On 12/22/06, Debarshi Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> open office will never be 'good enough' because it violates the basic
> principle of foss - many small tools, each doing one thing well,
> rather than one big monolithic application that tries to do everything.
Reminds me of GNU Emacs. The same logic applies to it, after all it
does many more things than OpenOffice.org. Many 'savvy' users do have
a liking for it. Do you think it is 'good enough'?
GNU Emacs follows the model of Unix, do a small thing, and do it well.
Emacs is built by making several small commands work in a series (by
defining macros) to build complex commands. this is much like shell
scripting. Indeed that is the reason why Eamcs rocks.
OpenOffice, or for that matter any office suit that have seen so far,
approach is flawed, because the spends most time getting things done,
unlike the appication doing the things for the user. This comment
applieso only to the word processor component. What we need to
preserve in an office suit are the spreadsheet, presentation, and
database linking. These latter set of tools are very useful. If
macro-definition in OO becomes easy, it may come close to my vision of
a good computing application.
Nagarjuna
--
http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
