I think it's really a shame that now to be able to fully use GpSim (a Gnome program) in Ubuntu and derivatives have to install Wine or another Windows emulator, because for now there is no graphical interface in Ubuntu GpSim package, and in the Windows port the Gui works ok.

So what we need is porting the Windows port back to linux including the GUI.

rolesp

1 members found this post helpful.

As much as i like Clementine, i still miss Foobar2000 sometimes.

And Cubase, too!

+1 it's still the most customizable / easiest to customize I've seen anywhere. It's quite robust as well - at least one of the best Windows media management proggies, and puts many others to shame (even many paid for equivalents).

But I don't think it's going to be too easy to get it ported to something other than Windows. It's basically a GUI-IDE built on top of the program itself, so you can adjust the entire UI by actually modifying each element as and when you need in real time while the program is running by simple point-n-click.

Perhaps if someone re writes similar code using something like Qt / wxWidgets instead of using MFC (or whatever they used). But I think that's going to be a huge task - and is probably why the creator(s) of Foobar don't want to do it.

adobe illustrator (a 1:1 clone)
Excel and Winword 2000 or 2003 (yes, really, they very rock)

Unfortunately I don't know of a 1:1 clone. But depending on what you're actually using AI for you might try InkScape (as a vector graphics program) or Scribus (as a layout program).
This I just can't state more clearly: For those 2 versions (in particular) Open Office or Libre Office is nearly exactly similar - only has more options, more comprehensive and less prone to crashing.

Otherwise (if you simply want the name of Microsoft on your program and refuse to even consider a clone) MSO's 2000 and 2003 versions seem to work mostly under Wine:
http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?iVersionId=2735
http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?iVersionId=2736

If you wanted 2007 or later, then there's nothing which has similar ribbon interface which I know of. But then even 2007 can be run under Wine:
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManage...sion&iId=12811
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManage...sion&iId=12812

Esword http://www.e-sword.net/downloads.html

Yes, some have gotten it to work with wine but it would be nice if it ran natively.

I want to say, why? But, seems how I have nothing nice to say; I will not...science—smart enough to not need ∞ answers.

MS office 2000 is unbeatable. That has been one of the best to word processing docs.

libre office or all free stuffs havent most of it.

It is like comparing the last adobe photoshop with gimp

I agree with you on Calc and Impress, but what exactly does Writer not have as compared Word? The last versions even showed bugs like section numbers F* up, bulleting and indenting behaving randomly, styles being incorrectly applied, tables being malformed beyond recognition, OLE which does anything except embidding and linking properly and graphics sticking to any place except where you wanted them, exactly like Word has been doing since 1997 without MS being able to fix that.

Since you perhaps were not intending to mention that as Word's assets, what features as advertised does Word possess which Writer does not?

For some time now I threw both packages deep into the bit buckets of cyberspace and I am using Latex. Which increased the time of writing my reports, but reduced the layout tasks to absolutely zero, and brought down the discovery of typos and such errors after document release to 1% of what it was with a WYSIWG word processor.

Calc is seriously lacking features and a user interface, and the Impress developers should take a serious look at how a user wants to draw graphics on a slide and adhere to the policy of confronting the user with the least surprise.

jlinkels

1 members found this post helpful.

Slightly off topic ... If you want a program to be "better", should you not post to a forum / bug of that program's pages?

Anyhow ... to continue with the off topic discussion:A bit unfair in my opinion. Both Word and Write are general purpose word processors, AFAIAC these are "entry-level" word processors. You're comparing apples with spaceships here. PS is a whole lot more complex than a "simple" postit writer, you might rather want to compare them with something like Paint.

IMO, Writer is just about good enough for most of my purposes, Word is incredibly buggy and inconsistent (especially with formatting) - so it's relegated to "Only when forced (on pain of firing, or at gun point) to use this junk". If you want something comparable to PS in the word processor category, then as someone's mentioned: Latex is a much more capable program - even WordPerfect is a lot better in this regard than Word/Write, though I'd place it well below Latex (or similar) on the food chain. I must say Word 2007+'s table formatter is a lot easier to use than Write's. Write's is comparable to Word 2003 (and earlier), at least it uses styles consistently, which makes it a bit better than the old Words. But if you place lots of tables in a document, you need to use something else, you need some head-shrinking if you use word/write tables throughout your doc (rather copy-paste spreadsheets for pete's sake).

As for Excel/Calc, I've got similar experience here. Excel makes for dangerous calculations which have been plagued for decades with incorrect answers. Not to mention it's formatting goes all wonky just as Word's does. Calc, I've found is near perfect with accuracy and very consistent with formatting. It's built-in formulas is at least comparable to Excel's, though its formula wizard is by far the better of the two (even comparing to Excel 2007+). There are some issues I have in Calc, e.g. the engineering format is unavailable - but that's a miniscule hiccup compared to Excel's gotchas.

I might be willing to agree that they're not perfect (none of LO's programs are absolutely perfect and infinitely comprehensive). But wasn't this comparing it to MSO? If that's what you mean, then I'm disagreeing. I'd rather want something instead of nothing, and then I'd want the better of that which is available to me, not the "worse". IMO and in my experience, Excel is a lot worse than Calc - Calc may not be the "best" in all aspects, but I'd rather use Calc than Excel.

Impress is more controllable to me. Perhaps it's just me, but I hate the way Power Point keeps on forcing its own defaults on you without any way to keep your property mods consistent easily. Its styles are near non-existent and the templates tend to misbehave constantly. But take note that neither is actually a good presentation package - presenting to an audience means you should follow some design guidelines, and PP / Imp tends to let you break those much too easily (e.g. keep animation to an absolute minimum, preferably non-existent, as it only detracts from your actual message).

I joined this thread because I wanted to see WordPerfect posted to Linux. I still do; it's my word processing program of choice, and I've paid good money to upgrade from WP12 to WPX3 to X5 and now to X6. (I started with WordPerfect 4.2, and for years used WordPerfect 5.2 on an MS-DOS machine. It's the only reason I still now run a Window$ based computer. Unfortunately a lot of people with whom I work and who need to read documents I send them are enslaved to Micro$oft. Why they pay money for poor quality software, I really don't know - and I speak as someone who has been reduced to tears by the vagaries of Micro$oft Word deciding that it knows how I want to lay out my document. When I need to send a document to them, I use OpenOffice/LibreOffice, and save in the format they can read.

What I cannot understand is why so many public authorities seem to be in the thrall of Micro$oft, paying out taxpayers' money to support poor quality software. Perhaps we should be lobbying our representatives in government to use open-source software?

+1mil for that one, I'd actually like to see QuatroPro as well . Corel used to have a cut-down linux version of WP. They even had their own Linux distro based on Debian - called ... you guessed it ... Corel Linux. But that was around 2000, and they've since discontinued this. The last WP which worked as a native Linux program was 8.1 (through some of the later can run under Wine): http://linuxmafia.com/wpfaq/

IMO, as soon as Write can introduce something like the Reveal Codes in WP it's much closer to being a professional word processor like WP.

As stated previously, Latex is even more comprehensive than WP. But its interface is more in line with a programming language than a WYSIWYG, see it as if you create the entire document only through WP's Reveal Codes window. From my experience WP is the closest WYSIWYG which allows minute and accurate control, Write has some quirks but behaves mostly, Word never behaves and quirks are actually considered a "feature":

Even just opening the same document in the same version of Word on the same PC on a different day - chances are it will reformat the previously "perfect" document which took blood-sweat-and-tears to get to that point originally. At least Write never did something like this for me (if I use the ODT format, but with DOC/DOCX it's not better than Word) , and WP's still formatting 15 year old WPD files perfectly as they were done then (and formatting them "perfectly" was a breeze then and now).

+1
The newer versions of WordPerfect can save/convert documents in/to the ms-word formats.

@malwodyn,
When all else fails, follow the money.
Novell bought WordPerfect Corporation, QuatroPro (from Borderlund?) and a few other things and were going to put together a office suite to compete with mickeysoft-office. For whatever reasons they didn't follow through and Corel stepped up and purchased the various components from Novell. Corel put together and marketed Corel Office and has Irneb has pointed out, they had a version of WP for Linux and their own version of Linux. Then mickeysoft made a $150,000,000.00, Canadian, "investment" in Corel and WP for Linux and Corel Linux disappeared almost overnight without so much as a whisper.

Well, "Borland" (the guys who made some nifty programs and programming IDEs like Paradox, CBuilder, Turbo Pascal, Interbase, etc.) created Quattro as a follow on to the major spreadsheet of the time: Lotus 123 (note Quattro = 4 in Italian), caused a lawsuit and was probably the reason Borland didn't do too well. It added some extra features & introduced much more comprehensive graphics capabilities. Then when a windows version was created (called Quattro Pro) they bought the license to add WP into the Borland Office Suite (from Satellite Sys Itnl.) This comprised QP (spreadsheet), WP (word processor), Paradox (database) - this was in '94 (the first time I used it was Borland Office 2.0, with WP 6.0, QP 5.0 and Paradox 4.5).

In the same year Novel bought out the "suite" (excluding Paradox), but licensed Paradox as its DBMS. They added their GroupWise products to have a central contacts & calendar functionality - i.e. sharable to other users. It also included Presentations (i.e. like the now Power Point). WP6.1, QP5.0,

In '97 Corel bought that and released it under the Corel Office brand. Also made it work on Win NT - which was much more robust than the abortion "mickey" soft called Win95 and the 98 (that's a whole other history about OS2 and IBM getting screwed by Gates).

In '99 - 2000 Corel dabbled in Linux and ported WP as a test case. Seemed to be the intent to port the entire suite if WP succeeded in Linux. But as you've shown ... MS seemed to use its plan B approach (or seeing as they used it so often, it should be called plan A): "Buy out the better competition and then kill it, instead of actually fixing our inferior products."

Try this one in MS Word: Create a 2003 DOC file and open it in Word 2000 or Word 95. Edit save close and open again in 2007. No formatting lost along the way and no corruptions. ... NO? ... Well you could do this with WP 6.0 all the way through to WP X5, backwards and forwards at will. Evel Open Office / Libre Office tends to lose formatting through backwards compatibility.