digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

OpenOffice 3.0 Promises to Bash Office

pcworld.com — Others maintain that the whole model of deskbound productivity applications is obsolete, foreseeing a future in which businesses and individuals instead use lightweight online applications such as Google's Docs . It is likely, however, that all models will flourish

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • puelocesar, on 03/24/2008, -13/+72a little exaggerated these people don't you think?
    • FutureGuy, on 03/24/2008, -22/+13No it will do it, just like OpenOffice 1.0 made Office obsolete.
      • tortfeasor, on 03/24/2008, -3/+27I have a tribe of pandas that live in my back yard and knit magic flying carpets for me. They are fluffy and beautiful - the pandas and the carpets.
      • fkr3, on 03/24/2008, -3/+14Don't forgot Google Apps is making everything obsolete too.
        • JamesMorris, on 03/24/2008, -2/+3Futureguy should be a poster boy for drugs and the dumb ***** they make you say.
      • gandhii, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6this is obviously all a bunch of hype. But for me and my parents openoffice 2 has made MS office obsolete. Not saying that is a big deal, but it is a fact.
    • ruddy, on 03/24/2008, -15/+7yeah, office2007 is fantastic (see pirate bay). my biggest beef with OO is spell check is stupid as hell (i guess i am too), and the clilpart is lacking. but srsly, office2007 is snazzy look'n and frickn sweet to use - plus they're both free
      • SSUK, on 03/24/2008, -1/+23You're an idiot. Office 2007 is free when you pirate it. Which is illegal. Also, clipart? Who the ***** still uses clipart? Get the ***** off Digg.
        • grimward, on 03/24/2008, -0/+9Yes, I agree with the previous poster, who the ***** uses clipart these days? (seriously, does clipart even EXIST anymore? )
        • specialK16, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4I don't agree, Office 07 is seriously great.
      • quarkie, on 03/25/2008, -1/+2Though there are one or two minor bugs, for writing documents the ribbon interface is beautiful once you get used to it.
    • robbob, on 03/24/2008, -3/+2Bash, meaning the talking sh*t comments in the code
    • shadow010, on 03/24/2008, -8/+7They can't port their own code, they just rely on java to be ported to the users' OS. Because of that, OpenOffice will never be comparable on performance with office.
      • Planets, on 03/24/2008, -4/+3Even though I've had much better performance with OpenOffice than I've ever had with Office?
      • ldog, on 03/25/2008, -0/+7The vast majority of OpenOffice is not written in Java. Small parts are such as jdbc for the MS Access counter part, and for additional languages in scripting. You can run most of office without a JVM.
    • FreakyT, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4Yeah, the main gist of the article seems to be "there's a new program selector screen, more rows in the spreadsheet program, and a couple new views in Writer, therefore, the beta promises to utterly destroy MS Office.

      Really, with OpenOffice, the potential is definitely there, but the user interface need serious work; in terms of option placements, it's as if you took Office 2003's UI, removed several useful features, and then put the rest in a blender. I'm not saying they need to "rethink" the UI with a ribbon, but the ability to float a table in a couple clicks would be nice.
    • jabberwolf, on 03/24/2008, -2/+3Yeah let's take out all the extra availability in MS's code and dumb it down to everyone's level so everyone can use it.
      You DO know that's exactly what you guys are doing right?

      Dumbing things down to make sure everyone is on the same level is great but that means EVERYONE now can equally do less. I'm not sure how that is better?!
  • LANjackal, on 03/24/2008, -37/+23"Promises to Bash Office"
    ^^ what a joke, thanks for the laugh. As the article itself admits, OO.o has so far proven only to be for FLOSS zealots and people who can't afford/don't want to pay for MS Office. As someone who's run both OO.o and Office 2007 on my PC, IMO OO.o doesn't hold a candle to Office. It's not even a contest. This is simply because OO.o is trying too hard to be an Office replacement. The problem is that they're a couple generations behind. OO.o looks and feels like Office 2000, and the screenshots/overviews that I've seen of 3.0 suggest more of the same.
    • Remmy, on 03/24/2008, -20/+28You really believe that, don't you? You believe that the "look" really matters? We're talking about documents here. They are more than likely going to be printed. Who the hell cares what's wrapped around the text filed area? I'll tell you who. People who think that shiny pretty things make the software better.
      • Azimuth1, on 03/24/2008, -4/+32"People who think that shiny pretty things make the software better."

        Which is probably the majority of average computer users, i.e. Office users, i.e. exactly the people who Open Office is trying to win over. So actually yes, the look does matter.
        • 1timeuser, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4Sad but true. In other news abiword > OOo writer. That's right, I went there.
      • TomFrost, on 03/24/2008, -2/+29The look is part of the experience. This is why Mac OS X is winning over so many switchers: Apple designs its interface around the idea that using their software should be an enjoyable, aesthetic experience. Something you want to do. If the interface is ugly and there's not much more to the UI than a box of tools that can be used to make a document, it's not something you enjoy working with.

        Maybe the above doesn't apply to you, but there are people -- sharp people, not just morons who can't tell "good" from "shiny" -- who have an innate design sense and whose subconscious will make them prefer the better-designed, prettier option as long as the function is all there.
        • DarkSamus, on 03/24/2008, -5/+7agree, but oo costs nothing.
          As more people become familiar with computers, they'll ask themselves "why am i gonna pay for an application i can get for free legally?"
          • fjc8, on 03/24/2008, -6/+1Because they use that application to make money.
          • inksmithy, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2Going by that theory, if you make money using a program you paid for, you actually make more money if you can do the same thing using a program you got for free, legally.
            Simple cost benefit analysis.
            If you have a good hard look at what people actually use office software for, you will see that probably better than 98% of people do not need to have all the 'features' in office. Tell me why the average personal assistant needs (or even understands) pivot tables. Tell me why the average mail room clerk needs database software or software which has an entire programming language built into it? Thats VBA for anyone who doesn't know.
            The answer is, the don't. The mailroom clerk might need to send an email asking what to do when his flugelbinder jams the sorter and the PA needs to be able to type letters and thats about it.
            Make money from it? In the words of Jim Royle, "my arse".
      • jabberwolf, on 03/24/2008, -3/+2Not even the LOOK, its the ability!
        So no looks and shiny things are not what matters. Apps, addins, etc..
        If you DO want a crowd that falls for that, I'm sure you can find plenty of Apple fans on here somewhere. - Oops looks like Tom Frost above is somewhat proving my case.
    • santasing, on 03/24/2008, -10/+12Wow, a MS Office expert, your mom must be so proud :-D
    • gquaglia, on 03/24/2008, -4/+17Considering that its free and will satisfy the needs of about 80% of the people who need an office suite, its looks pretty damn good.
    • technoredneck, on 03/24/2008, -3/+11What does Microsoft Office do for /you/ that OpenOffice can't do?

      Yeah, OpenOffice doesn't have as many features as Microsoft Office, but for something like 75% of all users, OpenOffice is plenty. The whole features argument is valid for a segment of people, sure, but if you're not using those features, it's not valid for you or that 75% of all users.
    • akurashy, on 03/24/2008, -0/+5I could care less for shiny interfaces, as long as the interface is usable and easy to understand I don't see any problem. Seeing 3.0 really fills the simple needs (and advanced)
      • Nougat, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4I *prefer* a less-shiny (yet still intuitive) interface, especially on something I'm paying for, because every time I see shiniy, I think, "I paid for that to be shiny." I hate paying for form.
    • nylrym, on 03/24/2008, -3/+2Buried for "FLOSS zealots".
    • antechinus, on 03/25/2008, -0/+4Try writing a book sized document ('long document') with cross references, indexes etc using MS Office. It is almost impossible. MS Office has always had problems in this area.
    • h37s3m, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Office 2007s interface is the ultimate pain in the ass. It just takes up more room and everything is harder to find because all the text is replaced by "cute" "little' buttons
  • brisbin33, on 03/24/2008, -5/+81i think the goal should be less about emulating MS Office and more about format compatibility. i could care less if all the bells and whistles are there as long as it can open a .doc and .docx attachment without reformatting all the margins and indents making the essay look more like a tetris piece; don't get me wrong i love and use OOo almost exclusively for documents, i would just rather see them branch off in the GUI and toolset area, do it better and leaner than MS, but focus more on just making sure the documents look right when other formats are opened. personally, i enjoy using Writer much more than word but i still have to have office on my computer(s) for excel alone.
    i think MS is in trouble; but in reality i could care less if linux takes over windows (or if OOo takes over office) next week, next year, or never; i can still use them both, be happy, and pay nothing; if other people still want to deal with Crashy McCrasherson word and a slow as dirt OS then go for it, ill go type this up over here and send you a PDF when i'm done. yes, i have to use all the MS programs for work but i'm not paying for it so i'm more tolerant of the crashes; and when they do happen... its break time while i reboot!
    • briguymaine, on 03/24/2008, -2/+3amen, I've tried a bunch of things, google doc, open office, and you are right. If I have to spend 20 minutes making it look the way it is supposed to then I've kind of lost the wiz bang idea of "I'm saving time by using a lighter app."
      • sremick, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6I don't know of anyone who claimed OO was a "lighter" version of MS Office. The point of OO is to be:

        - free
        - cross-platform

        That said, OO is indeed a bit of a beast. I do find myself opening up AbiWord or Gnumeric sometimes because I don't feel like bringing my computer to its knees.
    • Rahodeb, on 03/24/2008, -2/+15For businesses and corporate IT, it's more than just being about writing a doc or two. Outlook provides functions when interlinked with MS Exchange that you can't get on any other mail client. Excel and legacy macro's are so deeply embedded that removing them would cripple a lot of accounting departments. Administrative packs for Active Directory allow the remote configuration of all settings in MS office for your entire enterprise through group policy. Remote install setup allows remote deployment of office through group policy also.

      Basically, there's a lot that goes into MS success in business beyond what the toolbars look like.
      • Altotus, on 03/24/2008, -3/+6Excel macros are probably what will sell OpenOffice, ironically. The latest Mac and upcoming Windows versions of Office have gotten rid of macro support. There's no reason to think that OO will dispense with theirs so long as people want it.
        • SSUK, on 03/24/2008, -6/+3No they haven't. Office 2007 still uses VBA (Visual Basic 6) code for Macros and are fully compatible with previous versions' documents with Macros. You have no idea what you're talking about.
          • BadLittleGuy, on 03/24/2008, -1/+7Which GP did say. Office 2007 still uses VBA. The current Mac version and the next Windows version don't. So you don't know what you're talking about AND have no reading comprehension. Bravo. (Sorry for the harsh response. But you should seriously work on your debating skills)
        • gudnbluts, on 03/24/2008, -2/+0"The latest Mac and upcoming Windows versions of Office have gotten rid of macro support."

          Do you have a link about the Windows version not including VBA? I can understand them not bothering to support it on the Mac any more (I mean, let's face it, who cares?) but Excel will be seriously hamstrung without a language attached.
        • gudnbluts, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3Oh, never mind. I found a link

          http://blogs.msdn.com/vsto/archive/2008/01/16/the- ...

          It was a rumour that's not true. Office will still have VBA, they just can't be arsed to continue trying to port it to Macs.

          (sorry, originally hit the wrong "reply" button)
      • gudnbluts, on 03/24/2008, -1/+0Oh, never mind. I found a link

        http://blogs.msdn.com/vsto/archive/2008/01/16/the- ...

        It was a rumour that's not true. Office will still have VBA, they just can't be arsed to continue trying to port it to Macs.
    • Bulletbillx, on 03/24/2008, -2/+3Part of the problem as far as format compatibility goes is all of MS's formats including OOXML aren't fully open and thus require some reverse engineering which takes time and is rarely perfect. I do think they need to make office files working better more of a priority than the already nice interface. There is also the matter of vendor lockin as far as exchange/outlook and the various macros.
      • SSUK, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3Well, you have some people working on formats and another set of people working on UI. Not just 3-4 people working on all of it. The OO team has a whole user base of programmers who can chip in because of the open source nature of Open Office. I'm sure a lot of changes in OO3 that were made to the code, you'll never see, which is why you're led to believe that they're spending more time on the user interface than anything else. When this is just incorrect. Stability, functionality and format support are the main pursuits for Open Office 3, the user interface changes are merely made to make everything look more modern as time progresses.
        • Bulletbillx, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6Well I was mostly just saying that Microsoft isnt making it easy for them to use their formats. Personally I wish every document format was completely open so that office suites would compete on features, usibility, stability, etc. rather than just trying to lock people in by not letting others use their formats.
    • iofthestorm, on 03/24/2008, -1/+10Paragraphs sir, paragraphs! Won't anyone think of the children? Also, a semicolon does not mean what you think it means.
      • brisbin33, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4i like how i use semicolons; i don't care if its wrong; stop stifling my creativity.
        • quarkie, on 03/25/2008, -0/+4Close to a haiku
          I wonder was this your intent
          I don't think it was
        • benplaut, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Stormy is the eye
          Of the one who writes poems
          On internet forums
    • Gamer2k4, on 03/24/2008, -2/+2I don't think I've EVER had Word or any of the MS Office suite crash on me, and I use them daily. I don't know what you're talking about.
    • zongamin, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Don't ever use the phrase 'Don't get me wrong' - makes you sound like a c*nt.
  • daveisfera, on 03/24/2008, -5/+40Maybe I just haven't used it recently enough, but I just wish it didn't take so long to start up.
    • vspazv, on 03/24/2008, -3/+28I just tested this before posting... To open OOo Writer with a blank document took 15 seconds while MS Word took less than 3. This is with the 'quickstart' portions of both programs disabled.
      • easypie, on 03/24/2008, -30/+1Your an *****
      • Tyr7BE, on 03/24/2008, -3/+10So enable quickstart.
        • antdude, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4Doesn't QuickStart stay in memory? If so, then we don't want that. Word doesn't even use QuickStart type of program.
        • felderado, on 03/24/2008, -6/+5But Word ties into Windows pretty tightly. It basically has an auto-quickstart because of how it's architected with the OS.
        • estvir, on 03/25/2008, -2/+4How the hell does Word tie into Windows 'pretty tightly'? Actually, how does it tie into Windows at all?

          > how it's architected with the OS.

          That's BS.

          Just because it's also made by Microsoft doesn't magically mean there's some secret connection between the 2.
      • prophetpimp, on 03/24/2008, -0/+13Funny thing is that office 2003 under wine in ubuntu i faster then open office.
        • ahz1, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2According to OOo-hacker Micheal Meeks, OOo in Wine is fater than OOo in native Linux. At least, that was true until he wrote a patch for the GCC compiler regarding C++ symbols.
      • HonoredMule, on 03/24/2008, -1/+5uninstall/disable Java, and suddenly OOo flies.
    • griz, on 03/24/2008, -10/+2Holy crap, what will you do with that extra 12 seconds?? Oh right, post to digg.
    • rowjimmy, on 03/24/2008, -1/+11Tools > options > java > click off "use a java runtime environment"
      at least on multiple *nix distros this speeds up start-up time & lowers memory usage by leaps and bounds
      • antdude, on 03/24/2008, -1/+3It took about 25 seconds in Windows XP Pro. SP2 (IE6.0 SP2 and all critical updates) on a Dell Optiplex GX280 (prescott P4; 1 GB of RAM). And that's without Java checked.
    • wigren, on 03/24/2008, -0/+37 Seconds to open the main menu, select a previously written document and be ready to edit. Ubuntu 7.10, 2.2G possessor, 1.7G RAM
      • wigren, on 03/24/2008, -2/+3I just tried the same with Word 2007 on Vista. 13 seconds to open a new document and begin editing.
    • Planets, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2Try the beta of OpenOffice 2.4. In my experiences, it opens much faster than 2.3.
  • jm4847, on 03/24/2008, -19/+5You don't really have to pay to have the real office...
    • griz, on 03/24/2008, -3/+7You don't really have to plead guilty to a crime, but you just did.
      • jm4847, on 03/24/2008, -5/+1You don't really have to show how much of an idiot you are, but you just did.
        There's a difference between saying something and very subtly implying it.
        • wigren, on 03/24/2008, -0/+5It's called an unspoken truth for a reason.
      • jm4847, on 03/25/2008, -2/+1lol how did this dense idiot get +3?
  • vspazv, on 03/24/2008, -0/+58The only things I want from OO.o are less memory usage, faster startup time and the ability to open Doc file without breaking the formatting.
  • oddmanout, on 03/24/2008, -4/+24i sure hope they fix it on a mac, that X11 thing is lame. Open office is slow and cumbersome, so much so, that i had to regretfully put ms office. (of which, i've actually been pretty satisfied with, i'm not gonna lie, they did a good job on this one)
    • vibrokatana, on 03/24/2008, -3/+18Try NeoOffice, it works without X11 and is a pretty decent port of OpenOffice.
      • AnthoMacP, on 03/24/2008, -0/+8OOo 3 is actually being designed now specifically for the Mac, you can get the beta off their site if you like, same for windows and linux by the way ftp://mirror.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/openoffice/developer/DEV300_m3/
      • Kyan, on 03/24/2008, -1/+7Neo office sucks. It repaints my spreadsheet screen line-by-line every time I scroll down one line. It is so slow that the flickering can be seen row by row as this happens.

        I use Scrivener and textedit. When I have to format something, I use Pages, but that is rare.

        Eventually, I will go out and buy Office just for Excel. Credit where credit is due - Excel is great. Neo's Calc in not.
  • waydee, on 03/24/2008, -7/+18I'd normally just steal MS Office but for the past year i've been using OOo and its a fantastic piece of free software, for someone like me who only needs the word processor, spreadsheet and presentation programs I see little point in buying or stealing MS software - these free alternatives do a perfect job, I just write essays mainly.
    I've never noticed the slow startup time problems I always hear people talking about either - I just checked and Writer opened within 4 seconds of hitting enter... is that slow these days?
    • vspazv, on 03/24/2008, -3/+5Are you using the quickstart portion of OOo that sits in the systemtray and uses ~50-150MB of RAM?
      Open task manager and look for soffice.exe and soffice.bin
      • waydee, on 03/24/2008, -2/+4Nope, they're there when Writer is running though but soffice.bin is using 13,168K and soffice.exe is using 1,252K.
      • jhuebel, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Granted, if you spend most of your time in and out of OOo, then the 50-100MB of RAM that's eaten up by the quickstart option isn't such a terrible thing.
        • vspazv, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3Unless you're on a ***** work computer that's running McAfee VirusScan Enterprise and XP Pro on 512MB RAM
    • zammit, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1OOo2.3 on Vista 2.2ghz 2gb ram 5400rpm hdd... to open writer for the first time took ~15 seconds, and any time after that 1-2 seconds (vista keeps it in the memory until it has to make room); w/o quickstart w/ java
      i'm not complainin.
  • DjArcadian, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2Does Calc support the Ctrl+D function yet?
  • Persian5Life, on 03/24/2008, -16/+3open office is an amazing program, but i pirate Microsoft office anyways (not because its good but because i am use to it and is ridiculously expensive).
    • chalkboy, on 03/24/2008, -1/+2Really $119 is to much for you. How much should they charge for it?
      • Persian5Life, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1well i am a student and yes that is to much for me 69.99 will be good for me.
    • jakobhedlund, on 05/24/2008, -0/+0It should be free, like all software.

      EDIT: This is a reply to chalkboy, sorry.
  • talonstriker, on 03/24/2008, -6/+6OO.o is great in that it has a lot of features that MSO doesn't have, like making simple 3D models. But the problem is that not many people need those features. While those features are great, OO.o developers should spend some time making the existing features better e.g. the grammar checker. The previous version of MSO had a horrible grammer checker....for some reason it thought half of my papers were filled with passive sentences...whatever that means..
    • GreyICE, on 03/24/2008, -0/+11It means you're a lousy writer. MSO is very good at detecting passive sentences.
    • iofthestorm, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6Passive sentences aren't necessarily bad though, but whenever possible it's best to change them to active ones. Go look it up on wikipedia or something.
    • Gamer2k4, on 03/24/2008, -0/+7"I don't know what it means so I assume that it's wrong."

      Great logic there.
  • eggsovereasy, on 03/24/2008, -6/+25Am I the only person on the planet that thinks online office apps like Google Docs are just dumb? I don't understand why having a word processor installed on your machine is such a big deal that we need to go online with it?
    • monkeyboyhero, on 03/24/2008, -5/+12One of the main reasons for it is for people who want to write collaborative documents and don't want to keep emailing different drafts to each other.
      • estvir, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2And there's software solutions for that as far as I'm aware. Also, I think one of them comes with Office 2007 -- Groove.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Groove

        Call me old fashioned, but when I'm working on something I'd rather have the PC in front of me with the software installed and know just where my data is, and be able to easily back it up and also know it's [fairly] secure.

        I don't want to rely on the Internet, others (Especially companies like Google), etc. So far, all I'm relying on is the guy who operates the power plant and even if he slacks off, I have a UPS to keep me covered for a short amount of time.
      • gl77, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2but google and OO.o are free.
    • MindStalker, on 03/24/2008, -3/+4I don't use Google Docs primarily, but if I'm working on something and I'm not at my computer, or I expect to possible need the document elsewhere I put in on google docs. Sure I could email it to myself, but then I'd need to remember to email it to me everytime I revise it. As well I might be at a computer that doesn't have my version of office and then I'd have to deal with compatability problems. Sure, I have a laptop, but I don't take it everywhere.
      • jerbaker, on 03/24/2008, -3/+2They make these little things you can put on your keyring. You can store hundreds of documents on them. I think they're called thumb drives. The best part is that you don't have to give up control of your information.
        • MindStalker, on 03/24/2008, -2/+3Yes, but does every public computer have the correct version of Word, do they even have accessible USB ports? I've had thumb drives die on me way too many time.
        • DarkLaughingMan, on 03/24/2008, -0/+0And what if you didn't bring your keyring? Or what if your using a device that doesn't support a full USB port? I've used Google Docs to work on a paper when I've gotten to practices early on my n800. To plug the flash drive in I would have to first attach the adaptor I have to it, which would mean when holding up the device, a full sized USB stick would be sticking out of it.
    • jerbaker, on 03/24/2008, -2/+10You're not the only person. Of course there is a big push to take control of your information away from you. Right now you can't be forced to upgrade, but if all your documents are stored at Google and you want access to them after an upgrade, you'll pay. You'll pay or you won't have access to your documents. It's as simple as that. Even if you can store your documents locally, they just upgrade the application on the server, increase the fees, and make it unable to open your documents until you pay to upgrade.
      • counterpt, on 03/24/2008, -2/+5I thought Google docs use odf (just like openoffice.org) so if you store your files locally you can always open them later because they use open formats.
        • jerbaker, on 03/24/2008, -1/+2For now. Do you trust that for the rest of eternity that will be the case ... that there won't be any way for somebody to figure out a way to hold your own data for ransom? Is the convenience even worth the risk? If they're so benevolent, why not release a free desktop application that does the same thing?
        • directrix13, on 03/24/2008, -1/+3@jerbaker:
          They don't need to release a free desktop application. That's called OpenOffice. I'm all for Google Docs and OpenOffice. Edit it in Google Docs while on the road, use OpenOffice at home. Download all ODFs. There are NO losers here except Microsoft (and its about time).
          • jerbaker, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1You're missing the point. We know OO can create and open ODF documents, but what does that have to do with whether Google makes a desktop client. By your argument, OO shouldn't exist since there's already an office application.
          • directrix13, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1@jerbaker:
            The point is OO is a preferred environment if it is installed. Google Docs is a convenient platform available everywhere. The two complement each other quite well, actually.
    • Metasquares, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1No, I agree, except (as one of the posters said) if you need to collaborate on documents in real-time.

      There's no reason I should require an Internet connection if I'm just trying to write a document.
    • DarkSamus, on 03/24/2008, -1/+6it's not just about writing a document, it's the accessability of getting it anywhere anytime without a thumbdrive and the programs as well.

      And to the person who said "what if they start charging a fee", in that case don't use gmail or any other products they offer. If you have to worry that they will hold you to a ransom then you're too paranoid to even use these apps.
      • zammit, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1to add on to DarkSamus: what if M$ starts charging $2,000 instead of $200 for MSO?
    • sirhomer, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2There is an extension for OOo that lets you save and open from Google Docs automatically. Google Docs is useful when you DON'T have a off line office suite around for one (ie for the people who havn't heard of OOo, aren't a thief, and aren't willing to spend $579 for an Office suite), and it has SVN like access control built right in.
    • blackjack75, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2There's nothing more pratical thang Google Docs when you want to just share a quick and dirty spreadsheet (to note hours on a specific project or such things). It's not as full feature or powerful but you can't beat the speed or simplicity.
  • AmishJedi, on 03/24/2008, -0/+11Some early screenshots of OpenOffice 3.0:
    http://www.oooninja.com/2008/03/openofficeorg-30-n ...
  • TheG2, on 03/24/2008, -3/+15GIMP has been saying the same thing about replacing Photoshop for years. Bottom line: it's not really going to happen.
    Granted it looks better, but the functionality is still heavily lacking (for both GIMP and OO)
    • jerbaker, on 03/24/2008, -0/+7The problem with free software is that it tends to reflect the desires of the open source community, and I don't think I'm going out an a limb to say that the average open source contributor's desires are different than John Q. Public. When I use OO, I try to do simple things that work in Excel or QuattroPro, like CTRL+D, and it just doesn't work. Ever try to do envelopes in Writer? That's enough to stop me from using it, despite the cool 3D modeling (why a spreadhseet program should do that, I have no idea).
      • directrix13, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1Free software tends to represent those who are willing to contribute. Either monetarily, through dev time, or through just plain asking for a feature. John Q Public can actually get a lot more feedback with free and open source software.
        • jerbaker, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Ya, so the theory goes. When's the last time you saw a feature the public in general wanted and the geeks didn't want make it into an open source product? Mozilla's public bug database is a good place to watch developers engage in ego battles with the public over features they don't want in the product, even though there are contributors and maintainers willing to do it.
          • directrix13, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1True. But the only difference between that and proprietary software is that the public even has this direct line to devs to begin with.
          • jerbaker, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1No constructive purpose is served. By and large, the public is ignored. Input in that context is meaningless.
          • directrix13, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1You are wrong, it is not ignored. Mozilla is actually fairly peculiar in this case. Due to the size of the codebase, they have to sift through an ungodly amount of bug reports being filed by anyone from basic computer user to devs willing to help. If its a dev who has written code (not just willing to help) then usually the only reason they won't take the code would be that it would make accomplishing their stated goals harder. Granted egos get in the way sometimes, but that is NOT limited to FOSS. I have worked with Microsoft and I have worked with FOSS devs. I will take the FOSS devs any day of the week over waiting for decades for a trouble ticket to come back with a semi-stupid answer from Microsoft that roughly amounts to: our software doesn't do that, probably won't do that, and you are stupid for wanting that kind of flexibility to begin with. Thank god for the capacity to pay for your own dev time.
    • directrix13, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6GIMP has never claimed that. Crazy users have. Ultimately, I'm sure they would love that title. But they are very smart people, and know their current limitations.
    • estvir, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1.. and it doesn't even look better. I just can't use OO.org after having had Office 2007 for so many months.
  • dassouki, on 03/24/2008, -3/+21I use both OO 2.2 and office 2003 (I haven't upgraded yet to 2007). I am a masters student that writes on average 20 to 30 page documents weekly, and when it comes to formatting large documents, putting them in order, automating captions and headings, organizing the document for print, and having the print look exactly like the screen, in all honestly, MS office kicks OO 2.2 in the butt.
    Being a long term Linux/OO user, currently I write the whole document in OO, reboot to my windows partition, format it on MS office 2003, and then print it.
    As much as I love open source/Linux, when it comes to producing journal material documents, OO does not compete with MS Office. OO is an excellent piece of software, that in some areas can not compete with MS Office.

    P.S. what's with the previously free Linux software starting to sell their software instead of giving it for free such as QCad.
    • earlycj5, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3Why aren't you using Latex for your documents?

      Oh, wait, this isn't /., sorry, my mistake.
      • entidi, on 03/24/2008, -0/+0Your suggestion was not so bad, outside /. too. dassouki seems to spend half life in writing: he can waste a couple of weeks in writing his first paragraph in LaTeX. Paris is worth a mass...
        • earlycj5, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1I like Latex, I use it where I can but I also realize that my colleagues don't and I need to exchange documents with them. Yeah, latex2rtf sorta works, but it's still a pain.
          I wish it were easier to do. Latex is MUCH easier to use, but harder to learn I suppose, less known, etc. Most of the journals we submit to only take .doc files. Frustrating as it is, it's easier to go with the flow than against it most times unfortunately I've found.
          • entidi, on 03/24/2008, -0/+0There's nothing easy in the LaTeX world: the quality is as high as the time needed to customize a page.
            Anyway I know, it is really frustrating the .doc format is used as a standard. I try to do my best to enforce the pdf format, but for every document sent, I receive 10 .doc files.
            This is the world we have built...
    • i88gerbils, on 03/24/2008, -2/+2On the other hand I vastly prefer formatting my documents in Open Office Writer. I find it has a much better and more friendly interface for paragraph and page formatting whereas Microsoft Office Word does not.
    • JQP123, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2"... MS office kicks OO 2.2 in the butt."

      OO looks pretty good to the casual user --- someone who doesn't create and manage documents for a living.

      My sister-in-law is a legal secretary who is pretty sharp from a user perspective with lots of experience and the salary to prove it. Her office selected her to evaluate OO as a possible replacement for MS Office so she spent quite a bit of time working with it. Her conclusion was pretty much the same as yours.
    • Tyr7BE, on 03/24/2008, -3/+2Maybe you just don't know how to use OOo to do all that stuff? I used to use OOo for my work term reports and lab reports back in uni. An average of four or five 50+ page papers and probably a dozen 1-15 page papers throughout the course of a few months. I used OOo exclusively (this was pre-2.0, ie, the 1.3 or whatever days), and found everything worked great. TOC generation was just fine and dandy, same with tables of figures and tables. Inserting a new table or figure meant all indexes were auto updated, along with corresponding TOC. Same goes for creating new sections to start new types/indices of page numbering. Never had a hitch. In fact when I had to use Office instead for some compatibility stuff (doc import/export wasn't all it could have been back then), I had trouble getting it to do everything OOo could. Sure, it was probably me not knowing how to do stuff in Office that I could do in OOo, but I'm just wondering if maybe the reverse was true for you.
  • Kythas, on 03/24/2008, -2/+8If OO can come up with something like the OneNote feature that Office now has, I'd be all over that. I've found OneNote extremely helpful and absolutely love it. MS did it right on that little app.
    • Nysul, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3It's really MS's killer ap. I know there are alternatives but they don't come close.
    • AzureRise, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2I remember seeing that, what does OneNote do?
      • Yarnage, on 03/24/2008, -1/+3It's basically the greatest digital notebook out there. I currently use it for my school and, when possible, taking notes with clients. It's even better with a tablet PC as you can draw on it, type in notes anywhere, add recordings pictures and/or video and more.

        While I don't really use Word that much, I've got to say OneNote is _very_ impressive and useful. I went out and purchased a copy for each of my computers because I can't live without it anymore, heh.
  • 955701, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3I still want to know how to change the style of the line I'm on without taking my hands off the keyboard. ctrl-shift-s did it in Word, and F11 followed by scrolling down a list is tedious.
  • halobender, on 03/24/2008, -5/+6OOo is no MS office. MSO is Microsoft's cash cow and has a ton of money pumped into it OOo just doesn't have this going for it.
    Google docs might be able to unseat MSO in the future.
    • akurashy, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6That's not really going to happen... A lot of people works in documents offline.
    • likwidfuzion, on 03/24/2008, -2/+2Microsoft has a stranglehold on the productivity suite. There's not a single competitor out there that can compete with them.
    • estvir, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2Google Docs has even less a chance of beating MSO than OOo does.
    • arcticblue, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1I think the real benefit of Google Docs is the API. I've been playing with the Picasa API (creating a Ruby class for album integration into a Ruby on Rails project), but I've taken a quick look at the Docs API. There's alot of potential under the hood.
  • pudds, on 03/24/2008, -13/+10Somehow I think the jump from "complete garbage" to "better than office" is a bit of a stretch. Call me a skeptic.
    • Yarnage, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4Not sure why you're being dug down. I use OO from my thumbdrive when my work or school computers do not have Office installed and it's crap. It's great that they're trying to compete as competition is always a good thing but OO has bad usability, it's slow and the code is bloated and pretty nasty (it's open-source, go take a look at it!).
  • barius, on 03/24/2008, -4/+12It may be near feature parity with Office 2007, but it still *looks* like Office 97. If anyone doubts the importance of style just consider Apple and its' products.
    • Bulletbillx, on 03/24/2008, -5/+7Personally I prefer the Office 00-03 look and earlier to Office 07's ribbon.
      • LMN8R, on 03/24/2008, -0/+5Use 2007 for more than 2 minutes and you'll realize that the ribbon is a drastic improvement for far more reasons than it's pretty look.
        • estvir, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1And it's bringing us out of toolbar hell while OOo is keeping us there.
      • zammit, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1correct me if i'm wrong but the Office 07 ribbon is like Adobe's smart toolbars (introduced [i think] in CS2)? as a professional who uses adobe products daily, this concept made life a heck of a lot easier. I can imagine with the numerous amounts of menus and toolbars available in MSO, having an interface that changes to your needs when you need it to and w/o asking is superb!
    • phybere, on 03/24/2008, -6/+5Office 2007 is stylish, but at the cost of functionality. Office 2007 may be easier to use for simple tasks, but for someone who's actually trying to use its features it becomes cumbersome.
      • LMN8R, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4Give me a break. Anything you can do in 2003 using shortcuts or whatever else are still present in 2007. But 2007 adds a ***** ton more into the mix too. I use Word, Excel, and PowerPoint every day for personal use and professional use and there is never a time it's been "cumbersome" to me. If anything, going back to 2003 is a chore because every menial task is hidden away in endless menus galore.
      • Yarnage, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1phybere is incorrect and looking at the interface as a long time user of office 2003. The ribbon, however annoying for users of previous versions of Office, is actually more intuitive and user friendly than the previous versions. The only problem is people were taught how to work around the bad interface previously so everything takes longer but in the end, new users and converts alike can become more efficient.
    • sremick, on 03/24/2008, -3/+4What exactly was wrong with Office 97's look and layout, besides MS suddenly one day declaring it "outdated" and telling you that you need to upgrade. For a certain amount of money, of course.

      Change for the sake of change isn't a good thing. Otherwise spoons would be square.
    • adila01, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2The Open Office developers are going to have a new interface for the 3.0 release. They like the Lotus Symphony interface design and will more likely be similar to it.
      • Bulletbillx, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2looking at screenshots the lotus symphony UI looks pretty good.
    • dosware, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Many people run OO (and Office) fullscreen and get 95% of their work done with keyboard shortcuts. Don't need those ribbons or toolbars invading the workspace.
    • gl77, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1apple is *****.
  • AnthoMacP, on 03/24/2008, -1/+6Personally I'm just waiting for features that are required for me as a biologist to get my work done. This version introduces error bars which are greatly welcome but some of the stats present in most spreadsheet applications are missing in Calc and simple things in powerpoint (like adding backgrounds) are completely absent or unnecessarily difficult to do in Impress. I also would like to see some strides in the formatting department. There's nothing worse than designing a powerpoint presentation and having to tweak it on a MS Office to fix formatting errors before you present it.
    I love open office but I always seem to be making things harder on myself using it which is what I think the real problem is. I don't care if they emulate Microsoft Office in fact I'd rather they didn't (I can't stand the Office 2007 layout), all I want is the same usability as my colleagues who paid for MS Office.
  • Winston84, on 03/24/2008, -1/+8Sure, every company is going to use Google Apps, why not share your trade-secrets with the GIA ?
    (Google Intelligence Agency)
    • jabberwolf, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3I've known about 5 offices that switched over to Google Apps last year. I know of 4 of those that have gone right back to office. I guess reality set in. The extra 3rd party applications that MS OFFICE has had a relationship for years, simply outweights the "online" shiny feature of google apps. It's simply too limiting not being able to do things. tweak thing, write apps for, locally.
  • AngryAngryBrian, on 03/24/2008, -0/+20Wait you can all ready call OpenOffice from bash.

    angry@BOX:~$ openoffice
  • cryptoki, on 03/24/2008, -1/+13open office is cool... but give me a break.
  • Elvaanish, on 03/24/2008, -2/+2I'm just waiting on the new Lotus Sympony suite, free, local and easy on the eyes. The best of MSO, Google Apps and OO.o all in one :p
  • jabz, on 03/24/2008, -4/+6I want OO to become the main office application and odf the standard file format. Open-source is the future. so yes, I digg this!
    • GruntboyX, on 03/24/2008, -1/+3keep dreaming. Reality will be that both software models have a place and depending on application depends on whether Open source or commerical closed source products are better. I dont see Gimp or OO being major players because there goal is to emulate commercial offerings. Until they offer something "new" and pump in research then they will only be compelling 2nd place pieces of software. Its kind of hard to compete with an organization willing to pay its software developers to research and be on the forefront. If your good enough to do that kind of development why would you give your work away for free? I understand there are philanthropic idealists out there that have done such things but they are rare.

      Bottom line Gimp and OO are still playing catch up. They are not on the forefront.
      • entidi, on 03/24/2008, -1/+0Is it so important to be first? Do you think life is a match? What do you win?
        I prefer a good dreaming man than a good technician.
      • jabz, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2I want to believe as well... that`s why I send open-source developers as many bug-reports as possible and bring myself in with ideas from design to usability.
        At the same time: You have to highly respect people that write applications like GIMP or OpenOffice.
  • jiganto, on 03/24/2008, -0/+8Like some already mentioned above, for OOo to really make something of itself it really needs to branch away from Office and start doing things that are different and better. Right now, yes it's an ok replacement for Office but the bottom line is... it's not as good, not even close. Especially when compared to Office 07, which is feature rich and is a real pleasure to use. A lot of things that I easily do in Office 07, are a real pain for me to do in OOo. Not only that, but majority of the time if I do something in OOo and try to open it in Office and vice versa all the formatting gets messed up, and given that majority of the time other people use Office, I have to do my work in Office to make sure that formatting stays the same for other people.

    I would love to use an Open Source alternative to Office, but considering how much of a pain OOo is and that as a student I can get Office 07 for $60... I'll stick to office.
    • AzureRise, on 03/24/2008, -2/+1I can get it for free through my school, and I still use OOo in Linux, and AbiWord in Windows.
  • eldridgea, on 03/24/2008, -2/+2OpenOffice.org 3.0 works great on the Mac side with no X11.
    Try the beta. Go to http://distribution.openoffice.org/mirrors/#extmir ...
    Choose a mirror, go to "developer", go to "DEV300".
  • kubasa, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2My only question is - does it integrate with Sharepoint? I use OpenOffice all the time at home but in the corporate world, it's another story......
  • mikehill33, on 03/24/2008, -1/+5Show me don't tell me. No Digg.
  • wbeavis, on 03/24/2008, -1/+0It's the format to worry about not the application. With a complete and thorough document format standard, it shouldn't matter what app you use. Which is why MS will do whatever they can to stifle a standard.

    Hopefully they will make a standard that holds up better than some of the web ones.
  • potterboy, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4Gimme a ribbon and I'll switch to OO.org/Linux. Office 2007/8 is the only thing holding me back.
    • sirhomer, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1How about the BSA when they find you have a pirated copy of Office and put you in federal assbanging prison for a few years? Then actually you'd have no Office suite or computer.
      • jabberwolf, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Would that make him an ass pirate?

        Ok but seriously, unless you are a heavy distributer or office worth going after, prison is not a worry. Fines, maybe, prison no.
    • potterboy, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1@ sirhomer: actually I got my copy of Office 2007 from the Vista launch party. And 2000-03 from the MS Company Store. I'm pretty sure their genuine.
  • springboks, on 03/24/2008, -6/+3Open Office has already "Bashed" MS Office
    • LMN8R, on 03/24/2008, -2/+3Please, do tell in your infinite non-fanboyish wisdom how Open Office is better than Office 2007. Bonus points for baseless claims of bloat!
  • carrotmadman6, on 03/24/2008, -7/+5OO bashing Office 07? Are u kidding me? Even Office 97 is better than OO!

    Google Apps... er, where are the apps? Picasa, Gtalk, Google Toolbar?

    Open-source fanboys have to give up on Office. They'll never catch it...
    • yournamehere, on 03/24/2008, -1/+3google apps are under 'more' in the main google page... dumbass
      • carrotmadman6, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1If you are talking of Google Docs... then it's not a proper app. It's a web-app! & i doubt many people would want to access the Internet each time they want to modify their documents.
  • LMN8R, on 03/24/2008, -1/+6I'll believe it when I see it. Office 2007's interface is such an incredibly huge improvement and honestly, anyone who disagrees has obviously not gone into it with an open mind and used it for more than 10 minutes.

    Every single time I have to go back to using Office 2003 or Open Office, I cringe. Everything is so much more difficult to use. Power Point presentations that I make to present upcoming events to the entire school look like utter ***** compared to the flashy (yet tasteful) things I can do with 2007. Equations in Excel are harder to implement.


    Open Office already had a hard time keeping up with Office 2003 for what I do with it. Hearing them promise that they'll "bash" 2007 now only sets them up for a boatload of disappointed fans.
    • DarkLaughingMan, on 03/24/2008, -0/+0I'd say the interface is up to preference. I've had to use it to write papers and I'm still stumbling around with its interface. Though there are some things I do like (like the mini edit toolbar you get when highlighting text) I'd usually just write it in Writer, but whenever I opened up the .doc in Writer the formating screwed up.
    • sirhomer, on 03/24/2008, -3/+1I don't give a *****, Office is not worth it's $579 price tag. Either you are moron or a thief. Either way you should be locked up.
    • LMN8R, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4Or maybe I paid $120 for the Home and Student edition that I legally installed on my parent's computer, my desktop, and my laptop, easily making it well worth the money.

      http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 ...

      Word, PowerPoint, Excel, OneNote - exactly the applications I need. Dumbass
    • zammit, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1"PPT" and "tasteful" should not be used in the same sentence.
      i agree... i'm going to be really disappointed, i just know it - dugg you up.
  • Amiga500, on 03/24/2008, -1/+2Again, this article should NOT be posted as a Linux/Unix article. From the very beginning with Star Office, OO has always been available for Windows. The other ports came afterwards.

    Lest you forget, it's also worth noting that OpenOffice owes much of it's code to Star Office. Like many of the more successful open source programs today, Star Office started as a closed source, proprietary application.
  • chamberlanderic, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3where is the mail-contact-calendar-task-shortcut-browser-file previewer, client (nothing is equal to outlook 2007)?
  • sega01, on 03/24/2008, -1/+2I am sure that Open Office 3 is greatly improved, but I am personally not satisified with it. Don't get me wrong, I don't use Microsoft Office or any Office solution really, but as a Linux distribution developer I have glanced at OpenOffice's internals, and they are distgusting. I am sure Microsoft Office is more hackish (as is the rest of Windows), but OO is like glueware. To be honest, I would rather see it have half of the features, and have been coded "properly" (however, IMO: it could have as many features, if not more, if it was coded well from the start).
  • bincoder, on 03/24/2008, -1/+2Open office runs quickly for me, under windows, much better than the M$ version. It has never crashed or locked up the pc. But I still like Pfe32 much better. When I write text, I just want to write text, all the fancy auto this and auto that just gets in the way and slows me down, or worse, corrupts the file. OO is excellent for peeps who have a use for such software, like someone in an office who is forced to do things the office way, like the primitive tech called fax, when email works 1000 times better.
  • cubicrystal, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Thank you very much, but will continue to utilize Nova Atlantis freeware. It's all I need for wordprocessing and all that jazz.
  • AppleMacMan, on 03/24/2008, -3/+0NeoOffice for the Mac is already bashing M$ Office. Life is good on a Mac. 
    • Smeeeprig, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3You know Linux users can get away with using the dollar sign but I don't see how an Apple Mac user (I'm being kind) has the gall to even try.
    • zammit, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2hmm what's that little empty box at the end of your comment... is it my incomplete utf character set or your [overpriced] manila-envelope-mac?
  • icemounts, on 03/24/2008, -2/+3HAH....riiight! This title makes me laugh.
  • jabberwolf, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4Honestly, do ANY of these diggers with OpenOffice work in an office, at all, any one, AT ALL ??!
    And sharing calendars, appointments, contacts, sending on behalf of, the list goes on.

    Again developers for many 3rd party apps, oodles of them, make addins specifically for MS OFFICE. Not to mention the ***** of extra's for view that MS Office is all about for 2007. Sorry but dumbing things down to everyone's lower level is NOT a better idea.
  • brocori, on 03/24/2008, -0/+0we gunna get manual cropping of images?
  • ChuckInReno, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3I've been using MS Excel for what seems like an eternity, and I've become quite accustomed to its nuances. I'm no fan of Microsoft, mind you, and would LOVE to see a good open-source competition. I use OO.o 2.2 on my laptop, and, well, I'm trying to get used to it. It just isn't as comfortable... Why isn't there a keyboard equivalent to Fill-Down (ctrl-D in Excel). And, Zoom, how do I change the zoom? With the mouse, again?

    OO.o has a lot of potential, but needs some cleaning up!
  • bdbElysian, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Man I can’t wait until I can replace all my programs with multi platform open source software so I can pick any OS I want and keep all the programs I use everyday. I wont be forced to use crap just because I’m using ‘bla bla’ OS and importing/exporting should be far a less time wasting chore.
  • Hangly, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1If 3.0 supports opentype I'll ditch MS in a heartbeat.
  • neko, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2As far as I'm concerned, OpenOffice will never be the same experience as MS Office 2003 and MS Office 2007.

    For example: Some of my flatmate's friends came over and wanted to access a MS Office document from their hotmail. But it was an MS Office 2007 document, and my flatmate only has 2003.
    • zongamin, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1I hate MS as much as everyone else but you do know there is a free plug in for 2003 that you just install?
    • neko, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1No, I didn't know that (I own neither). My friends didn't know that, if I remember, I'll let them know next time.
  • shanesemler, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Shallow article.
  • kjfarley, on 03/25/2008, -0/+0As an IT guy and Outlook wrangler since it's release, I'm so frustrated that Outlook has NO competition: Thunderbird is good for downloading email (our marketing manager needs it for newsletter processing) but SUCKS at forwarding emails with images; no ical/outlook cal/cal that works, no tasks, etc. Why hasn't anyone made a decently competing product? Outlook is teh SUCK, so many usability problems (ex: go to pst, right click, go to properties, try to edit the internal pst name (recursive usability suck; why two names for a pst?) You can highlight the name, cursor is blinking, you can reposition the cursor, but you can't edit the field. You have to click on advanced... and why 8 frickin pages of option dialogs? It should be one page! All of this was in Outlook 98 which is 95% the same as Outlook 2007! Arrrrrrrrrgghhh!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.