OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

[Posted January 26, 2011 by ris]

The H looks at the OpenOffice.org 3.3 release. "OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 features an updated, easier to use, Extension Manager user interface (UI) and several improvements to Calc spreadsheets, such as an increase in the number of rows supported from 65,536 to 1,048,576. The print system has been restructured, the thesaurus dialogue has been redesigned for better usability and slide layout handling has been improved in the presentation application, Impress." More information can be found in the OOo New Features page and the release notes.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 12:14 UTC (Thu) by jmalcolm (subscriber, #8876) [Link] (15 responses)

Is there anything in this release that is not available in LibreOffice as well?

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 12:42 UTC (Thu) by kirkengaard (guest, #15022) [Link] (7 responses)

Put another way, how much did LibreOffice steal their thunder with the same basic codebase?

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 16:21 UTC (Thu) by stumbles (guest, #8796) [Link] (6 responses)

Steal? Sigh.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 17:29 UTC (Thu) by xtifr (guest, #143) [Link] (5 responses)

"Steal [their] thunder" is an English idiom which does not imply any sort of actual theft. "Thunder" in this context basically means "bragging rights".

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 19:13 UTC (Thu) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link] (4 responses)

There are definite negative connotations, though. Particularly with the "same codebase" assertion.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 28, 2011 20:09 UTC (Fri) by MattPerry (guest, #46341) [Link] (3 responses)

> There are definite negative connotations, though. Particularly with the
> "same codebase" assertion.

No there are not. It's not the "same codebase" as you incorrectly quoted, but it is the "same basic codebase" is the original posted stated. There's not a lot of difference between LibreOffice and OpenOffice at this juncture. They're probably 90% identical. LibreOffice has done some cleanup and added a handful of new features, but it hasn't diverged significantly from OpenOffice yet. There's nothing negative about that. It's just a fact.

To steal ones thunder means to "to do something that takes attention away from what someone else has done."[1] That's exactly what has happened. LibreOffice has gained a lot of positive press since it was announced. Then it releases its stable version a day ahead of OpenOffice's latest version. That has definitely stolen OpenOffice's thunder. There's barely any news articles about the OpenOffice release. The media seems largely indifferent, probably because they just reported on the nearly identical LibreOffice the day before. I suspect that OpenOffice's relevance will diminish rapidly over the next six to nine months.

[1] http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/steal+thunder

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 28, 2011 21:59 UTC (Fri) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link] (2 responses)

> It's not the "same codebase" as you incorrectly quoted, but it is the "same basic codebase" is the original posted stated.

Yeah, it was a loose quoting. Perhaps it is perhaps it isn't.

> They're probably 90% identical.

(citation needed)

> LibreOffice has done some cleanup and added a handful of new features, but it hasn't diverged significantly from OpenOffice yet.

Well, concrete data that's readily available is the feature list linked below. By my quick, crappy count (I'm in a hurry but I tried to benefit OOo over LO) I count 31 starred features vs 60 non-starred.

> To steal ones thunder means to "to do something that takes attention away from what someone else has done."

And "to lessen someone's force or authority." (the meaning you didn't choose to quote).

Other definitions include
> Someone 'steals your thunder' when they use your ideas or inventions to their own advantage.
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/steal-ones-thunder.html

> To do or say something, intentionally or not, that another person has planned to say or do.
http://www.sky-net-eye.com/eng/english/idioms/american/i_...

> to grab attention from another especially by anticipating an idea, plan, or presentation; also : to claim credit for another's idea
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/steal+one%27s+t...

Seems to be at most ambiguous and context-dependent. Care to call it even?

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 28, 2011 22:58 UTC (Fri) by MattPerry (guest, #46341) [Link]

>> They're probably 90% identical.

>(citation needed)

I don't have one as it was just a guess based on things I have read about current LO development and status. There can't be that many changes that go into it in such a short period of time. Even the developers like Michael Meeks were saying they were concentrating on merging go-oo and cleaning up the codebase so it's easier to hack on.

> Well, concrete data that's readily available is the feature list linked
> below. By my quick, crappy count (I'm in a hurry but I tried to benefit
> OOo over LO) I count 31 starred features vs 60 non-starred.

Ah, I think you misunderstood me. My "90% similar" guess was based upon all of the code, not new features. Both OO and LO still share all of the other features that aren't new.

> And "to lessen someone's force or authority." (the meaning you didn't choose to quote).

Because it wasn't the appropriate usage for the context. There is no authority relationship between OO and LO. The example sentences for both definitions demonstrate the difference.

> Seems to be at most ambiguous and context-dependent. Care to call it even?

Yes, just like all language. And we're not in a competition. There's nothing to call even.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 29, 2011 21:34 UTC (Sat) by spaetz (guest, #32870) [Link]

> They're probably 90% identical.

(citation needed)

"They are probably more than 90% identical"
- spaetz

Here is the citation you want from someone that has actually looked at the codebase.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 15:23 UTC (Thu) by ledow (guest, #11753) [Link] (6 responses)

Nothing by the look of it. The release notes look almost the same, and at least LibreOffice has the decency to indicate in its release notes anything that OO *doesn't* have with an asterisk (awful lot of asterisks here: http://www.libreoffice.org/download/new-features-and-fixes/ ). Compare and contrast the two pages.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 17:36 UTC (Thu) by xtifr (guest, #143) [Link] (5 responses)

Since LO released first, wouldn't their list be a comparison with the last release of OOo? It doesn't indicate the version, though, so there's no way to tell just from the asterisks, at least as far as I can see. The "[c]ompare-and-contrast the two pages" as you suggest should reveal the desired information, but I wouldn't go by (and wouldn't even bother to mention) the asterisks until I'd verified that they're still meaningful.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 18:21 UTC (Thu) by przemoc (guest, #67594) [Link]

> I wouldn't go by (and wouldn't even bother to mention) the asterisks until I'd verified that they're still meaningful.

Thanks. I haven't verified the asterisks, so I was awaiting the introduction of daggers for real LO kill features.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 19:14 UTC (Thu) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link] (3 responses)

<blockquote>there's no way to tell just from the asterisks, at least as far as I can see</blockquote>

Perhaps. At least one data point is straightforward, though: the 1M row limitation is mentioned as a new feature in OOo 3.3 and not starred in the new feature list in LO 3.3.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 21:02 UTC (Thu) by Kit (guest, #55925) [Link] (2 responses)

I looked at about 3 - 4 of the highlighted features on the OOo page, and all appeared on the LO page _without_ the asterisks. I'd feel pretty confident in saying that all the ones with an asterisks definitely don't appear in OOo (unless, possibly, they were both implemented independently). It would be pretty easy for the LO people to know what OOo was going to have (many of them having been working on OOo before, as well as knowing what code they imported- and what they wrote themselves).

I think a more interesting question would be how many of the features came post-fork, and how many had been floating around in Go-OO but could never be merged... that would give a fairly decent impression of the progress LO is making.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 21:07 UTC (Thu) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link]

even if the patches did exist pre-fork, they still had to get all the new processes setup. so we won't really see the rate of change for a couple of releases.

even if the first release or two are large, part of the question is if this is representing a change in contributions, or just short-term enthusiasm over the break.

OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 final released (The H)

Posted Jan 27, 2011 23:22 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

How many features are in OO that are not in LO?

Probably none. Oracle has a copyright assignment policy, LO does not. That means that LO has been syncing regularly with the OO tree because they can, but OO can't sync with the LO tree because they won't.

How many features are actually *new*?

Probably minimal. The main focus has been on code cleanup, including merging all the patches that Sun/Oracle wouldn't take. If you look at the mailing lists, you'll see a lot of work has gone into reducing bloat, with plenty of "low hanging fruit" of the order of MEGAbytes of dead code being deleted. Just compare the size of the installers, or count the LOC.

Cheers,
Wol