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!

Sun Denies StarOffice on Mac OS X

pudge posted about 12 years ago | from the eh-who-needs-it dept.

OS X 249

mattworld1 writes, "MacCentral is reporting that while development of OpenOffice for Mac OS X will continue, Sun is denying that a version of StarOffice is in the works. This is unfortunate, as it would be nice for Mac OS X users to have a good alternative to the expensive Microsoft Office." Apparently it's not all bad news, as VValdo writes, "The recent announcement of a collaboration from Apple/Sun on a Java-based version of StarOffice for Mac OS X shocked and angered many of the OpenOffice developers who had been left totally in the dark. After two days of intense programming on a proof of concept, they announced a first look at Open Office in Aqua." Neat!

cancel ×

249 comments

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

FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3987989)

Suck it.

PEDOPHILE ARE EVIL (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988300)

http://www.kfor.com/Global/story.asp?S=874963

i hate pedophile

FP!!!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3987993)

Fp!!!! Oooooh yeah!!! Fp baby!!! Fp!!! Fppp!!11

Suck It (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988001)

Suck it, Loser.
Gotta be quicker than that.

Re:FP!!!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988021)

seems like the "first look" link got slashdotted within 1-2 posts, I wonder who got "first look" instead of "first post"...

Has anyone seen Sun's stocks? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3987995)

Lets face it, Sun is going to be concentrating on projects that will GENERATE REVENUE.

Yeah, Star Office for Mac woulda been great, but it wouldn't generate the revenue they need.

Remember, folks, Open Source is great unless you want to make money.

Re:Has anyone seen Sun's stocks? (1)

Narchie Troll (581273) | about 12 years ago | (#3988293)

Now, if Star Office was open source, you might have a point. It's Open Office that is open source. Star Office is a closed source commercial product.

Wow. WIPO! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3987997)

Wow. Allow me to present... The WIPO Troll [50megs.com] alive and well.

Old story. (1, Redundant)

peterdaly (123554) | about 12 years ago | (#3988005)

This was on other sites yesterday. Isn't that scary that that is considered "old" now adays?

Some reported didn't understand the difference between a "Sun Project" and a Sun employee working on the OpenOffice project. Simple as that. Good news is the publicity made by the mishap sped development along quite it bit as thousands of new users and developers tried the app for the first time.

-Pete

Re:Old story. (0)

mAIsE (548) | about 12 years ago | (#3988440)

how can i help !!?!?!

I cant code much at all, but im willing to do anything else!!

OS X already has an alternative (-1, Redundant)

Jonny Ringo (444580) | about 12 years ago | (#3988008)

Its called emacs, join, sort, grep and cut.

Learn these tools my Mac friends and you will not have to shell out $500 for MS Office. :-)

Re:OS X already has an alternative (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988026)

Yeah, and grandma will have a great time trying to understand that.

Lets face it, people buy Office for the userfriendliness.

Re:OS X already has an alternative (0)

vidalsasoon (555891) | about 12 years ago | (#3988030)

emacs, join, sort, grep and cut is an alternative if you go back in time to 1985.

Re:OS X already has an alternative (3, Interesting)

Lev13than (581686) | about 12 years ago | (#3988074)

That may be fine for the 1% of computer users out there who actually use the tools. It's far more important to let joe-average user (teacher, student, homemaker, small business owner, retiree etc...) know that there is no real reason to spend extra money on microsoft office products. There are lots of viable alternatives out there, be it StarOffice, AppleWorks or whatever.

In my view the biggest problem is the lack of standards in document formatting these days. For example, if people would simply save word processor files as .rtf instead of .doc we'd all be a lot better off. File convertors are a clumsy non-solution - you don't see us 'converting' e-mails written in Outlook so we can read them in .vi, so why do we continue to operate this way with text files? The proprietary features of Microsoft products (PowerPoint, complex text manipulation in Word etc...) are only really required by a small percentage of business users, in which case the money spent is a good investment.

Re:OS X already has an alternative (1)

Jonny Ringo (444580) | about 12 years ago | (#3988161)

I agree, the average joe does need to be educated that they don't need fancy $500 MS Software.

I don't believe that the tools I mentioned are hard to learn. The average home user isn't using spread sheets and database software, but you could do all of that with the tools I mentioned any way.

People feel they need super office apps, I just want to point out that if they don't :-)

Re:OS X already has an alternative (3, Interesting)

mr. marbles (19251) | about 12 years ago | (#3988095)

you forgot to add LaTeX, some people actually have to format their work.

Re:OS X already has an alternative (1)

Valdrax (32670) | about 12 years ago | (#3988236)

Cute. That's a nice solution if you don't need anything like tables or fonts or any of the rest of "that fru-fru crap." While you're at it, maybe you'd like to suggest a replacement for replace Excel and Powerpoint too.

Re:OS X already has an alternative (2, Insightful)

rampant mac (561036) | about 12 years ago | (#3988271)

Sorry to say, but for professionals who require it, there's no substitute for MS Office.

It's like telling a graphic artist who relys on Photoshop to just "Gimp" their next project...

Besides, most Mac users barely use the command line...

Telling my Grandma to "emacs, join, sort, grep and cut" when all she wants to do is WRITE A LETTER will probably require a change of her adult diapers.

Jeez (1)

sjgman9 (456705) | about 12 years ago | (#3988009)

Can they just make up their minds?!?

While they are at it, Sun should work with Apple to make a much faster JVM in OSX. Having Java 2 version 1.4 would be a big help.

Java is their crown jewel, but a cocoa-ized version of Star Office would be kick ass.

Re:Jeez (3, Informative)

ProofOfConcept (567087) | about 12 years ago | (#3988165)

Can they just make up their minds?!?

They had their minds made up from the beginning. C|net, on the other hand, didn't. [newsfactor.com]

Re:Jeez (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988208)

Jaguar includes Java 2 1.4 you see the shared libs being built the first time it boots...

Java based Office... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988012)

Now, before people start railing on "how much memory this takes", or "how slow it will be" because its an app in Java, may I suggest you run over to Borlands site and tryout JBuilder. Most developers think its a C++ app, when, in actuality, it is a Java app.

And no, its not slow, and no, it doesn't have a major memory footprint.

Re:Java based Office... (-1, Flamebait)

thufir (129668) | about 12 years ago | (#3988121)

Too bad that JBuilder isn't 100% java.
They didn't use pure swing for the GUI! They wrote their own native widgets for each platform JBuilder supports (osx, windoze, linux...).

Re:Java based Office... (1)

AdamInParadise (257888) | about 12 years ago | (#3988170)

You're thinking about Eclipse, which does use SWT instead of AWT. JBuilder is 100% Java. Borland claims that they did the Mac OS X port in 3 days...

Re:Java based Office... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988206)

I ran the unix version of jbuilder on a Mac before the Mac release. It is 100% pure java.

Re:Java based Office... (5, Informative)

betis70 (525817) | about 12 years ago | (#3988369)

Well this post would be accurate for JBuilder 3.5. I believe earlier versions were in C++.

However, since JBuilder 4, it is 100% Java (they are now on JB7). Perhaps you haven't used JBuilder since 2000, which of course gets you a +1 Informative on slashdot.

They'd rather give SO to Apple (5, Interesting)

JHromadka (88188) | about 12 years ago | (#3988029)

From this C|Net article [com.com] : "I don't want to sell StarOffice for OS X," [Tony Siress, Sun's senior director of desktop marketing solutions] said. "I want Apple to bundle it. I'll give them the code. I'd love it if I could get the team at Apple to do joint development and they distribute it at no cost--that it's their product. Nobody makes a product more beautiful on Apple than Apple." Perhaps Apple could rework AppleWorks to incorporate Sun's work.

Clarification (5, Insightful)

Nomad7674 (453223) | about 12 years ago | (#3988035)

My understanding is not that the StarOffice story was materially WRONG, but that it was a bit distorted.

Essentially, Star and Apple programmers have been working with the OpenOffice developers on getting out a version of OpenOffice (which the original reporter confused with StarOffice, the commercial version of OpenOffice) for MacOS X. But it is still under the aegis of OpenOffice and will be a called OpenOffice and will not be sold by Sun. It was never an official Sun-sponsored initiative and no one was given a paid position to support a MacOS X version. But Sun employees did some work, Apple employees did some work, and the StarOffice team provided informational help on the structure of OpenOffice, when asked.

This distorted reporting has spawned a lot of scathing commentary on all sides. Shows that having the right facts in the wrong order can be as bad as having the wrong facts, as far as the community is concerned.

Re:Clarification (1)

ProofOfConcept (567087) | about 12 years ago | (#3988187)

Essentially, Star and Apple programmers have been working with the OpenOffice developers on getting out a version of OpenOffice.

No, they haven't. The project is being done completely by volunteers.

Read the parent comment again... (2, Informative)

Simon Carr (1788) | about 12 years ago | (#3988251)

I believe the original poster stated that the Sun and Apple programmers that worked on it were volunteering time (not getting paid).

I don't know who works for who on the dayjob side but it wouldn't particularly surprise me if employees from Apple and Sun were contributing.

If you look at The about page [openoffice.org] It's clear there is participation from at least Sun employees.

I think it's cool. I like OpenOffice. If people are looking for an alternative to MS Office, that's one of your better bets.

It must be true! (2)

Dutchmaan (442553) | about 12 years ago | (#3988048)

After all.. what company would deny (lie about) working on a project that's in early development!?

Reminds me of the Bungie denials about Microsoft only days before the buyout was announced.

Appleworks (1)

gypsyx (128424) | about 12 years ago | (#3988055)

Appleworks is a good alternative! Appleworks has everything I need in an office suite. Plus, it's not buggy like Star Ofice or slow like MS Office X.

Re:Appleworks (1)

rindeee (530084) | about 12 years ago | (#3988101)

Buggy like StarOffice? You've used SO on a Mac then? Wow...way ahead of me. Myself, I've only used it on my WinTel and *nix boxes, and haven't ran into a hitch yet.

Re:Appleworks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988111)

For those not amongst the faithful, how well (or not) does Appleworks read/write the MS Office file formats?

Re:Appleworks (1)

piggy (5857) | about 12 years ago | (#3988153)

I haven't had any problems with AppleWorks 6.1.2 reading .doc files. However, .xls files are a different story. If the .xls has a lot of macros or even uses multiple cheets, it often imports all funny like. Note that formulas are imported, it's just VB macros which don't work so well.

In my mind, the lack of multiple sheets in AppleWorks is a big deal.

That said, I haven't had trouble with the majority of Windows (or Mac) MS Office created files.

Russell

Re:Appleworks (-1)

BattleCat (244240) | about 12 years ago | (#3988215)

Oh, yeah, you know, .xls files are cheating all the time on us, mere users. My (former) wife lost two days of financial work due to xls was broken all the way down after sudden Win2k crash.
And I told 'er - "make backups..."
Now she's studying linux extensively :-)

Re:Appleworks (2)

Valdrax (32670) | about 12 years ago | (#3988277)

Not well. It always screws up something about formatting when I import documents -- especially if you use the odd tab settings that Word likes to auto-format your documents with. I find that it doesn't do formatting of text around embedded images well, nor does it handle footnotes 100% correctly. However, with the exception of the tab settings crap, I find that it usually only takes about half a minute per page to fix imported work.

I would love a port of OpenOffice to the Mac, but I'd rather see it done using native APIs rather than have yet another half-assed attempt at a port of a Win32/UNIX app via Java. Give me speed and native system color-correction and font-smoothing!

Re:Appleworks (1)

simpl3x (238301) | about 12 years ago | (#3988192)

i have osx loaded on my son's ibook (g3/600) with appleworks... it is quite fast, stable, and plays well with the other apps--word.

Re:Appleworks (3, Funny)

daddymac (244954) | about 12 years ago | (#3988417)


it is quite fast, stable, and plays well with the other apps--word.
To my mama?

Slashdotted soon for sure... (3)

peterdaly (123554) | about 12 years ago | (#3988056)

There are more screenshots, but again, have patience with and mercy on the connection!

That's never a good sign on a site slashdot links to. I saw one blury screenshot (stopped the page load after a couple minutes.)

That server's toast for sure. Anyone have a higher bandwidth mirror of the screenshots?

-Pete

Re:Slashdotted soon for sure... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988265)

Ed P is working on getting at least the images to a faster box. Its a on a 10kbit/sec upstream link for God's sake.

Re:Slashdotted soon for sure... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988314)

http://www.iceni.org/~peterlin/first_aqua.html

Ahhh Poor mac users NOT! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988071)

Lets see. Mac users are supposedly better edumacated then us other lusers. Let them pay for the expensive M$ office suite. They deserve what they get.

Re:Ahhh Poor mac users NOT! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988454)

Fuck you, man. Some of us will take ANYTHING to not have to buy an MS product. I suffer through Appleworks just to be able to read friggin' .doc files without MS Office.

What I'm wondering is..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988076)

Who the hell is pudge???

Re:What I'm wondering is..... (1)

hether (101201) | about 12 years ago | (#3988136)

To quote pudge.net, the link from his name:

I work for OSDN (Open Source Development Network), a division VA Software, working on the Slash code and editing stories for the Apple section of Slashdot.

Re:What I'm wondering is..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988266)

Who the hell is pudge???

He's just another Slashdot pudge facker.

Proof of concept... (2)

ashitaka (27544) | about 12 years ago | (#3988080)

That announcing a "First Look" at something "Neat" for geeks will result in an instantaneous Slashdotting.

What would be great (4, Insightful)

bogie (31020) | about 12 years ago | (#3988087)

Is that if Apple bundled OpenOffice with OSX. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't. This would make OSX even more compelling. It would also allow Apple to tell MS to shove that carrot they dangle over Apple where the sun don't shine. They are already overcharging their customers already, why not charge $10 more per machine to cover tech support costs for OpenOffice. They by this fall with Redhat and Apple including OpenOffice we would actually start to see some market share. If we are ever going to get out from under MS's thumb we have to start somewhere. Next is to port Evolution to windows, and Mac and get a free exchange plugin going.

Re:What would be great (3, Funny)

MattHaffner (101554) | about 12 years ago | (#3988147)

It would also allow Apple to tell MS to shove that carrot they dangle over Apple where the sun don't shine.
You mean where Sun does shine? :P

Of course the way Apple's operating these days, it would be Aquified, renamed iOffice, bundled (but require 10.2 of course), and be free for a year or so. After that, they would announce that you can now only save your documents to your iDisk, which of course costs $100/yr now.

Sigh...

mh, long-time, but now severely cynical Mac-head...

Re:What would be great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988176)

"overcharging" in a capitalist system means that people stop buying whatever you're offering. If Office is selling, then by definition they're not overcharging.

If Office continues to sell for such a high price when StarOffice and OpenOffice and AppleWorks are available, that says a lot about the quality of those alternatives.

A buggy, ugly, almost-compatible bunch of amateur bloatware like OpenOffice isn't going to make MacOS X any more compelling. And $10 extra per machine? Oh, an Open Source tax. Remember, that's a good kind of tax, unlike the bad Microsoft Windows kind of tax.

It's amazing to see an Open Source communist like yourself pretend to want something like market share... is it just that misery loves company?

Re:What would be great (4, Insightful)

divec (48748) | about 12 years ago | (#3988258)

"overcharging" in a capitalist system means that people stop buying whatever you're offering. If Office is selling, then by definition they're not overcharging.
I can only be glad that you're (presumably) not in charge of enforcing ant-trust law.

Re:What would be great (1)

hondo77 (324058) | about 12 years ago | (#3988186)

Reality check time: OpenOffice is not a threat to Microsoft Office. It might be nice to think that it is and in the distant future it might be but as of right now, no way. Besides, I'm happy with that other alternative to Office: AppleWorks. Okay, it's not a package-by-package alternative but my needs are fairly simple and it gets the job done (except for AutoCalculate).

Re:What would be great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988301)

This would make OSX even more compelling. It would also allow Apple to tell MS to shove that carrot they dangle over Apple where the sun don't shine.

Until OS X (including Aqua) is ported to the x86 architecture Apple can take it and shove it where the sun don't shine for all I care. I'll stick with Linux. Now, it'd certainly be nice to have a pretty interface for Linux compared to the shite like Gnome and KDE but we shouldn't hold our breath.

It would be great (1)

Damek (515688) | about 12 years ago | (#3988351)

if Apple bundled OpenOffice with OSX. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't.
It sure would be neat (and I don't even own a Mac). But I can think of at least one thing that, while it may not be "a reason why they shouldn't" bundle OpenOffice, it's certainly a big consideration: they'd have to provide support. With MS Office, I imagine users with support questions get help from Microsoft. With an Apple-bundeled OpenOffice, Apple would have to have a team to handle support requests.

Quartz Open Office... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988093)

They had a quartz version of open office before this mess came out (alpha mind you based pre 1.0). Nothing new on that front other than it now has an aqua theme.

Won't be any good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988107)

Sure, some folks are trying to port it over to the Mac, but let's face facts, the port won't be any good. The better Open Source programmers concentrate on creating programs for Linux platforms with a much larger market share than Macintosh (take away the number of machines they've dumped into schools and they must have less that a 1% market share).

This project, due to the second team programmers attracted to it, will fall apart quicker than the average teenage boy's SourceForge game.

Posting Stories without checking facts... (5, Interesting)

jaaron (551839) | about 12 years ago | (#3988114)

The whole "problem" here has nothing to do with Sun or Apple, but it has everything to do with CNET running an inaccurate story that was picked up by the other "news" sites like Newsforge and Slashdot, thus furthering the rumors. This in turn created quite a fuss with the OpenOffice programmers who thought it would have been nice for Sun to tell them directly rather than getting the word through a news story.

The really interesting part of this little mixup is how quickly misinformation travels. While this episode might not be all that serious in the grand scale of things, I wouldn't be surprised if one day this same sort of mix up (ie- online news sites reporting some rumor story that spreads like fire through blogs and other online portals) will create a real problem or crisis. You watch. Information (thankfully) travels much faster and more freely these days, but that means the consumer of the information must pay more attention to filter out fact from fiction.

For those looking for more facts, check out the FAQ at [openoffice.org]
OpenOffice.org about the OS X port.

Re:Posting Stories without checking facts... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988162)

http://download.microsoft.com/download/win2000plat form/SP/SP3/NT5/EN-US/w2ksp3.exe

Re:Posting Stories without checking facts... (2)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | about 12 years ago | (#3988207)


The really interesting part of this little mixup is how quickly misinformation travels. While this episode might not be all that serious in the grand scale of things, I wouldn't be surprised if one day this same sort of mix up (ie- online news sites reporting some rumor story that spreads like fire through blogs and other online portals) will create a real problem or crisis.
I figured this was exactly how the stock market worked. Or, at least, how it worked in the hayday of day-traders, online news and 'investment' gossip forums... and clicky-clicky friendly online tool sets.

Re:Posting Stories without checking facts... (1)

captredballs (71364) | about 12 years ago | (#3988254)

No kidding. Isn't it funny how the western economy gets more and more fake everyday?

Market forces are remarkably similar to daytime soap operas except that the soaps are written and controlled by a small group of people... oh fuck.

We're all just pawns, aren't we? Shit. At least they give us beer to make us stupid enough to not notice the fact that... that uh... hey, is that the 2002 Explorer? Wow man, I bet Sarah will come back to you when she sees that shit. Does it have a TV inside?

Have you fed your Illuminati lately?

ThinkFree Office (1)

mssymrvn (15684) | about 12 years ago | (#3988126)

While not free (as in beer or speech) ThinkFree [thinkfree.com] Office is an alternative to Office.X. And it's only US$50. Of course, it's quite slow (Java-based) but it supports the MS file formats that I've thrown at it (Word and Excel v.X) and is quite stable. Of course, I've already sold my soul to Office.X but ThinkFree Office *is* a decent alternative.

Re:ThinkFree Office (3, Funny)

zangdesign (462534) | about 12 years ago | (#3988204)

Java-based AND slow? This is a recommendation?

There will be StarOffice... (1, Troll)

thrillbert (146343) | about 12 years ago | (#3988131)

It's just that it's going to come in 78 3 1/2 inch floppies.

Of course, since Mac's do not come with floppies any more, this is going to be quite a challange to get it installed on a non-networked system. <snicker>

---
After a number of decimal places, nobody gives a damn.

Re:There will be StarOffice... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988381)

Is that the best troll you could come up with? Man, that was *weak*...

Who is behind it? (0, Troll)

sn00perz (597488) | about 12 years ago | (#3988138)

Follow the $$ trail. Its in M$'s best intrestes to hamper development of Office alternatives.
They have been unhappy about poor OfficeX sales which leads me to suspect they are pressuring Apple to stop cooperating with Sun developers.

Just say 'NO' to intellectual property

I've got your StarOffice right here ... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988144)

Dear Apple,

I ama homosexual. I boughtan Apple computer because of its well earned reputation for being "the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if you could produce more software which would appeal to young boys. Thanks in advance.

with much gayness,

Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.

Re:I've got your StarOffice right here ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988281)

Who in the hell modded this "interesting"?

For more info... (5, Informative)

jaaron (551839) | about 12 years ago | (#3988152)

For more information, check out the NewFactor article at : http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/18805.html [newsfactor.com]

Also check out this GeekNews story: http://geek.com/news/geeknews/2002Jul/gee200207310 15675.htm [geek.com]

(Don't need the Karma, I just want people to get the facts straight. I hate misinformation being spread around...)

Hrmmm... (5, Funny)

captredballs (71364) | about 12 years ago | (#3988156)

Maybe they are denying this news because in truth SUN AND APPLE ARE MERGING!!!

Wouldn't that make a great little conspiracy story? Come on, think about it. Sun has positioned themselves such that they need desktop software [theregus.com] and Apple SHOULD be looking to G4/5 alternatives, particulary 64 bit options if they want to maintain any customers in the movie industry. The sparc wouldn't be a poor choice, since it seems like its roadmap goes farther than the vanilla powerpc chips.

Okay, it would be pretty un-applish to want to port Aqua to solaris rather than darwin, but you never know. Or the apple/sun conglomerate could maintain 3 difference unixes (don't forget that Sun has a linux distro coming out). It should would strengthen both companies pitch to the business sector since the whole office could come from one vendor (server, clients and office software). You can even picture what the new logo would be: a purple apple with sunbeams gracing one side, casting a shadow northward... no, farther north... yeah, past Oregon.. yeah, that far northward.

Come on silicon valley! Mount a RISC offensive against Redmond!

Sun plans Apple takeover! (5, Funny)

weefle (22109) | about 12 years ago | (#3988260)

Yeah, this rumor has floated around countless times, almost as many as the one about how Apple's about to just go bankrupt and call it quits. But somebody passed it around to me about six years ago with the funniest spin:

Yeah, did you hear? Sun's going to buy Apple! Yeah, and do you know what they're gonna call themselves after the merger?

Snapple!

Re:Sun plans Apple takeover! (2, Funny)

captredballs (71364) | about 12 years ago | (#3988296)

Listen Dude. That was somebody else's rumor. THIS ONE is mine. Did they have the OpenOffice spin? No. Was MacOS UNIX then? No, it wasn't. Was the powerpc chip too slow to keep up with intel back then? Ooops! I guess that's always been the case.

My Sun/Apple "rumor" is way cooler than any of those other out of date rumors.

The Snapple thing IS funny, though. I give props to the rumors before mine. I'm truly standing on the shoulder's of giants.

Re:Hrmmm... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988289)

that can't happen. I mean apple is using a BSD unix base, while Solaris is now SysV. I mean merging those two would be unholy... and would probably resmeble linux

Re:Hrmmm... (2)

captredballs (71364) | about 12 years ago | (#3988338)

Well they wouldn't have to merge them, they'd just port Aqua over to solaris (if they didn't just maintain both). I almost be that porting to solaris would be easier than porting darwin to sparc.

Here is one thing to think about: each company usually has cooler looking cases than their wintel counterparts. Hrrrm... now if they brought SGI into the picture then we'd have some serious looking rigs on our desks.

Oh wait... no... this would be awesome... All the new Sun's would have Titanium style cases. Awesome! And they would have a big apple/sun logo etched into the metal... Oh wow, the server room would have more silver in it than a rich wife in the burbs who just traded her car in for all stainless steel appliances.

So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988408)

that can't happen. I mean apple is using a BSD unix base, while Solaris is now SysV

Sun has a rich BSD history. A Sun founder was one of the writers of the original BSD. The old SunOS was BSD based. NetBSD & OpenBSD have Sparc ports. Porting Darwin over to Sparc would probrably be relatively simple (by kernel hacker standards).

Or they could port Aqua over to the old SunOS :)

The name of the merger....? (2)

Doctor Fishboy (120462) | about 12 years ago | (#3988336)

So would they call the new company Snapple?

Re:Hrmmm... (2)

cpeterso (19082) | about 12 years ago | (#3988345)


that can't be. I thought that Disney and Oracle were competing to buy out Apple...

Re:Hrmmm... (5, Funny)

powerlinekid (442532) | about 12 years ago | (#3988354)

No no you got it all wrong. First IBM is going to buy Sun because we all know in our lifetimes its going to happen. Next IBM is going to move its new "Sun Division" away from sparc and to IBM's 64 bit powerPC. Now IBM will merge with Apple, move AQUA on a linux base instead of BSD or Solaris slap it on these 64 bit powerpcs with it's IBM Star Office and drive Microsoft straight back into the hole it crawled out of. Now its kind of scarry that it would take 3 companies to kill MS, but if someones gonna do it it might as well be IBM because they started this mess in the first place.

Re:Hrmmm... (2)

captredballs (71364) | about 12 years ago | (#3988423)

Yeah, eventually, as in "not soon enough to matter". As if IBM's purchase of PwC won't slow it down enough, the last thing that big ol' lumbering IBM could do is take on MS through a purchase during the next two years. Hell, it would probably hurt IBM more than helping it, considering the amount of $$ they make on MS solutions.

One company wouldn't be able to take on Microsoft, especially not a company that was purchased and integrated. You just can't do that without some severe growing pains. Microsoft is huge, but they've learned how to do it. They can still move faster than any other big-ish company out there (damn them).

thinkfree is a very good alternative (1)

thaigan (197773) | about 12 years ago | (#3988157)

I saw this demo'd at the NY Macworld and it looked pretty good...
http://www.thinkfree.com [thinkfree.com]
...And low cost too!

You First post Boys are stupid... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988160)

I suggest that instead of first posting, that you guys start a FIRST LOOK. Be the first to check out a slashdot link before it gets slashdoted. The proof on how you'd be first? Mirror the sitee and put it up. Then come heere and say FIRST LOOOOK!

Java based StarOffice - blow me! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988166)

Troll my ass all you want!
I hate slow programs! Especially productivity programs where I need to type/work as fast as I think. Having to wait for some fucking interpreter really pisses me off! The performance of programs these last couple of years has degraded to retard level. WTF! When I started programming - ya know - in the snow - up hill - both ways - we made sure the poor fucking user didn't have to wait around for the fucking computer to thrash, swap, and all that horseshit!
With all these new fangled processors that have a gagillion gigiahertz and gagillions of bytes of RAM, there shouldn't be ANY delay in proocessing! But NOOOO, I have t wait for my fucking computer to thrash it's drive and I have to wait SECONDS before the screen updates!
Write the fucking code and make it native. Fuck this interpreted shit! It didn't work for BASIC!Perl - well, you got me. I guess that's because Perl programmers are smarter and know when to use an interpreted language.
Leave the Java shit for WEB shit - OK!

I'm getting Open Office! Fuck the Java shit!!

The face of a troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988167)

Ever wondered what slashdot trolls look like? Well here is a pic of the Wipo troll [archive.org] .

Re:The face of a troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988426)

thats hilarious.

he's such a nice young man

Java office suites (1)

_narf_ (21764) | about 12 years ago | (#3988172)


I'd missed the original article, so I don't know the whole story. But if there IS any truth to the Java port, I feel the need to point out Corel's failed venture to port the Wordperfect suite over to Java.

Why would it be any better to try such a thing now?

Re:Java office suites (3, Informative)

JohnA (131062) | about 12 years ago | (#3988273)

Absolutely. Java has come a LONG way since Corel tried to port Office to Java. Corel was trying to port to JDK 1.1, which was totally pre-swing and pre-Java 2D. This meant that there was no font support outside of "monospaced", "serif" and "sans-serif", and it also meant no access to acceleration tools provided by Java 2D.

Any effort to create an office suite today would have a tremendous chance of success, although it would still be a challenge.

Re:Java office suites (1, Troll)

AJWM (19027) | about 12 years ago | (#3988394)

Why would it be any better to try such a thing now?

Well, here are a few reasons for starters:

  • Processors are an order or magnitude or two faster now than they were then.
  • "Hotspot" and similiar JIT compiler technology means JVMs run orders of magnitude faster even on the same processors.
  • Java itself has improved greatly from the, what, 1.0 or 1.1 days of Corel's venture?
  • And Java programmers are a lot more familiar with the technology these days -- I imagine Corel's Java coders probably weren't very far up the experience curve.
  • Then there's the whole J2EE web services thing, which might make a lot of sense for an organization that wants to maintain some sort of central control over its office documents, but that's a whole other issue.

I'm not saying it necessarily makes sense even now to do a cross-language as well as a cross-platform port, just answering your question.

Mac rumors (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | about 12 years ago | (#3988240)

Why is it that the Macintosh is always haveing rumors about it? Apple in general. What is it about Apple folk that makes them need to start/spread them? This isn't supposed to be a troll, honestly. It just seems that Apple has developed a cult that (most) other computer companies have not (slaves don't count).

Re:Mac rumors (0)

rampant mac (561036) | about 12 years ago | (#3988311)

It's like owning a Porsche. Just not as fast :D

Just in time (1)

eskilling (557414) | about 12 years ago | (#3988252)

I've installed OpenOffice on the Win2K hard drive I have at school to show people that yes there is an alternative to MS Office. I installed it even though I had access to a liscenced version of Office XP. The learning curve was negligible and it opened all the existing Word docs I had.

I'm looking very forward to OpenOffice on the Mac. I have AppleWorks which is fine however after using OpenOffice I was hooked.

Now if I could only look at the "First Look" ;)

Why don't you just get a REAL operating system... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988253)

...instead of trying to trick developers into writing software for your obsolete OS?

Windows has tons of Office suites. Although there is no need to use any of them since MS Office works perfectly for everything!

Re:Why don't you just get a REAL operating system. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988451)

Bill? Is that you? Where's that $20 you owe me?

Well, *I* think this is good news... (1)

hawksmoor (596095) | about 12 years ago | (#3988270)

I'm going to hazard that this is good news, wrapped around good news. First, it's good that Apple is more sensitive to developers than rumor gives them credit for. Second, it's nice to know that Apple is assisting the OpenOffice folks in their efforts. I think this is promising for getting some good OS X implemenations of free software out there.

Sure, call me Pollyanna, but I feel like taking the sunny view today. Rest assured, tomorrow, Apple will do something horrible to prove me wrong.

Re:Well, *I* think this is good news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988431)

I with you, there is definately an upside to the story.

Before the c/net piece the mac open office project was crying out for developers and getting no nibbles, after it they have interest from all over.

http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/18805.html

So the Mac Open Office becomes a near future possibility rather than a "some future date". Thats what I call a result! Go-oo C/net!

pay for? (0)

aexandria (443460) | about 12 years ago | (#3988285)

"have a good alternative to the expensive Microsoft Office."

You mean people still pay for MS Office?

Re:pay for? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988333)

You mean people still pay for MS Office?

Some do. I wish Microsoft would come up with a totally fool-proof anti-piracy scheme. When you think about it, they couldn't do anything more to promote free software than to crack down on piracy. When high school and college kids can't warez the Office and Windows they'll end up installing open source stuff to get shit done.

Re:pay for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988376)

It's coming - the anti-piracy stuff.

I've seen it. It looks good. And Open-Office is going to get -very- popular when it comes out.

Either that, or the world will standardize on Office 97.

Behind the times??? (3, Interesting)

Andy Dodd (701) | about 12 years ago | (#3988441)

While not fool-proof, MS's latest software (WinXP/OfficeXP) has much more antipiracy than previous versions, to the point that for once it's actually an annoyance for warezers. Probably 75-90% of those who warezed older versions of MS products won't bother with MS ProductXP. What you want is already here to a degree.

JAVA? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3988410)

Dragging any JAVA based version of anything to the trash can will get it to perform more for you than actualy trying to use it. This will do nothing but turn people off or Star Office, OSX, the mac and once again JAVA itself just like very other java app failure to date. (And that everything ever done in Java BTW)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>