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

On 6 July 2011 08:45, Robert Derman <robert.derman@pressenter.com> wrote:

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.


Maybe. However there are probably objects that do general things like saving
a file or handling printing that could largely be lifted out an modified
without starting from absolute scratch. Of course the downside is that you
will have to replicate quite a lot of code with each application so the sum
total of code for the whole suite will get bigger while each individual app
will get smaller. Inkscape is a 25 meg download on its own so if you take
this as broadly comparable for Draw and that you need most of that in
Impress and Writer and Calc will be bigger. It might overall double the size
of the download for the whole suite with probably a minimum download of 25
meg for any individual component and perhaps as big as 50 meg for something
like Writer. So the question is whether the time and effort is worth it if
the only gain is a reduction in download size and then not that big a gain
and some making it worse.


> 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.

Pretty well. It seems to me that a web version would be a better bet because
as bandwidth becomes more reliable you then don't need to download anything
and it will work on any mobile (or non-mobile) device. Snag again is that
this probably needs a rewrite although there is less need to break things
up. If we could get sponsorship for servers you could do it right now by
giving thin client logins. That would need either sponsorship or a revenue
stream for support costs. Advertising is one way of funding that sort of
service, certification, or charging end users. The latter I doubt because
competing products don't charge and it would probably back fire in terms of
pr.

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.

There used to be one on the old Acorn and Sinclair Z88s called Pipedream.


> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
> discuss+help@**documentfoundation.org<discuss%2Bhelp@documentfoundation.org>
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.**documentfoundation.org/**
> Netiquette <http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette>
> List archive: 
> http://listarchives.**documentfoundation.org/www/**discuss/<http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/>
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted


-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
Wales.

-- 
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