Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Google "Office" Released 394

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the you-got-web-all-over-my-desktop dept.
pumpknhd writes "Looks like Google has finally integrated Writely and spreadsheets into Google "Docs & Spreadsheets". Writely.com now redirects to this new location. The design has also changed to match the look of other Google services." The more "applications" I try forcing into a tabbed web MDI model under a Mac, the more clumsy it gets. They aren't in my Dock, they can't be apple-tabbed through. Issues like this really frustrate me as I find myself wanting to use more web2.0 ajaxy fancy pants programs.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google "Office" Released

Comments Filter:
  • Goffice? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by P(0)(!P(k)+P(k+1)) (1012109) <math.induction@gmail.com> on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @08:41AM (#16391273) Homepage Journal
    The name, at least, is sufficiently benign; though I rooted for “Goffice.”

    I'll stick with LaTeX, thanks; but Goffice's real-time collaboration-feature [google.com] may make concurrent editing easier than under SVN.

    • Re:Goffice? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Rob T Firefly (844560) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:12AM (#16391619) Homepage Journal
      As possible names go, I think "Goofice" would be more gallant.
      • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

        by hcob$ (766699)
        As possible names go, I think "Goofice" would be more gallant.
        You should have heard the Bill Clinton version's name: G-orifice.
    • by j.leidner (642936) <leidner@@@acm...org> on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @01:37PM (#16395895) Homepage Journal
      > I'll stick with LaTeX, thanks; but Goffice's real-time collaboration-feature may make concurrent editing easier
      > than under SVN.

      It would be nice if Google added LaTeX support to Goffice, because a lot of scientists author papers together in a distributed
      collaborative scenario, and the workflow usually consists of mailing fragments and drafts around (ugh!) for the
      majority, while a minority of more technically versatile researchers use CVS/SVN, both of which approaches suck
      big time.

      So Google, if you read this, please give us a SCIENTIST'S WORKBENCH to author papers more effectively :-). (Thanks in advance!)
  • by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohn@@@gmail...com> on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @08:41AM (#16391277) Journal
    So while I was fooling around with this, I couldn't help but notice that it has the option of saving to a Portable Document Format (PDF) which, according to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] is:
    a file format proprietary to Adobe Systems for representing two-dimensional documents in a device independent and resolution independent fixed-layout document format.
    I bolded the word that has caused Adobe to sue Microsoft [slashdot.org]. My question is simple, doesn't Google face the same kind of lawsuit?

    If I may comment more generally on this, releasing the Acrobat reader a long time ago for free use to anyone was ingenious of Adobe. Because the Writer/Creator for those files once cost tons of money (back then). Today, it's a bit cheaper [adobe.com] but I still love and cherish the PDFCreator project [sourceforge.net] under the GPL.

    Really causes one to wonder how 'free' something is when it comes to standards. Now we'll just have to wait and see if Adobe begins to sue everyone who wants this functionality in their application. A lot of people I talk to regard PDF as an 'open' standard when the only part that's free is the ability to decode it--not encode it.
    • by mccalli (323026) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @08:47AM (#16391327) Homepage
      A lot of people I talk to regard PDF as an 'open' standard when the only part that's free is the ability to decode it--not encode it.

      Not so - witness OS X. It encodes PDFs with wild abandon without paying anything to Adobe. The PDF standard is published and can be implemented by anyone.

      I've honestly no idea why Microsoft backed down against Adobe. Perhaps it's because of the monopoly status or something, but what they wanted to include in Office seemed perfectly reasonable to me. after all, I'm used to doing the same thing with NeoOffice/OpenOffice and also with any application that prints on a Mac. Linux uses could say the same thing, and I'm sure I remember a freebie printer driver on Windows that creates PDFs as well.

      Cheers,
      Ian

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Ahhh, but NeXT was a license-holder for Display PostScript, which PDF is a descendent of.
      • by RevMike (632002) <revMike AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:11AM (#16391615) Journal
        I've honestly no idea why Microsoft backed down against Adobe. Perhaps it's because of the monopoly status or something....

        Exactly. One of the restrictions placed on a monopoly is that they can't use their monopoly status in one area to help them create a monopoly in another area. By adding PDF capability to Office, they would be expanding their near-total monopoly in "Office" to create a second monopoly in "PDF authoring tools".

        Apple, not having a monopoly - at least in the personal computer space - has more flexibility to add a feature like this.

        • by RAMMS+EIN (578166)
          And now Google is using their monopoly in the web platform market to gain entry to the word processing, spread sheet, and PDF authoring markets, after they have conquered web search, Usenet, email, sattelite image viewing, online video, and whatever I forgot. All the while collecting more information about everyone and using it for advertising purposes.
          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            I think the differences is that Google doesn't actually have a monopoly. Sure they use their large Size to move their new stuff but Google has a Yahoo, Google Videos had a You Tube, but even still There's Myspace which is still a viable competitor for flash player video delivery, etc.

            In the areas where Google excels they find themselves only #1 by a small margin, but the breadth of their offerings makes them seem larger then they really are. Because they still have strong competitors it doesn't make them
        • by RAMMS+EIN (578166)
          ``By adding PDF capability to Office, they would be expanding their near-total monopoly in "Office" to create a second monopoly in "PDF authoring tools"'' ...and offering their customers a service, which now they are denied from doing just because everybody uses their products. I still have difficulty with this "you can't do that, because you're a monopoly" thinking.
      • by dan.hunt (613949) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:44AM (#16392061) Journal
        ... a freebie printer driver on Windows that creates PDFs as well. It works fantastic, the PDF Creator [theopencd.org] conveniently distributed on the fantastic OpenCD.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by raffe (28595) *
      PDF is open and adobe threaten to sue because if you could read and write pdf in office who would buy stuff from adobe? It was about competion not about owning pdf.
      • by Lehk228 (705449)
        more importantly, it was about unfair competition because MS is a monopoly* in the office suite market
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by gfxguy (98788)
          No, that's not how it works. Let's say GM is the dominant automobile seller (jokes aside, it's an analogy), and Ford invents airbags. That's like telling GM they can't install airbags in their cars.

          No, the problem here, as I understand it, is MS was trying to, once again, extend a format they didn't own to lock people into using MS products.
          • Bad analogy continues. It was not merely "dominant seller" like GM. It is a de-facto monopoly. A monopoly convicted of using its monopoly power unfairly in competition against Netscape. The rules are different for monopolies. Otherwiser competition will be stifled.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            No, that's not how it works.

            Actually, it is pretty close.

            Let's say GM is the dominant automobile seller (jokes aside, it's an analogy), and Ford invents airbags.

            Why does it happen that every time a discussion about a monopoly comes up, someone immediately proposes an analogy that has no monopolies in it? Use a monopoly in all analogies about monopolies. Also, if someone invents something new, there won't be an existing market for it, so bundling is perfectly legal.

            Okay, so here's a more apt analogy.

    • by thebdj (768618) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @08:48AM (#16391345) Journal
      I bolded the word that has caused Adobe to sue Microsoft. My question is simple, doesn't Google face the same kind of lawsuit?

      Adobe is suing because Microsoft is trying to create a new format that is embedded as part of the system. This was discussed many times in the previous discussion of the lawsuit. Both this app and OpenOffice have PDF exporting support. As you pointed out, there are PDF creators that are freely available.

      Remember, Adobe opened the PDF standard so people could do this. (At least, I do believe that has how it went.) Like I said, it is not PDF creation that has Adobe pissed at Microsoft, it is their new, PDF-esque format.
    • by tygerstripes (832644) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @08:50AM (#16391365)
      If you'd care to continue your research beyond the first paragraph:
      Anyone may create applications that read and write PDF files without having to pay royalties to Adobe Systems; Adobe holds a number of patents relating to the PDF format and claims that it is an open standard, licensing them on a royalty-free basis for use in developing software that complies with its PDF specification.
      I bolded the sentences that clear this matter up.

      Adobe holds the patents, but they'll license without royalties as long as you conform to the standard... and as long as they can't find a good reason not to. Of course, the minute they try to, the world will move to a free open format pretty quickly.

      I don't know the details of the MS case - did MS do it without permission, maybe?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by ElleyKitten (715519)
        Of course, the minute they try to, the world will move to a free open format pretty quickly.

        Bullshit. Many people already call PDF "Adobe format" because they don't know you can read it without Adobe. If PDF became completely proprietary tomorrow, few people would notice.
        • by Halo1 (136547)
          I think a lot of people would notice, because quite a few middleware, reporting tools and websites use iText [lowagie.com] to generate PDF's. Some examples are Adobe's (formerly Macromedia's) Coldfusion, Google Calendar and JasperReports. End users may not know it, but it wouldn't surprise me if most PDF's out there are generated with tools not sold by Adobe (not only iText, but also e.g. pdflatex and things like that).
        • by kalidasa (577403)
          Every Apple user would notice immediately: Quartz, the 2D rendering engine for OS X, uses PDF: , and
        • bullshit, "ah doh bee for mat" has more syllables than "pee dee eff" so laziness wins....

          Also, I work with some pretty goddamned computer-illiterate people and I have never, ever, heard anyone call a .pdf file an adobe file or an adobe format file...

      • I don't know the details of the MS case - did MS do it without permission, maybe?

        I'm wondering if it's another case of "embrace and extend" so the final PDF wasn't compatible with anything Adobe made.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by jrumney (197329)
      No Google does not face any lawsuit, since the patents surrounding the PDF format are licensed royalty free by Adobe to anyone implementing a PDF writer or reader. The potential lawsuit your link refers to concerned antitrust issues, not IP issues.
    • by OlivierB (709839)
      The PDF export is disgusting, it's a hack that takes the PostScript image of your print and sticks it in a PDF.
      It looks like ass and you cannot copy and paste from the PDF.
    • by 0racle (667029)
      Adobe hasn't sued anyone over putting PDF writing in Office. MS said they thought Adobe might sue.
    • by gutnor (872759)
      You just highlighted a problem of the proprietary formats ... the owner can deside who can and cannot use its format.

      In this case as it is for Apple, Adobe will probably make no problem. Only Microsoft is forbidden to include PDF in Office.
      Even more funny, as MaxOS export everything in PDF, the new Vista has the same capacity, but instead of using PDF, they push their own format( proprietary, off course ). Microsoft would probably not be authorised by Adobe to use PDF, but anyway Adobe is still complaining
      • by gkhan1 (886823)
        Office 2007 exports to PDF just fine. Check your facts
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        You just highlighted a problem of the proprietary formats ... the owner can deside who can and cannot use its format.

        PDF is an open standard anyone can implement, so long as doing so does not break some other law.

        In this case as it is for Apple, Adobe will probably make no problem. Only Microsoft is forbidden to include PDF in Office.

        Actually, Apple is forbidden from bundling it with anything they have monopoly on as well (iPod being the only real candidate). If Adobe decided they don't want Apple or

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      So while I was fooling around with this, I couldn't help but notice that it has the option of saving to a Portable Document Format (PDF) which, according to Wikipedia is: a file format proprietary to Adobe Systems for representing two-dimensional documents in a device independent and resolution independent fixed-layout document format.

      Umm, maybe you should look for more than one source. Wikipedia has a lot of slant on various topics, including this one. The truth is PDF is a trademarked term that refers

  • Can't you just apple ` through your browser windows? Or, use witch [petermaurer.de]? That still doesn't get you to a particular tab in a tabbed browser, but at least will get you to the window you want. Maybe there's a quicksilver widget out there to bring focus to a particular tab in a browser (or if there isn't one, maybe someone will write one!)
  • 500k? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jbreckman (917963) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @08:48AM (#16391339)
    Why the 500k limit? I have 2.5gb in my gmail, but I can only upload a small word document.

    Anyone know why this is there?

    I would start recommending this to people if they could actually use it in the real world, but word documents get pretty big. It happens. They should be able to deal with it.
    • by Bandman (86149)
      I would hazard that much beyond that and it sucks to load into memory, edit, swap, and so forth live via AJAX.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:19AM (#16391683)
      That sounds like a limitation of AJAX.

      AJAX-based applications really start to suffer from performance problems (when used on typical American broadband connections) when the amount of data involved exceeds about 650 KB. For an application like a word processor or a spreadsheet, where the data must be continually be updated between the client and the server on each change, even 500 KB is pushing it.

      Don't forget that some overhead comes from AJAX itself. It takes bandwidth transmit the XML data that encapsulates the XML-RPC AJAX request. So while 650 KB is the practical limit of a request, it's plausible that 150 KB of that is being used to cover the XML overhead, thus reducing the amount available for actual data down to about 500 KB.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Lauritz (146326)
        Well, then only load the part of the document being edited to the client.
  • While it's neat that this sort of thing can be done, there is just something about all of these AJAX applications that does not sit well with me. I think that part of it has to do with the issues that the submitter mentioned. That would actually be a fairly simple thing to fix though, I imagine it would be trivial to write a sort of ajax launcher that was basically a web browser with a slightly modified UI that added bookmark links to your dock/taskbar/etc.
    I know a lot of my issues at one time were relat
    • by nblender (741424) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @08:56AM (#16391437)
      Of course it doesn't sit well with you, Mr. Computer Professional. But we're getting to the point where Grandma just needs a kernel with a browser in a ramdisk. She doesn't even really need a 'disk'. She doesn't need a grandchild sysadmin to de-worm her computer every 6 months. Everything she wants to do can practically be done online now.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by SScorpio (595836)
        Microsoft locking down "non-genuine" versions of Vista to only allow web browsing doesn't sound so bad now.
    • I appreciate what you're saying, but isn't "shoehorn all of our desktop applications into the browser" actually a new thing in itself? It offers portability, thin-clientiness and all sorts of other advantages that I'm sure Google et al will be happy to mention.

      People like to innovate; it's what we do. Sometimes that means making something new entirely, sometimes it just means improving or adding functionality to something that already exists. That's not something worthy of negative criticism in itself.

    • by Smidge204 (605297) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:01AM (#16391499) Journal
      I think that a lot of what irritates me is that the sort of things that are being made are largely things that already exist. I have Abiword and OpenOffice and KOffice installed, and they are better

      Keyword: "installed"

      No argument that there exists plenty of standalone, purpose-made applications that do a better job, but they need to be downloaded and installed.

      If you happen to use a computer that isn't yours you can still access your documents in "native format" with a consistent interface as long as the computer has a javascript capable browser installed... and any computer with internet access is practically guaranteed to have a web browser installed. Consider things like editing your documents at a library if you're out of town, or any other public web access kiosk you might find. Borrow someone's laptop for a few minutes, etc.

      Of course, if you don't encounter those situations you may as well use a dedicated application - it's all about the right tool to suit your particular needs.
      =Smidge=
      • by BenjyD (316700)
        You make a good point. But unless import/export is perfect, doesn't the disadvantage of using a limited web-based tool all the time to edit outweigh the advantage of occasionally being able to work on another computer?

        Also, the internet connection is the single least reliable part of most people's computer setup.
        • Depends on how often you use computers other than your own.

          If you're constantly floating between multiple computers, then the ability to just sit down at a browser, type your L/P, and have all your documents presented to you is a real "killer feature." One that might completely outweigh any limitations of importing and exporting.

          As people get more computers -- a whole lot of what I'd call 'average people' now have more than one (at least one work computer and another personal computer) -- this becomes more
      • by LordKronos (470910) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @10:07AM (#16392365) Homepage
        You forgot about the collaboration part. For most people, sharing a word document with others would consist of emailing the file back and forth, keeping track of who has the latest version, and making sure no 2 people try to edit it at the same time. Yeah, you could use FTP or something, but that doesn't solve all of the problems, and that's beyond what a LOT of people would know how to do.

        Now look at Google Docs. It handles all of that for you. Just grant someone access to the document and they can instantly edit it. Everyone always has the latest version. In addition, it allows multiple people to simultaneously edit the document and instantly merges those modifications together in real time. I shows you what parts other people are editing, and gives you chat ability so you can discuss those changes together.

        This would be great for a group of students working on a research report. You write the outline together, then each person takes responsibility for researching a subsection of the topic and fills in that part of the report as they go. You can review what the others in your group are doing, so you can see what progress people are making (or not making). If you see something that conflicts with what your research has uncovered, you can point that out. Likewise, if you learn something that it looks like they missed, you can suggest they add it.

        I've never seen a feature like this in MS Office, Open Office, or any other office suite.
  • by MECC (8478) * on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @08:52AM (#16391385)
    I tried importing a simple excel spreadsheet, and it didn't work :-(

    • by gfxguy (98788)
      Funny, I tried and it worked just fine. Mine was pretty simple, though.
    • by value_added (719364) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:00AM (#16391481)
      I tried importing a simple excel spreadsheet, and it didn't work :-(

      That happens to me, too. What version of Office were you using to import the Excel spreadsheet?

      Oh wait ...
      • by MECC (8478) *
        I know what you mean. It was an Office 2003 Excel spreadsheet. Actually has nothing but text fields, and is about 5Kb in size. Doesn't import - I actually get the message that it can't be imported. If I try from the File -> Open dialog box, it just grinds endlessly.

  • PicasaWeb? (Score:2, Interesting)

    Has anyone else noticed up in the corner of Docs that there is also a new "Photos" option that points to "Picasa Web Albums?"
  • by adavies42 (746183) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @08:58AM (#16391455)
    Are you even trying anymore?
  • While Taco's complaint may be valid, its this sort of techno-elitism which often impedes progress, or at least consumer take-up of a product. While people are bickering about the intricacies of a tabbed web MDI model, Joe Public will stay away.
  • MDI browser model (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gEvil (beta) (945888) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @08:58AM (#16391465)
    As someone who spends most of his day logged into a web application, I have to say that I'm not too fond of the whole MDI model for them either. This is mainly due to crashes. If the app crashes, all of my other browser tabs/windows go down with it. Due to this, I've taken to using different browsers for different tasks. For my all-day web app, I use IE. For website administration, I use Opera (the guy who does our web coding sucks and changes to the site will routinely take down the browser). And for general browsing, I use Firefox.
  • API? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Dan East (318230) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:03AM (#16391531) Homepage Journal
    I have a client whose website is utilizing FCKEditor for in-browser html editing. We haven't been too pleased with it for a number of reasons. I checked Google's site but couldn't find any information, so maybe someone here knows - can their word processor be embedded into 3rd party sites and used stand-alone? Similar to Google Maps? From the little testing I've done it seems to generate good clean html.

    Dan East
  • Spreadsheet Wrecker (Score:5, Informative)

    by gothzilla (676407) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:07AM (#16391569)
    I believe spreadsheet wrecker would be a better name. I imported a very simple spreadsheet that I use to track my ink and toner for the company I work for and then exported it back out as an .xls.
    It has columns for printer brand, model, location, ink or toner type, ink/toner model number, price, and how many I need to order the next time I do. Very simple spreadsheet.

    It stripped the price column of it's "currency" setting and changed it to "general".
    It broke the simple "price times quantity" formulas.
    It resized the columns and made them too small to display the numbers.

    This app is nowhere near ready to be considered an actual spreadsheet. Proof of concept maybe, but I can't see myself ever using it for anything useful. I can't imagine how much damage it would do to a more complex spreadsheet.
  • The more "applications" I try forcing into a tabbed web MDI model under a mac, the more clumsy it gets. They aren't in my dock, they can't be apple-tabbed through. Issues like this really frusterate me as I find myself wanting to use more web20 ajaxy fancy pants programs.

    How long do you think it will take companies to realize that users are starting to see browser tabs and AJAX sites as basically their own "programs" and will want to manage them like they do all of their programs, not just within the confin

  • File Storage (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CopaceticOpus (965603) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:10AM (#16391601)
    My big 3 questions:

    1. How do I easily upload and organize all my locally saved Word and Excel files?
    2. How do I maintain a local copy of all my changes and new files?
    3. How safe should I feel about uploading files with sensitive personal info?

    Answer these questions, Google, and I'm on board. And, I suspect many other people will be too.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ElleyKitten (715519)

      How safe should I feel about uploading files with sensitive personal info?

      I wouldn't. Whatever Google says, It's just not a good idea.

      Google Docs looks good for the random paper for school or something that you want to work on at school and home and don't want to carry disks around or bother emailing yourself it again and again. I wouldn't put every document you've ever made on it. If you're never going to use the document on another computer, or if it contains information that would be totally bad if

    • Re:File Storage (Score:4, Interesting)

      by hodet (620484) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @10:53AM (#16393135)
      3. How safe should I feel about uploading files with sensitive personal info?

      I am surprised there is so little discussion here about this. Lots of "ooooing and aaaahhing" over "save as pdf" (which is kinda cool) but little about the fact that if you want to use as your main office suite then you need to upload your personal information. It would be really cool if they distributed the program for installation on my own web server.

      Very nice in a pinch though and will probably use it, even if in a somewhat limited fashion.

  • Dashboard Web Clip (Score:4, Interesting)

    by chr1sl0ng (687978) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:13AM (#16391633)
    When 10.5 Leopard comes out (or using available widget authoring tools possibly) you should be able to create a Dashboard widget that could serve as home for your "Goffice" app, or any other AJAX app that works in Safari.
  • Ok, maybe I'm slow (it happens ;) but I noticed that along side the "Docs and spreadsheets" link there's now a "Photos" link which gives you 250 Mb space for uploading images.
  • As long as the webpage is sufficiently standalone encapsulated, I can drag its URL into my Ubuntu Panel, where it makes a button I can click like any other app.

    If I wanted, I could write an HTML wrapper I keep on my local machine or my own webserver that pops up Javascript UIs to populate the URL with parameters for opening the remote webpage.

    The only real problem is IPC between the webpage app, but that's always been a terrible problem with webpages since the beginning that practically no one has addressed
  • by suv4x4 (956391) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:20AM (#16391707)
    Firefox's JS advancementas and SQL engine are features requested by Google for their web application platform.

    Late 2007, Vista adoption is still beginning to happen, WGA eats at Microsoft share of OS. People looking for alternatives.

    Google buys Ubuntu and rebrands it as a powerfull "plug and play" web platform that interfaces with Google apps and Firefox. Google Box is born.

    Google buys Mozilla. Firefox keeps it's brand and keep on expanding its web platform features in FF 3.0 and 4.0 as it adds 3D and OpenGL acceleration.

    Late 2009: Microsoft share is dropping quickly at the same time increasing their revenue as pirates are slpit between those paying up, and those going for Google Box.

    Late 2011, Google purchases Adobe and makes Flash and a light version of PDF part of their web platform. Google announced mobile web platform: Google Boxmobile.

    Windows share has dropped below 50%. This allows Microsoft to innovate and integrate applications in their OS without threats from antitrust and anti-monopoly lawsuits. Spectacularly, with nearly half the share it had before, Microsoft's revenue is higher than ever. Microsoft releases Windows Vienna, amazing advancement in the world of desktop OS and computer-interface technologies.

    Microsoft positions Windows Vienna as the desktop os for power users, business users and IT professionals, and phases out Vista and XP.

    Google Box positions itself as the casual computer platform for people looking for entertainment, photo management, word/spreadsheet functionality, light games etc.
  • Err... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by RAMMS+EIN (578166) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:23AM (#16391753) Homepage Journal
    ``The more "applications" I try forcing into a tabbed web MDI model under a mac, the more clumsy it gets. They aren't in my dock, they can't be apple-tabbed through.''

    Then why are you not opening the apps in separate windows? IIRC, that will put them in your dock, and you can navigate to them with Exposé. I guess you can't Apple-tab to them, but you could Apple-tilde (right?) to them when you already have your browser selected.
  • Web apps should conform to the UNIX ideal: do *one* thing and do it well.

    Desktop apps are the kinds of things people open once and work with for long stretches. I think of desktop apps as being like separate workspaces...my IDE is my workbench, Photoshop is my darkroom, etc. I go into these "places" to work on something where I need a vareity of tools that are centered around one type of activity and complement each other. I can use all of my desktop space (two monitors), and I have the speed and respons
  • ``The more "applications" I try forcing into a tabbed web MDI model under a mac, the more clumsy it gets.''

    Ah, good, another person has figured out that web apps are kludgy. My hopes that the API exposed by browsers will eventually grow up to give us a cross-platform API to creating native interfaces just went up a notch. That's something I've been hoping for for about ten years now, but so far, it hasn't happened. Perhaps XUL...
  • I don't know how new this is, but I havent seen it till now. Picasa [google.com] now allows users to upload pics to Google. I've been looking for a second place to backup my photos.
  • The better model is portable apps on a thumb drive. Mine is set up for M$ stuff, since that is what most machines I encounter when I don't have my own on hand are.

    Now just imagine if there were a standard virtual machine interpreter that was available by default on every end-user OS in existence. Imagine that it worked the same on all platforms and was quick and responsive.

    Now imagine having that little suite of programs on your thumb drive written to that VM.

    Oh well.
  • Please, Google, make us a presentation editor that could save the presentations in S5 (http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/s5/ [meyerweb.com] ). This would rock really hard.
     
  • The best part... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Bytal (594494) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @09:43AM (#16392057) Homepage
    is that if you browse the css and js source you can see that internally they're calling this version "leftly". Witty :)
  • by MrCopilot (871878) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @10:19AM (#16392571) Homepage Journal
    Let see here, let me get my glasses and tinfoil hat out.

    Your Rights
    Google claims no ownership or control over any Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Google services. You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any Content you submit, post or display on or through Google services and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate. By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through Google services which are intended to be available
    to the members of the public, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, modify, publish and distribute such Content on Google services for the purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting Google services.

    Google reserves the right to syndicate Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Google services and use that Content in connection with any service offered by Google. Google furthermore reserves the right to refuse to accept, post, display or transmit any Content in its sole discretion. You represent and warrant that you have all the rights, power and authority necessary to grant the rights granted herein to any Content submitted.

    I have to say that does seem pretty far from evil. Why do I even keep this hat anyway?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by theantix (466036)
      "which are intended to be available to the members of the public"

      So, not your docs which are intended to be available to you and who you choose to share it with.
  • by Inoshiro (71693) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @12:01PM (#16394221) Homepage
    "The more "applications" I try forcing into a tabbed web MDI model under a mac, the more clumsy it gets. They aren't in my dock, they can't be apple-tabbed through. Issues like this really frusterate me as I find myself wanting to use more web20 ajaxy fancy pants programs."

    Duh. Apple+Tab = applications. Apple+~ = application windows. I personally find this 2-level hierachy much better for working with data than the Windows-inspired "everything is a Window". I also like that I can quickly hide applications I'm not interested in (Apple+H), or merely minimize some Windows (which do get stuck in the dock, Apple+M). The only bad thing is that I haven't found a way to pull minimized windows out of the dock with the keyboard.

    For quickly getting between windows in an application when I'm not sure of the order, I just press the Expose key for all application windows (suddenly, all my TextEdit windows are on the screen, waiting for me to pick one!). I can do this for all applications and their windows with a different Expose shortcut.

    Between the Expose graphical picking, having a distinction between "another application" and "another window in this application", I find the MacOS X ui richer and more comprehensive than the usual point'n'ook GUI interface that exists under KMW or MS Windows. It's easy to pick up, and I'm missing it so much when I go to my KDE desktop that I'm tempted to write a patch to KMW to make it act more Mac-like.
  • by biendamon (723952) on Wednesday October 11, 2006 @12:38PM (#16394781)
    As a writer, I have well-formatted documents I use in OpenOffice. They are 8.5x11 inches, with 1 inch margins, and headers on every page. The body text is double-spaced, while the front-page manuscript headers are single-spaced.

    I lost ALL of that formatting with the test upload of a document. For writers who need properly formatted manuscripts, this is definitely a no-go. I'll have to wait until they can do proper headers and page layouts.

Prototype designs always work. -- Don Vonada

Working...