On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:45:02AM +0200, Nadav Har'El wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2006, E L wrote about "Re: OpenOffice 2 CD's": > > The problem with open office is different IMOH, once it is an openoffice cd > > and the openoffice > > itself is heavily depended on non free techonology it seems weird to me to > > support such a cd. > > I have a "she'elat tam". Does OpenOffice actually depend on Java? For doing > what? Oh my system, I deliberately did not install Java for several years, > but used OpenOffice just fine. What kind of fabulous functionality was I > missing? > > Note that Fedora Core, for example, and probably most Linux distributions, do > not distribute Sun's Java, but do distribute OpenOffice. What are they losing > by doing that? Or are they using some sort of free Java alternative, or > something?
Java is not exactly an inherently propriatary technology. From day 1 the specifications were there but controlled by Sun. Sun has made some steps in the recent years (mostly in the recent year) to make the Java specifictions more available. So for Windows I expect that Sun's JRE will be the best option for Java support. Is it worth the extra bother of adding yet another series of "next"-s at install time? What extra requirements does its license require from the user? You could say that it is too little and too late, and maybe figure that there won't be any decent free implementation for Windows, but at least for Linux, gcj is improving and OpenOffice is one of its target programs. I have no idea how well it performs there. -- Tzafrir Cohen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | VIM is http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | best ICQ# 16849755 | | friend --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
