Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

LibreOffice 4.2 Busts Out GPU Mantle Support and Corporate IT Integration

timothy posted about 9 months ago | from the when-free-is-valuable dept.

Open Source 192

Billly Gates points to this basic summary of the features of the recently released LibreOffice 2.4, writing: "In catching up with MS Office, the new LibreOffice 4.2 now has full Windows 7/8 integration including Aero peek, thumbnails, jumplists, and recent documents all from the taskbar. In addition, one weak area for LibreOffice has been enterprise network support and the lack of active directory tools: LibreOffice now has GPO and active directory support for system administrators to deploy and manage LibreOffice over corporate networks. LibreOffice also includes an expert configuration Window to assist power users and system administrators when deploying to hundreds of workstation at a time." Read on for some more details about the release, including some information about support for AMD's Mantle CPU acceleration support.Also of particular interest is AMD/ATI is expecting to finally release Mantle in the next coming hours for games like Battlefield 4. Surprisingly LibreOffice also supports mantle as well according to the release notes. However you will need the 14.1 driver which is being compiled and uploaded at the time of this writing to utilize this feature. Mantle will accelerate lower-end CPUs by up to 300% in some tasks while having modest improvements for those with more recent powerful CPUs. Real niceties for those like myself on AMD phenom IIs with the later 7000 series cards.

The only issue (some on Slashdot may say benefit ) is the lack of a ribbon UI. However, for recent articles about governments considering OpenOffice this release addresses shortcomings with the new active directory and GPO support."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

2.4? (2)

StuartHankins (1020819) | about 9 months ago | (#46113455)

4.2 not 2.4... are you messing with us intentionally, just to see who is awake?

Re:2.4? (5, Funny)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 9 months ago | (#46113495)

It was made in reverse polish notation.

Re:2.4? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113551)

That is not reverse polish.

Why would you submit this article? This software will compete with MS Office.

Re:2.4? (3, Informative)

Oligonicella (659917) | about 9 months ago | (#46113653)

Whoosh.

Re:2.4? (1)

Rockoon (1252108) | about 9 months ago | (#46114915)

I thought in reverse polish it was Shoowh.

Re:2.4? (1)

gerddie (173963) | about 9 months ago | (#46115701)

No, obviously it's Hsoohw.

Re:2.4? (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about 9 months ago | (#46115833)

Wouldn't that be . 4 2? :P

Re:2.4? (2)

jones_supa (887896) | about 9 months ago | (#46113545)

Also, I cannot find a citation for the Mantle support and find it odd that an office app would support something like that anyway. Also, it's not a CPU acceleration feature like the summary claims, although it frees up CPU time as being architecture-specific it is a much slimmer API than DX/GL.

Re:2.4? (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 9 months ago | (#46113565)

Also, I cannot find a citation for the Mantle support and find it odd that an office app would support something like that anyway. Also, it's not a CPU acceleration feature like the summary claims, although it frees up CPU time as being architecture-specific it is a much slimmer API than DX/GL.

..."Finally, the Catalyst 14.1 driver is also the first HSA-enabled driver, which allows Kaveri APUs to intelligently cooperate with a GPU to share the workload. The only supporting applications listed by AMD at this time are LibreOffice v4.2.0.1+ and Core AfterShot Pro v1.2.0.6+, but it says more will come online soon."

It is the second link from MaximumPC.

Re:2.4? (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 9 months ago | (#46113755)

Correct me if Im wrong, but Mantle is an API like DirectX and has almost nothing to do with LibreOffice. That quote you mentioned doesnt mention mantle either, it mentions HSA which AFAICT is not the same thing.

Re:2.4? (1)

GigaplexNZ (1233886) | about 9 months ago | (#46115747)

LibreOffice uses GPU acceleration for various calculations. I'm not quite sure where Mantle plays into this, I'd have thought they'd use OpenCL, but perhaps they do use it somewhere (maybe for drawing charts?)

And for the rest of us? (1)

Kenja (541830) | about 9 months ago | (#46113457)

Unclear if I can get a copy without all this unwanted bloat.

Re:And for the rest of us? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113519)

It may be unwanted bloat for the home user, but it's absolutely essential features in the corporate world. All it really needs is a decent component selection in the installer though to have it both ways.

Re:And for the rest of us? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113639)

Unclear if I can get a copy without all this unwanted bloat.

Yes, use vi for your documents. There's also a spreadsheet called sc, haven't tried it though.

Re:And for the rest of us? (3, Informative)

jedidiah (1196) | about 9 months ago | (#46114521)

>> Unclear if I can get a copy without all this unwanted bloat.
>
> Yes, use vi for your documents. There's also a spreadsheet called sc, haven't tried it though.

If it is a simple document, why not?

You also don't need the proprietary network effects and malware vectors associated with more 'feature rich" alternatives.

Re:And for the rest of us? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115377)

Unclear if I can get a copy without all this unwanted bloat.

Yes, use vi for your documents. There's also a spreadsheet called sc, haven't tried it though.

I use EMACS, you insensitive clod.

Re:And for the rest of us? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115545)

EMACS and unwanted bloat in the same thread? I sense an explosion is imminent...

OneNote (2)

camperdave (969942) | about 9 months ago | (#46113759)

What about OneNote? Anything about a Libre OneNote? It's the only thing keeping me on Windows.

Re:OneNote (4, Insightful)

JackieBrown (987087) | about 9 months ago | (#46114589)

Be honest... it will be something else holding you back once they have that.

It's a nice, moving, unattainable goalpost that people like to set up

Re:OneNote (1)

Razordude (3505695) | about 9 months ago | (#46115631)

To be honest, people don't like losing things when they don't have to. If you can't get the same software (or software with equivalent functionality) in Linux, you aren't gonna move. Linux's benefits (whatever they are) don't outweigh the tangible loss of feature-rich applications. Even I can't do it and I've been dabbling in Linux for over 15 years.

StarOffice 5.2 (1)

demon driver (1046738) | about 9 months ago | (#46114309)

If it'd still reliably run on 64-bit systems, my suggestion would be to try and get a copy of StarOffice 5.2, the ancestor. No version of OpenOffice[.org] or LibreOffice has met my demands as well yet. Unfortunately, it doesn't. So what I'm doing today is running StarOffice 5.2 on 32-bit systems, like my netbook, and OpenOffice 3.3 on 64-bit systems, which is the latest of the StarOffice descendants still capable of saving documents in StarOffice 5 compatible format. (StarOffice 5 binary formats are still fully readable with current versions of OpenOffice and LibreOffice, for that matter.)

Re:StarOffice 5.2 (1)

Nutria (679911) | about 9 months ago | (#46114823)

No version of OpenOffice[.org] or LibreOffice has met my demands as well yet.

What are those demands?

Re:StarOffice 5.2 (3, Funny)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about 9 months ago | (#46115935)

$20 grand and an escape helicopter.

How compatible is it? (0, Troll)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 9 months ago | (#46113487)

Can LibreOffice guarantee 100% compatibility (both read and write) with MS Office documents?

If the answer is no, then it doesn't matter how many other features are added, most businesses aren't going to use it. You can't risk the possibility that a PowerPoint slide in your quarterly board report will show up as garbage because of a compatibility issue.

Re:How compatible is it? (2, Insightful)

iggymanz (596061) | about 9 months ago | (#46113525)

logic fails you

if a business used LibreOffice, the board would be using LibreOffice Impress to view LibreOffice Impress documents and giving presentations with the PC hooked to the big screen running LibreOffice Impress.

Maybe some loaner using PowerPoint would have their slide looking like garbage in such a company....

Re:How compatible is it? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46114997)

logic fails you

Zealotry blinds you. An overwhelming majority of businesses currently use Microsoft Office products and therefore have their current collection of documents stored in Microsoft Office formats. Until LibreOffice can create, open, edit, save, or convert those formats with reliable accuracy, its adoption will be hindered significantly. Even assuming that a business had gone 100% LibreOffice, there's no guarantee any other business or individual they interact with would also be using LibreOffice, necessitating the need for compatibility with MS Office.

Re:How compatible is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46116023)

The fact that your piece of shit comment is currently +3, Insightful shows what a fucking circlejerk slashdot is when it comes to open source.

Re:How compatible is it? (0)

Karl Cocknozzle (514413) | about 9 months ago | (#46113531)

"PowerPoint" is a Microsoft Office phenomenon... If you standardized on LibreOffice you wouldn't be creating "powerpoints," and your board-room projector station would presumably also be running LibreOffice, making your concerns basically meaningless because you wouldn't be using PowerPoint to create the presentation, and you wouldn't be using PowerPoint to present the presentation. So why should I be worried, again?

And even if you "have to have" PowerPoint for some ungodly reason (it's a crutch for people who don't make good speeches or presentations--work on your skills don't just cling to the crutch/band-aid for your lack of those skills) you can buy one or two copies retail without signing the six-figure Microsoft enterprise agreement...

Re:How compatible is it? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113547)

Nobody can, at least until Microsoft opens up their entire API library. Until then, when someone gets close enough to endanger Microsoft's cash cow, they will change just enough stuff to keep them at arm's length. Repeat ad nauseam.

Re:How compatible is it? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113641)

Nobody can

Not even Microsoft, which is pretty funny. Transferring files between versions of MS Office or between Windows and Mac versions often results in garbage layouts/formatting. It's really quite sad on Microsoft's part. I worked years as an audio-visual tech to know that this is very true. When a client wanted do to a PowerPoint presentation with a laptop provided by us, we always had to ensure the versions matched.

Re:How compatible is it? (4, Informative)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 9 months ago | (#46113813)

Nobody can, at least until Microsoft opens up their entire API library. Until then, when someone gets close enough to endanger Microsoft's cash cow, they will change just enough stuff to keep them at arm's length. Repeat ad nauseam.

All of the MS Office file formats, both legacy binary and OOXML, are publicly documented. The binary documentation, I think, was released at the insistence of the European Union regulators.

Now, it is true that the formats are really badly designed and inelegant, and that there are a lot of MS Office "guts" spilling out of the specs. They are not easy to implement. But with enough time and effort, it should be doable. And MS is not introducing new breaking changes – to the contrary, they are finally introducing compliance with OOXML 'strict', which fully complies with the ISO standard. (MS Office 2010 can read 'strict' OOXML documents, and MS Office 2013 can both read and write them.)

Re:How compatible is it? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46114239)

The real answer. The code is the spec. Not even Microsoft can guarantee 100% backwards compatiblity. They only offer compatibility. The file format version for an Office product can only be read perfectly by the same version that created it, even down to the patch level sometimes. Every newer version offers compatiblity because the code in the new version isn't exactly 100% identical to the code in the original version.

If Office is made available on Linux Windows will get steamrolled.

The non-Microsoft office providers should all agree on a formal file format standards with compliance testing and a scripting language like VBscript and then start pushing that standard, but it will take years.

Re:How compatible is it? (2)

sconeu (64226) | about 9 months ago | (#46114325)

"All of the MS Office file formats, both legacy binary and OOXML, are publicly documented".

Great. Where's the explanation of "AutospaceLikeWord95"?

Re:How compatible is it? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46114799)

Right here. [microsoft.com]

Re:How compatible is it? (2)

armanox (826486) | about 9 months ago | (#46114781)

Sadly, the version of OOXML in 2007 (and I think 2010) is not the same as the released spec.

Re: How compatible is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115973)

just as predicted, as open source program attain the slightest complexity required, the fall apart. Libre Office can't even support java properly. They are already playing the blame game for their incompetence.
Stick to vi and a cli, you'll be fine.

Even MS Offic isn't 100% compatible with itself (3, Informative)

eladts (1712916) | about 9 months ago | (#46113557)

Anyone who tried to move files between different versions, system with different system languages or, if you are really daring, different platforms knows this.

Can MicroSoft guarantee compatibility then? (2)

dutchwhizzman (817898) | about 9 months ago | (#46113603)

MicroSoft can't guarantee compatibility with a lot of formats either, including older versions of their own formats. Any major upgrade or change is going to give compatibility and training/skill issues, regardless of what vendor you had or will go to. Sure, it'd be really nice if OpenOffice and/or LibreOffice would actually be able to fully work with at least current MicroSoft formats without messing up some of the formatting some of the time, but if you're looking beyond that, you'll be fine once you've migrated.

Re:Can MicroSoft guarantee compatibility then? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113851)

MicroSoft.

The capital S was deprecated decades ago, bro.

Re: Can MicroSoft guarantee compatibility then? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115883)

whining like a bitch about any variation of MS, M$, usoft, and all the rest never really was fashionable. It's just invariably, some wannabe faggot will whine, well, like a bitch.

Re:How compatible is it? (4, Informative)

gman003 (1693318) | about 9 months ago | (#46113645)

Even Microsoft Office does not guarantee 100% compatibility with older documents. And I've personally witnessed simple things breaking between MS Office on a Mac or on Windows.

When I dug through some very old Office 98 docs of mine a few years back, Office 2007 broke rather badly, but OpenOffice was able to read them. I'm sure it wasn't pixel-perfect, but it was readable and more-or-less as intended, unlike Office proper.

As far as trading between various offices, I've noticed more problems with Office For Mac than with LibreOffice. Granted, most people in my office are using either Google Docs, iWork or LibreOffice, but we get a fair number of outside docs that were made in MS Office.

For most uses of Word (glorified RTFs), everything is compatible. I've even had no issues going from AbiWord to MS Word. If you get crazy with auto-summaries or embedded docs, it might get problematic, but do you really use those? Presentations are much the same, although I've not worked with them nearly as much (because I do real work).

For spreadsheets, its a bit more hit-or-miss. If all you're doing is glorified CSVs, once again everything works, but the crazier your formulae get the more likely it will only work in one program.

Re: How compatible is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115861)

I've had issues historically with the printer selected (but that was office 9x days).

Re:How compatible is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113667)

So having switched to LibreOffice companies conference halls wont be updated because DOOM.... and this won't be checked by your it staff before important events because DOOM.... at worst you would have to print it as a PDF, or run it off a laptop machine with LibreOffice installed.

The real problem is the lock in cost of dealing with old systems built for the old version and everyday irritation of less important documents from partners. This is different for different organisations and at least some of this can be solved by making fixes in house or by a consulting company for a fee. With office pro costing less than £11 off £400 (more than the price of most business machines screen and all) you need to consider the cost more today than ever, so we will see in time....

Re:How compatible is it? (3, Interesting)

StuartHankins (1020819) | about 9 months ago | (#46113709)

Yes and no. Even between Office 2007 and 2010, documents don't always look the same... we have run into this for pretty simple documents. I have no idea why it's so ridiculously complicated that even the software provider can't get it right, but I'm guessing it has more to do with trying to intentionally hurt interoperability than anything else.

Call me a cynic, but I've been around for a very very long time and I've seen a lot of poor sportsmanship in the Microsoft camp.

The funny thing is now we're intentionally using older versions of MS Office simply because everyone hasn't learned the 2007 version yet, so what's the use of overloading everyone by going to the newest version every 2-3 years? The couple of users who will benefit can have the upgrade. The rest can have an upgrade every x versions.

Re:How compatible is it? (2)

MightyYar (622222) | about 9 months ago | (#46113737)

We manage to deal with the incompatibilities between different versions of Office, so I think we could handle LO/OO if my company chose to do so.

Re:How compatible is it? (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | about 9 months ago | (#46113865)

Okay if you wanna pull that trick then Microsoft Office fails also the list (not exhaustive) of things that can futz with getting a MSO file to work correctly

1 Different Fonts on the system
2 any difference in the default(or current) printer
3 version patch level and hotfix presence for MSO
4 Language version of MSO
5 Phase of Moon at both sites
6 presence of any addons (includes version numbers)
7 Applied Hotfixes/ Updates to Windows

in fact some folks have found that opening some MSO files works better in OO or LO

Re:How compatible is it? (1)

armanox (826486) | about 9 months ago | (#46114797)

Big one that breaks PowerPoint is different screen resolutions, especially if the aspect ratio is different.

Re:How compatible is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113891)

Can LibreOffice guarantee 100% compatibility (both read and write) with MS Office documents?

Can MS Office guarantee 100% compatibility (both read and write) with LibreOffice documents?

(I honestly want to know; I've been using StarOffice or one of its descendants since about the time it was bought by Sun. I export stuff to DOC or PDF if I need to share it, but it'd be nice to know if that's unnecessary.)

Re:How compatible is it? (1)

armanox (826486) | about 9 months ago | (#46114881)

I remember there being a plug-in (from Microsoft) to add Open Office support to Microsoft Office. I remember having it installed on my old laptop (Office 2007), and know I've used it with 2010. I can't answer what it does with spreadsheets or presentations, but normal text documents do just fine. (I don't see ODT in the SaveAs on my Mac running Office 2011)

Re:How compatible is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46114019)

Even Microsoft can't guarantee 100% compatibility with MS Office documents.

Re:How compatible is it? (2)

fast turtle (1118037) | about 9 months ago | (#46114219)

Even MS Office can not guarantee 100% compatibility with other versions of MS Office Documents. This is especially important to know if you are more then 2 generations behind (Office 2010) is the break point. I've had issues with docs from Office 2003 being screwed up by 2010 and those are local to my system. So if I have problems with formats from 2 generations before (office 2007 doesn't give me problems) then how in hell can you ensure that your latest Office 365 hasn't been updated to actually corrupt anything other then the latest version of Office-xxxx? This is how MS locks you into using the fucking products.

Re:How compatible is it? (1)

fermion (181285) | about 9 months ago | (#46115363)

The greatest thing I found about the OO.org distribution from a few years ago was that it would open MS Office document better than MS Office. People would come to me and say they could not open a MS Word document, I would pop it up in OO.org, save back in MS Word format, and they were good to go. I assume that since the OO and LO are the same base, that those capabilities are similar. I don't know because I only recently started looking at LibreOffice. I did download a couple years ago, but it crashed. Really the main reason I never used it is because the Libreoffice people seem to have an irrational hate of OO.org, and since OO.org has save my ass on so many occasions, I don't really have any time for those who feel the need to disrespect it instead of just compete. That said, the modern OO distribution does not seem to be able to deal with the modern MS Office files. I don't know if that is MS fighting back or OO/LO not being able to keep up.

Yes, better than Word version X to Word version Y (1)

raymorris (2726007) | about 9 months ago | (#46115465)

Yes, LibreOffice is Word compatible. Specifically, it scores better than Word 2011 on compatibility with three of the four .doc formats. See the Microsoft article "What happens when I save a Word 2007 document in the OpenDocument Text format?"

I experienced this myself when my mother couldn't open any of her old documents on her Win7 computer with MS Word. I opened them in LibreOffice for her and converted them to the latest version the .docx format.

Re:How compatible is it? (1)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | about 9 months ago | (#46115829)

No, it cannot, but then neither can MS Office.

Second rates join together (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113505)

To form a second-rate club of second rates!

Universal Disgust (3, Interesting)

gr4nf (1348501) | about 9 months ago | (#46113529)

The only issue (some on Slashdot may say benefit ) is the lack of a ribbon UI.

The majority of Office power users I know (mostly lawyers) were disgusted by the replacement of the menu-driven UI with the infamous ribbon. It's not just left-brained Slashdotters that prefer an easily navigable interface.

Re:Universal Disgust (2, Interesting)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 9 months ago | (#46113695)

I am in the minority here I guess.

I did not like the menus in office 2003 as things became nested and it kept taking up time and felt like Windows 8 closed door syndrome to use an advanced function.

It took a week to adjust and probably a month to get really proficient. Hit the alt key if you like shortcuts? See the numbers and letters? You can use the ribbon without a mouse for any function!

I also like the ribbon because I can visually see the changes before selecting. It is really handy when cutting and pasting from browsers and word as different styles get interpreted differently. I can preview just with a mouse hover etc.

Some old people though do not like change and I can understand. I am not saying this is all the case with the hate. But I am visual so to me it makes sense as I am not contextual. Some who are might have to re-adjust a lot harder.

People now use more features out of Office than before which means by all measures it is a success. It comes down to attitude to learn new things and realize not all change is bad. While I hate Metro, I do like the ribbon and view menus as old school and messy if you have too many fuctions. I do not want to go back in time and lock things the way they were.

Re:Universal Disgust (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113773)

The ribbon is crap for the majority of users, especially if you have a small screen. When writing docs, most of the time should be spent on writing content, not formatting. The old style menu system reflects this. With the ribbon 95% of the time it's a waste of space which takes away from actual useful space for text editing.

Power users (like you I'd assume) might have a point, but 99% of MS Office users are not power users, and essentially use it as a typewriter with spell check.

Re:Universal Disgust (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46114167)

So, click the button that hides the ribbon and gets it out of the way?

Re:Universal Disgust (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113703)

libreoffice has sidebars (in experimental state), those are much nicer than those ribbon UI stuff. Never learned to use those ribbon's...

Re:Universal Disgust (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113933)

Sidebar is kind of a dumb name. It should be something snazzy that really captures the essence of the feature. Like palette or ribbon. Ribbon, yeah. Because it is the same things as the Office Ribbon, just vertical with collapsing panels that hide things even better than original versions of the Office Ribbon did.

Re:Universal Disgust (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115639)

Sidebar is kind of a dumb name. It should be something snazzy that really captures the essence of the feature. Like palette or ribbon. Ribbon, yeah. Because it is the same things as the Office Ribbon, just vertical with collapsing panels that hide things even better than original versions of the Office Ribbon did.

How about "charms" ?

Re:Universal Disgust (3, Insightful)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | about 9 months ago | (#46114235)

Sidebars are a much better idea on a widescreen anyway ; the ribbon just takes up valuable vertical space that's at a premium since people stopped making LCD panels for computer users.

Re:Universal Disgust (1)

kyrsjo (2420192) | about 9 months ago | (#46113757)

Totally agree. Lack of "ribbon" UI (or at least not forcing it on the user) is a feature, not something I would miss.

Re:Universal Disgust (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113801)

The ribbon in Office:Mac 2011 and Office 2013 is much better. The organization is much cleaner and more logical. My biggest gripe with the previous versions was that the things you needed tended to move around a change sizes with the window size. For example, a frequently used button might be big and prominent until you resize the window a little, and then it loses its icon and becomes a tiny button just big enough for the text. Or, worse, it disappears from the ribbon and becomes part of a drop down menu attached to a different button. That seems to happen much less often for frequently used items in the new layout.

Besides, for me, the ribbon is a tiny thing compared the problems I had with Libre-/OpenOffice when I had to write a book of lesson plans that ended up being about 100 pages. By the time I hit 25 pages, Writer would just crash when opening the document. Maybe it was just the Mac version, I don't know, but I haven't looked back. Free is great unless the free software doesn't work.

YMMV.

GPU acceleration for other platforms (4, Interesting)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 9 months ago | (#46113543)

I submitted the story.

While ATI has listed LibreOffice for one of the few programs that use Mantle [maximumpc.com] I can not find any other information on this?

This begs to differ if LibreOffice uses GPU directwrite or OpenGL and does it work on platforms than Windows. Of course this is not critical unless you do multimedia heavy presentations I am somewhat curious. I wonder if anyone who develops it can care to comment?

Also I use LibreOffice in conjunction with MS Office. I can't afford publisher and it is nice to use it to repair office documents that MS Office says are corrupt. This is a highly recommended upgrade even if you use MS Office full time.

Re:GPU acceleration for other platforms (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113763)

I hope you didn't use LibreOffice as a grammar checker in your response :)

Re:GPU acceleration for other platforms (1)

Nivag064 (904744) | about 9 months ago | (#46113825)

More to the point: if he did, did he take any notice of the suggestions!

Re:GPU acceleration for other platforms (2)

edxwelch (600979) | about 9 months ago | (#46114349)

I think Mantle is only used by games. Libreoffice is probably using OpenCL. Maybe the poster got confused because the update includes both things.

Re:GPU acceleration for other platforms (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46114645)

HSA actually.

Re:GPU acceleration for other platforms (2)

0123456 (636235) | about 9 months ago | (#46114725)

I think Mantle is only used by games. Libreoffice is probably using OpenCL. Maybe the poster got confused because the update includes both things.

I'm still trying to understand exactly what kind of obscene spreadhseet abuse would actually require GPU accelerated math.

Re:GPU acceleration for other platforms (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 9 months ago | (#46115635)

https://www.libreoffice.org/do... [libreoffice.org]

A new engine for Calc - massive parallel calculations of formula cells using GPU via OpenCL are now possible thanks to our new formular interpreter.

Indeed it's openCL.

Yet... (3, Insightful)

edibobb (113989) | about 9 months ago | (#46113769)

... you still cannot perform a search and replace using manual page breaks. A simple shortcoming, but it keeps me from being able to dump MS Office.

Re:Yet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115047)

So submit a patch.

Re:Yet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115573)

for both kinds, ^p and ^13

Re:Yet... (2)

Razordude (3505695) | about 9 months ago | (#46115583)

Ah yes, it's just that easy isn't it?

You have to (a) be a programmer and be sufficiently skilled in understanding the LO architecture, and (b) create said feature and hope it's accepted and brought into the mainline. With that kind of work it's much easier to just use MS Office and get on with your life. Which is what most people do.

The guy was just complaining about a particular feature that he finds critical enough to prevent moving from MS Office to LO. Apparently simply expressing this issue brings out the idiots.

Re:Yet... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115651)

... you still cannot perform a search and replace using manual page breaks. A simple shortcoming, but it keeps me from being able to dump MS Office.

You can use this [libreoffice.org] extension, no?

Re:Yet... (1)

edibobb (113989) | about 9 months ago | (#46115943)

No. You can search but not replace with that extension.

It still doesn't get the job done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113811)

Open Office/LibreOffice are both so obsessed with competing against MS that they, just like Microsoft, have no interest at all in people who actually write narratives for a living. As a desktop publishing package, LibreOffice is constantly improving. As a tool for corporate administrative assistants, it may very well be wonderful. As a useful tool for someone who actually writes stories, it is becoming increasingly more of a pain in the rump that it is worth. It is a painful truth that Word 2000 (shudder) is honestly more writer friendly than anything, commercial or open source, that has been put out since then. FYI, just in case someone mentions yWrite5 and/or Scrivener (someone always does) they are not writing programs. They are organizing programs. RoughDraft, and some others like Jarte, can be used for small stories or articles. But they are old and not being maintained. Plus they lack the necessary fonts and/or other tools for modern submission requirements. Many of us would gladly invent something for ourselves, but we are wordsmiths. We don't program. So we're screwed.

Re:It still doesn't get the job done (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 9 months ago | (#46113849)

Open Office/LibreOffice are both so obsessed with competing against MS that they, just like Microsoft, have no interest at all in people who actually write narratives for a living. As a desktop publishing package, LibreOffice is constantly improving. As a tool for corporate administrative assistants, it may very well be wonderful. As a useful tool for someone who actually writes stories, it is becoming increasingly more of a pain in the rump that it is worth. It is a painful truth that Word 2000 (shudder) is honestly more writer friendly than anything, commercial or open source, that has been put out since then. FYI, just in case someone mentions yWrite5 and/or Scrivener (someone always does) they are not writing programs. They are organizing programs. RoughDraft, and some others like Jarte, can be used for small stories or articles. But they are old and not being maintained. Plus they lack the necessary fonts and/or other tools for modern submission requirements. Many of us would gladly invent something for ourselves, but we are wordsmiths. We don't program. So we're screwed.

Just curious, what specific features are needed for writing prose that aren't available in MS Office or LibreOffice? What does Word 2000 do right that later versions do wrong?

Re:It still doesn't get the job done (1)

edibobb (113989) | about 9 months ago | (#46113957)

Some simple things, such as performing a search and replace using manual page breaks. A simple shortcoming, but it keeps me from being able to dump MS Office. Also, many frequently used functions, while still there, are less "available", meaning they require more keystrokes to use. This costs time. Also, if you can't write without the mouse, it takes too long.

Re:It still doesn't get the job done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46114265)

Use macros then. If you're such an advanced user, you should be using them anyway.

Re:It still doesn't get the job done (3, Interesting)

bzipitidoo (647217) | about 9 months ago | (#46114307)

Guess the world shouldn't have thrown Word Perfect under the bus?

Or, how about Word Star? There was a time when its editing keystrokes were widely adopted, like in Borland's integrated development environments.

Or, why not use LaTeX? Admittedly, it's a bit of a learning curve, but you can just bang out text, and worry about formatting later, even change it around relatively easily.

Re:It still doesn't get the job done (2)

Crayz9000 (2783019) | about 9 months ago | (#46114483)

Regex support in the Find/Replace dialog works in LibreOffice. It took a moment to familiarize myself with their implementation, but it works, and it's more powerful than anything else. Try doing that in MS Office.

Re:It still doesn't get the job done (1)

the_cosmocat (1009803) | about 9 months ago | (#46115389)

> It took a moment to familiarize myself with their implementation
hhhuuummmmmm... it seems to be a standard regex though... https://help.libreoffice.org/C... [libreoffice.org]

Re:It still doesn't get the job done (4, Insightful)

kriebz (258828) | about 9 months ago | (#46114571)

It took me 10 minutes of thinking and experimenting to figure out what you were talking about. Why would you have a phrase spanning a manual page break? Why are you doing formatting during authorship? Maybe your process needs to change to reflect the tools. Not the creative one, but the technical procedure you use to save, recall, and share your writing. And Word and Writer are both jack of all trades, master of none programs anyway. There's an article I can't find about how adding presentation features to the editor is a mistake. Not that your text shouldn't look pretty while you type it, but that you should never type extra spaces to make it look _just_right_. Or page breaks.

Re:It still doesn't get the job done (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115817)

Ah yes, the "YouDontNeedThat" response:

http://www.tmrepository.com/tr... [tmrepository.com]

It doesn't matter what you think he should be doing instead - if MS Office allows him to accomplish things using a particular workflow and LO requires change for no obvious benefit, then MS Office is superior.

It's absolutely essential for people to realize that good software bends to the user, not the other way around. Proprietary developers seems to know this better than open source ones apparently.

Re:It still doesn't get the job done (1)

kesuki (321456) | about 9 months ago | (#46114719)

i am curious, wouldn't http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/ [gnu.org] emacs do everything you need? you said mouse less editing, and there are a lot of functions that can be added to emacs, through it's lisp programs. and easily modified nature.

i write in my spare time, but only for my own needs and i use the mouse. i have used emacs for some of it, but i like the bloated office suites a little better and since my time isn't rationed and i don't find and replace much at all.

Re:It still doesn't get the job done (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 9 months ago | (#46115669)

Just curious, what specific features are needed for writing prose that aren't available in MS Office or LibreOffice? What does Word 2000 do right that later versions do wrong?

The talent and inspiration modules?

Yet it still looks like a turd (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46113863)

Honestly will it ever look like a modern application? Office 95 wants its UI back.

Re: Yet it still looks like a turd (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115357)

Focuswriter: write something. Save as *.rtf. Send to editor; job done. Why bog down and bloat - it's a typewriter.

GPU support is the least thing I'd miss in LOffice (1)

ffkom (3519199) | about 9 months ago | (#46114977)

I use LibreOffice a lot and actually like it, not as much as FrameMaker (before Adobe layed of its creators), but it's still a good software. But if a fairy came by and offered me to realize a wish list with up to a thousand entries regarding Libre Office improvements, I would still not even come close to wishing GPU support for it...

Re:GPU support is the least thing I'd miss in LOff (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115585)

Because the OpenCL support is used in the spreadsheet to speedup Calc functions and you've mention FrameMaker in the same breath as LibreOffice as in your talking Writer features.

Nobody would add GPU support to their wishlist, but I'm sure your wishlist would include things like fast rendering of charts, better looking graphics, etc. I.e. some of your wishes would translate to wanting better graphics support, which could translate into using the GPU.

Re:GPU support is the least thing I'd miss in LOff (1)

ffkom (3519199) | about 9 months ago | (#46115823)

It would never occur to me to do calculations demanding enough to benefit from GPU usage by using a spreadsheet application. And even if a GPU can accelerate the rendering of some 3D graphics in a document, I would rather want the application to do such rendering in the background once and retain the rendered image in a cache while I scroll around in the document - so that rendering speed would not really matter a lot.

Fcuk office, I use LaTeX (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115053)

Fcuk office, I use LaTeX.

WISYWIG is the WORST invention since they include too many fonts, too many colours and they can't even get references and formatting copy and paste right. Not to mention LibreOffice has an interface dating back to the 90's.

If you really insist on using Office and it's clones in the WISYWIG world, I suggest you AT LEAST read TYPESETTING best practices instead of using the equivalent of CRAYONS to typeset documents.

Office and it's clones should have some kind of Typeset mode to be taken seriously.

Re:Fcuk office, I use LaTeX (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115961)

I love Computer Modern (no, really, I do) and use it in all of my Word documents. Does that count?

I'm with you, though. It's like airplanes. They are just the worst invention since they give people the option of doing too many things that cars were not designed for. They can't even compete on a F1 circuit or get you to the grocery store. If you are really going to insist on being a pilot, I suggest you AT LEAST read The Art and Science of Grand Prix driving instead of using the equivalent of a bird to do your F1 racing. Airplanes should have some kind of road mode to be taken seriously.

Seriously, WTF are you rambling about? By the way, it's WYSIWYG, not WISYWIG (Christ, it's an acronym, say the phrase out loud), you dyslexic LaTeX elitist.

Github Integration anyone? (1)

StonyCreekBare (540804) | about 9 months ago | (#46115443)

As someone using LibreOffice to write a huge manuscript that has been in development for several years, I would like some really good change control tools. I may be dense, and not quite understanding the problem, but it seems to me that integrating LibreOffice with Github to support distributed editing of huge projects, and version control, would be a natural... Am I just to ignorant to understand why this isn't being done? -Stony

Wikipedia entry on Mantle (1)

storkus (179708) | about 9 months ago | (#46115731)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... [wikipedia.org]

Mantle is a low-level API specification developed by AMD as an alternative to Direct3D and OpenGL, primarily for use on the PC platform.

Emphasis mine. I can't be the only one seeing this as a bad strategy (versus pushing this into Openxx).

The elephant in the room is (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#46115759)

Outlook. Without it you can forget any kind of migration. It's really AD that makes it indispensable, so don't bother suggesting anything without it.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?