Google "Office" Released 394
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.
Goffice? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll stick with LaTeX, thanks; but Goffice's real-time collaboration-feature [google.com] may make concurrent editing easier than under SVN.
Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:5, Insightful)
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
500k? (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Problems with AJAX (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Cute but no thanks. (Score:0, Insightful)
call me when there is an OFFLINE version for download.
Re:Problems with AJAX (Score:5, Insightful)
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=
Re:Goffice? (Score:1, Insightful)
I do my math homework in LaTeX, and my english homework in whatever office program is installed on the computer I'm using. I'd never think to use either one for the other purpose.
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Err... (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Import / export != Useage (Score:4, Insightful)
Have you ever tried to do that same type of import/export sequence with a WordPerfect spreadsheet inside Excel? Or even an older Excel version? You will have simmilar issues.
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Goffice? (Score:5, Insightful)
But you may not be doing serious work, then.
Let's say you have a five-hundred-fold bibliography: how are you going to port it between publishable papers if not in BibTeX [csuchico.edu]?
Re:Goffice? (Score:5, Insightful)
LaTeX is an unnecessary pain in the ass for non-mathematical writing where a WYSIWYG editor will suffice
Biting the flamebait here... you are (bzzt!) wrong. I wrote my graduation molecular biology thesis (almost no math involved) in LaTeX. I learned LaTeX for that purpose, and looking at my collegues struggling with word processors compared with the damn ease and elegance of LaTeX, I'd never turn back.
I wish my boss let me write research papers with LaTeX too *sigh*.
Re:File Storage (Score:3, Insightful)
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 hackers ever got into it, then it's not worth the hassle to upload it.
Re:Problems with AJAX (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
LaTeX (Score:5, Insightful)
How many times have you struggled to get an image placed just right in a popular WYSIWYG text editor? How many times has your favorite WYSIWYG editor added a page to your report that makes it go over the page limit, minutes before a critical submission deadline?
The little time spent in learning the language far outweighs the advantages it provides. Give it a try!
Re:LaTeX (Score:5, Insightful)
There's an edit-compile-test cycle; results are completely predictable; modern editors are almost full-blown IDEs for LaTeX.
A lot of programing is done with IDEs these days, for a reason.
It integrates well into multi-user editing scenarios: you can check in your source tex files into CVS or subversion, and get free version control with diffing capabilities. Try that with a binary format.
I think you're making three mistakes here. First, LaTeX is a layout application, than many people use for word processing. You can't compare it to MSWord and assume you've done a comparison of WYSIWYG versus markup. Second, you're discounting the learning curve and its affect upon collaboration. Third, you're equating LaTeX with text based format and word processor with binary, and that is just plain wrong.
Collaborating with LaTeX is a pain in the butt in almost every instance I've used it because their are invariably people who don't know the language and who then have to learn it, greatly slowing the whole process. As for CVS and Subversion, I often use them to check in both binary and XML files from other word processors and layout applications and collaboration with them is not a problem using these tools.
How many times have you struggled to get an image placed just right in a popular WYSIWYG text editor?
Never, as text editors don't support images. I've often placed images with ease in an exact location, however, using WYSIWYG layout programs, which I find to be much, much easier to use and more flexible for that task than LaTeX.
How many times has your favorite WYSIWYG editor added a page to your report that makes it go over the page limit, minutes before a critical submission deadline?
Never. If I have a page limitation, I'm almost certainly using the right WYSIWYG tool, like InDesign, Framemaker, Quark, or the like (depending on the particulars).
The little time spent in learning the language far outweighs the advantages it provides. Give it a try!
I use LaTeX for certain projects and it is even the best tool I know for certain types of projects. You seem, however, to have compared it to MS Word for certain tasks and concluded that it is superior and everyone should switch to LaTeX. This is not very good advice. Most people, performing normal tasks would be a lot better off with some of the WYSIWYG tools available, or better yet a hybrid tool like InDesign that allows the user to edit both the markup and the WYSIWYG view. It even uses the same basic layout engine as LaTeX, but you don't have to mess with all the hacks to get color and graphics and the like to function smoothly and you don't have to build it constantly to see the end result. Give it a try!
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (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. The power company has a monopoly on power distribution, like MS does on office suites. You can still buy a generator, or use solar panels, but those are not competing in the same market and are not really comparable solutions. So then, the electric company decides they want to move into the related light bulb business. They start bundling light bulbs with your electrical service. You get two regular light bulbs and two special MS patented light bulbs every 3 months, whether you want them or not. The cost of your electricity goes up to cover it, but you have to have electricity, so there is not a lot you can do.
In this situation, Adobe is the existing light bulb company being driven out of business. It does not matter if they can make bulbs more cheaply, or even that are better than the ones the electric company gives you. Everyone already has bulbs so no one buys from them. And the light bulb industry goes to hell. Their is no motivation to make better bulbs or cheaper bulbs. In fact, the electric company is motivated to make bulbs that use more electricity and they can get away with it. Consumer are getting products that are not only inferior, but that are intentionally designed to hinder the consumer. The innovation and efficiency that makes capitalism so successful has been bypassed.
The lock in is annoying, but not the primary problem. Bundling was the problem, as I understand it.
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (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 me or most anyone else building in PDF generation tools in out products, they could do nothing about it. The complaints Adobe brought concern both PDF generation and XPS generation (an MS proprietary format). The format, however, has nothing to do with the complaint.
Microsoft would probably not be authorised by Adobe to use PDF, but anyway Adobe is still complaining when they use another format...
Okay apply some logic here. Adobe complains when MS takes an illegal action using PDF and they also complain when MS takes the same illegal action using XPS. Maybe you might infer from this that it is the action, not the format that is the issue?
If I make a gun using no patented technology and shoot the CEO of Colt with it, or if I license the rights to build a rifle using Colt's patents and shoot the CEO of Colt with it, I'm still going to be in trouble for murder. Half the people here, however, are focusing on the fact that I licensed the patent from Colt, and saying other people should avoid licensing patents from Colt too, since they might go to jail for murder. Crazy.
Well that should make me happy to see Microsoft hurt, but at the end of the day, who will be the next Adobe target?
Just as the CEO of Colt would probably bring charges against the next person to shoot him, Adobe will probably lodge antitrust complaints against the next monopolist that tries to bundle a product with their monopolized product to illegally take over one of Adobe's markets.
Proprietary format are a plague, when they reach a status of monopol they should automatically fall in public domain, as trademark.
Wow, I'm not even going to start correcting this mess.
Apple will invent something. (Score:1, Insightful)
LaTeX support for scientists? [Re:Goffice?] (Score:5, Insightful)
> 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
Re:Your rights granted by Google (Score:3, Insightful)
So, not your docs which are intended to be available to you and who you choose to share it with.
Re:It's probably limited by AJAX. (Score:3, Insightful)