Re: [tdf-discuss] New "LibreOffice Reader" Eliminates Need for "PDF Reader"

Ian Lynch wrote:
> On 5 July 2011 21:58, Robert Derman <robert.derman@pressenter.com> wrote:
>
>   
> > e-letter wrote:
> >
> >     
> > > As far as the request for the ability to download individual
> > > components of LO, this should not be enabled. The whole concept of the
> > > predecessor staroffice product was to provide various functionalities
> > > in terms of word-processing, spreadsheets, drawing, etc. and this
> > > should be continued.
> > >       
> > Perhaps this was a bad idea way back when Staroffice was first designed.
> >     
> StarO was designed at a time when MSO had set the model for megalithic
> design.  You can see why a proprietary software company would do this. It
> focuses lock-in to the core productivity that could then extend further and
> further. Cooperation between applications through interoperability based on
> open standards was part of the original unix design concept but got lost
> until the rise of the web. So at the time it was probably not seen to be
> such a bad idea but in hindsight it clearly looks that way.
>
> Saying that because a design decision was made 15 or more years ago it
> should not be changed is a recipe for disaster. Things change and without
> change you will at best get stagnation ad at worst rapid death.
>   
Someone explained here in a more detailed and understandable way just 
what the nature of the design of Staroffice actually is.  That in fact 
it is just one big program and the different modules are just different 
about 300 K each user interfaces which present different controls and 
screens to the user. 


If that is indeed the case, then it follows that the only way to get 
significantly smaller separate modules would be to toss out the entire 
program/codebase and start over from scratch writing smaller programs 
that don't include any of the functions not required for the purpose of 
that program/function/module.  In other words the new Writer would not 
be able to function as a spreadsheet, or database, or drawing program, 
or presentation program, because the code, instructions to do those 
functions would not be present.  The new Calc would not be able to 
function as a drawing program, and so on.  This must be why it was said 
that to provide a mobile version of LO would require starting over from 
scratch and writing a new program.


I would guess that some of the speed/performance issues of OOo, LO are 
because of this monolithic design.  That for instance a spreadsheet that 
is ONLY a spreadsheet would run much faster.  As I understand it, this 
is the way that Microsoft Office is designed, with separate programs 
that are not integrated with each other. 


It seems to me that with such a monolithic design that we are missing 
the opportunity to provide one very unique capability, a combined 
function where you could use the word processor to create business 
forms, and within them, embed cells with spreadsheet or database 
functions, turn parts of the document read only, have automatic invoice 
# incrementing etc.  Many times when I had a small electronics company I 
wished for such a piece of software and never found one. 

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted