manager, file
> manager, and applications. Functionally, this is pretty much what Gnome
> should be, IMO. We might think of StarOffice as a competing environment.
>
I'm sorry to say that, but i consider StarOffice a complete failure.
It only emulates it's own working environment as defined by Win95
instead of integrating itself into and taking advantage of the great
Linux and X features like e.g. the virtual desktop. It's not enough
providing a cost free application if it simply introduces itself as an
alien element. Just try cut'n'paste between xclipboard and any
StarOffice application... It only integrates it's own components and
that's what it's all about. I'd rather happily invest some money into
a well integrated and good working ApplixWare than downloading and
using a cost free StarOffice with all it's performance shortcomings if
i really needed anything else besides (X)Emacs and LaTeX. This is
really not what Gnome should be going for please.
Thank you, P. *8^)
--
--------- Paul Seelig <pseelig@goofy.zdv.uni-mainz.de> -----------
African Music Archive - Institute for Ethnology and Africa Studies
Johannes Gutenberg-University - Forum 6 - 55099 Mainz/Germany
--------------- http://www.uni-mainz.de/~pseelig -----------------
From rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu
Received: (qmail 28125 invoked from network); 27 Apr 1998 02:20:45 -0000
Received: from haven.uchicago.edu (root@128.135.12.3)
by mail2.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Apr 1998 02:20:45 -0000
Received: from midway.uchicago.edu (root@midway.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.12])
by haven.uchicago.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA01137;
Sun, 26 Apr 1998 21:20:39 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from harper.uchicago.edu (4152@harper.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.7])
by midway.uchicago.edu (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id VAA27633;
Sun, 26 Apr 1998 21:18:28 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from localhost (rhpennin@localhost) by harper.uchicago.edu
(8.8.5/8.8.3) with SMTP id VAA00705; Sun, 26 Apr 1998 21:18:27 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: harper.uchicago.edu: rhpennin owned process doing -bs
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 21:18:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert havoc pennington <rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu
To: Paul Seelig <pseelig@goofy.zdv.Uni-Mainz.de>
cc: gnome-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: StarOffice as idea source
In-Reply-To: <87lnssf7jq.fsf@dialin79.zdv.uni-mainz.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.980426205713.18136F-100000@harper.uchicago.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On 27 Apr 1998, Paul Seelig wrote:
>
> I'm sorry to say that, but i consider StarOffice a complete failure.
>
Yes, it's bloated and alien. That's because it's cross-platform, among
other things. It mostly looks like Windows on all platforms.
I don't mean that Gnome should copy everything. I mean that StarOffice is
the *functional* equivalent of Gnome; Gnome should allow the same tasks
that StarOffice does, with equal ease. I mention StarOffice over other
office suites first because it's free to download, so anyone can try it
and get ideas; second because they've replaced the entire native platform,
so StarOffice is more of a complete environment than other office suites.
There are things worth copying in it. It's a technical monstrosity, and
like most proprietary software not written by the OS vendor suffers from
lack of integration with the environment and minimal code reuse, in this
case exacerbated by the cross-platform business. Nonetheless, it's the
best thing going for novice users now. If I was going to ask my mom to use
Linux, I'd install StarOffice.
*Functionally*, it's very much what Gnome should be going for, IMO. We
want to do that, only better. It's a big task, though.
We get the "better" for free, because the open-source nature of Gnome
means any reusable code can be moved to gnome-libs, and the distribution
model of Linux means everything will be beautifully integrated by Red Hat
and Debian. So don't worry about alien bloatware. What does need worrying
about is usability and non-hacker appeal.
Havoc Pennington
http://pobox.com/~hp
From jfp@squinky.org
Received: (qmail 2349 invoked from network); 27 Apr 1998 02:37:31 -0000
Received: from squinky.org (root@206.14.78.130)
by mail2.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Apr 1998 02:37:31 -0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain (justin@mg128-146.ricochet.net [204.179.128.146])
by squinky.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id CAA31070
for <gnome-list@gnome.org>; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 02:41:03 GMT
From: Justin <jfp@squinky.org>
Reply-To: justin@ndst.com
To: gnome-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: StarOffice as idea source
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 19:49:15 -0700
X-Mailer: KMail [version 0.6.5]
Content-Type: text/plain
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <98042619533600.01437@localhost.localdomain>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-KMail-Mark:
On Sun, 26 Apr 1998, robert havoc pennington wrote:
>We get the "better" for free, because the open-source nature of Gnome
>means any reusable code can be moved to gnome-libs, and the distribution
>model of Linux means everything will be beautifully integrated by Red Hat
>and Debian. So don't worry about alien bloatware. What does need worrying
>about is usability and non-hacker appeal.
>
Yeah.. I think that when designing applications we should be
aware of what a vetrinarian, hairdresser, real-estate broker or some non
Information technology worker (the other 90% of computer users) would want out
of a computing environment instead of what a kernel hacker would want. Kernel
hackers are going to want XEmacs and Latex and non-IT end users are probably
going to want something more like StarOffice.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Justin Sher | "No appeal to any historical or empirical
Programmer/Analyst | consideration can discover any fault in the
NDST Communications | proposition that men aim purposefully at
justin@ndst.com | certain chosen ends." -L. Von Mises
From dunham@cps.msu.edu
Received: (qmail 11211 invoked from network); 27 Apr 1998 15:48:00 -0000
Received: from sargasso.cps.msu.edu (35.9.20.14)
by mail2.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Apr 1998 15:48:00 -0000
Received: from jocoque.cps.msu.edu (jocoque.cps.msu.edu [35.9.20.46])
by sargasso.cps.msu.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA09786
for <gnome-list@gnome.org>; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 11:47:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from dunham@localhost)
by jocoque.cps.msu.edu (8.8.5/8.8.7) id LAA15687;
Mon, 27 Apr 1998 11:47:53 -0400
To: gnome-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: StarOffice as idea source
References: <98042619533600.01437@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: Steve Dunham <dunham@cps.msu.edu>
Date: 27 Apr 1998 11:47:51 -0400
In-Reply-To: Justin's message of "Sun, 26 Apr 1998 19:49:15 -0700"
Message-ID: <m9bvhrv5krc.fsf@jocoque.cps.msu.edu>
Lines: 33
X-Mailer: Quassia Gnus v0.17/XEmacs 20.5(beta17) - "Chapar"
Justin <jfp@squinky.org> writes:
> On Sun, 26 Apr 1998, robert havoc pennington wrote:
> >We get the "better" for free, because the open-source nature of Gnome
> >means any reusable code can be moved to gnome-libs, and the distribution
> >model of Linux means everything will be beautifully integrated by Red Hat
> >and Debian. So don't worry about alien bloatware. What does need worrying
> >about is usability and non-hacker appeal.
> Yeah.. I think that when designing applications we should be
> aware of what a vetrinarian, hairdresser, real-estate broker or some
> non Information technology worker (the other 90% of computer users)
> would want out of a computing environment instead of what a kernel
> hacker would want. Kernel hackers are going to want XEmacs and
> Latex and non-IT end users are probably going to want something more
> like StarOffice.
IMHO, we should keep the unix model of small programs that do one
thing well and that's it. For a WYSIWYG WP, wordpad would be a better
model than StarOffice (or MS-Word). It should be small, fast and not
overloaded with features.
StarOffice is large and often too complex for the casual user. (It's
complex enough that I became annoyed and turned to Latex for making
slides.)
Steve
dunham@cps.msu.edu
From rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu
Received: (qmail 5581 invoked from network); 27 Apr 1998 18:21:27 -0000
Received: from haven.uchicago.edu (root@128.135.12.3)
by mail2.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Apr 1998 18:21:27 -0000
Received: from midway.uchicago.edu (root@midway.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.12])
by haven.uchicago.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA29119;
Mon, 27 Apr 1998 13:21:17 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from harper.uchicago.edu (4152@harper.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.7])
by midway.uchicago.edu (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id NAA08124;
Mon, 27 Apr 1998 13:18:51 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from localhost (rhpennin@localhost) by harper.uchicago.edu
(8.8.5/8.8.3) with SMTP id NAA17806; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 13:18:49 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: harper.uchicago.edu: rhpennin owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 13:18:49 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert havoc pennington <rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu
To: Steve Dunham <dunham@cps.msu.edu>
cc: gnome-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: StarOffice as idea source
In-Reply-To: <m9bvhrv5krc.fsf@jocoque.cps.msu.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.980427131414.5424C-100000@harper.uchicago.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On 27 Apr 1998, Steve Dunham wrote:
>
> IMHO, we should keep the unix model of small programs that do one
> thing well and that's it. For a WYSIWYG WP, wordpad would be a better
> model than StarOffice (or MS-Word). It should be small, fast and not
> overloaded with features.
>
Agreed - but we can match StarOffice functionality and integration with a
collection of small programs and libraries. StarOffice is still a
functionally comparable interface. Whether the executables are separate is
an implementation detail.
> StarOffice is large and often too complex for the casual user. (It's
> complex enough that I became annoyed and turned to Latex for making
> slides.)
>
Large and complex are separate issues. Large is an implementation detail.
Complex is a UI issue. I think the best solution to complex is hidden
functionality; "advanced" and "simple" modes, where "simple" has fewer
options.
I agree with you that StarOffice has a steep learning curve due to
complexity. This is something Gnome can be better at.
Havoc Pennington
http://pobox.com/~hp