Weekly Edition
Return to the Development page
| |||||||||||||
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate is out. See the product page
for information on this release, the
features page for a quick tour of enhancements in 2.0, or the download
page to get your copy.
(Log in to post comments)
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 29, 2005 17:01 UTC (Thu) by tjw.org (guest, #20716) [Link] Anyone know why they went with HSQLDB (http://hsqldb.org/) instead of SQLite as the default dabase backend?
I know it claims to be "Lightweight 100% Java", but that's kind of like having a "Tiny 100% Elephant" (a matter of perspective indeed). It doesn't even appear to be free software (libre or otherwise).
Will a jre be built into OpenOffice for this?
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 29, 2005 17:53 UTC (Thu) by dmh (guest, #14528) [Link] The licence page is at http://hsqldb.org/web/hsqlLicense.html
They have two 3-clause BSD-like licences, seems perfectly free/libre to me.
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 29, 2005 20:32 UTC (Thu) by tjw.org (guest, #20716) [Link] Ah yes. I was orginally thrown off by the pricing scheme for support which looked a bit like seat-licensing to me.
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 29, 2005 21:27 UTC (Thu) by dmh (guest, #14528) [Link] Yes. There's also the issue of a libre Java platform, of course, but GCJ seems to have that covered. The OOo release candidate's in Fedora already, which is cool.
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 30, 2005 4:12 UTC (Fri) by Mithrandir (subscriber, #3031) [Link] I think that lightweight in this context means that it is pure platform-independent java code. For example, Swing is a lightweight GUI toolkit, and AWT is a heavyweight one.
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 29, 2005 18:06 UTC (Thu) by alspnost (guest, #2763) [Link] Nice to see this, and very long-awaited. OOo 1.1 is feeling rather old now, though it still does the job.
Just one *major* problem - none of the recent 2.0 snapshots that I've tried can actually do such esoteric things as *saving documents*. I've tried time and time again to convert existing 1.1 documents. They open just fine, but when I save them in the new OpenDoc format, bang, just a useless error and no joy. What on earth am I missing? They can't have overlooked something quite this fundamental :-)
Problems saving? Posted Sep 29, 2005 20:58 UTC (Thu) by dwheeler (guest, #1216) [Link] "Works for me". And presumably lots of other people. It must be something in your configuration/setup. If it's a Linux or BSD distribution, talk to the distribution mailing list. For Windows, talk to OOo.
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 29, 2005 21:31 UTC (Thu) by ernstp (subscriber, #13694) [Link] Try turning on OpenOffice.org save dialogs in General preferences!
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 29, 2005 21:35 UTC (Thu) by alspnost (guest, #2763) [Link] Hi again - well, progress at last. I thought Java might be to blame (my AMD64 system complicates things), but in fact it was the password-protected documents causing problems. I had to save them in 1.1 without a password, then save them in OpenDoc using 2.0, still without a password, then re-save them a final time with a password again. All looking good now....
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 30, 2005 5:17 UTC (Fri) by hingo (guest, #14792) [Link] Hrmm... You can't seriously say that all is looking good? Sounds like http://qa.openoffice.org is the way to go.
What about the memory consumption? Posted Sep 29, 2005 18:52 UTC (Thu) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link] When I startup OpenOffice 1.1 on my laptop and open a 30-something pages long Word document, OpenOffice tends to use about 180 MB memory (according to top). When I add to it the 150 MB used by acroread, the 120 MB used by Firefox after a day and the 130 MB used by Opera after two weeks, I tend to run out of the half GB physical RAM which is quite a shame.
What about the memory consumption? Posted Sep 30, 2005 7:42 UTC (Fri) by aleXXX (subscriber, #2742) [Link] Try using KDE apps, like konqueror and kpdf :-) Then you won't have 4different framework and widget libraries in RAM. Then most of the consumed RAM you see for an application will be actually RAM used by a shared library, i.e. which is used by multiple programs. Alex P.S. of course this can also be applied to gtk/gnome apps
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 29, 2005 22:05 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] Is it possible to remove the JVM, database, or any other cruft from OOo2? The 20 second startup time is just insane. Especially when all I want is the word processor. (AbiWord has MSWord import/export and stability issues on my system, otherwise I'd use it in a heartbeat).
I'm hoping somebody will create trimmed packages.
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 30, 2005 9:34 UTC (Fri) by BenR (guest, #30999) [Link] I'm not sure if performance is ever going to get better. OO2 doesn't seem much faster on my system than OO1. I think the sheer size and complexity of OO.org is a real problem and to some extent it's a shame that it exists - without it around, projects like Abiword, Gnumeric etc would get far more use and developer time.
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 30, 2005 15:28 UTC (Fri) by richardfish (guest, #20657) [Link] Startup takes just 8 seconds on my Gentoo laptop. Of course, 2G of memory probably helps here... :-)
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 30, 2005 1:04 UTC (Fri) by escitalopram (guest, #31419) [Link] Does it finally work with Java 1.5?
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 30, 2005 2:25 UTC (Fri) by dang (guest, #310) [Link] the betas have worked fine for me with sun's 1.5 and 1.6 ea( and faster than gcj )
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 30, 2005 6:19 UTC (Fri) by mbligh (subscriber, #7720) [Link] So what actual benefits does this offer over 1.x?
Is it still a fat bloated oinking pig?
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 30, 2005 11:03 UTC (Fri) by jamesh (guest, #1159) [Link] You could check the features page linked in the article to find out what is new ...
The first OpenOffice.org 2.0 release candidate Posted Sep 30, 2005 11:42 UTC (Fri) by th0ma7 (guest, #24698) [Link] It's sad that it is still not fully 64-bit compatible... but work is in progress... since version 1.x :) Although it works quite well under FC4 64bit even if it is still compiled for standard i386.
Here is an interesting link on the target milestone:
- vin
|
|||||||||||||