ODT

[Prince]

Will Atlantis have odt-file export/import? Seems to become the next standard, replacement perhaps for rtf. OpenOffice, Abiword and Textmaker 2006 have it.

[admin]

Sorry but we do not plan supporting the OpenOffice or AbiWord document formats.

[samokhov]

I'd think again. It's not just OpenOffice or AbiWord. Open Document Format is really becoming a next standart. There's a lot of apps that support the text part of it (ODT) already and more to come.
For all its nice features Atlantis is far from being a market leader, so it doesn't look wise for Atlantis team to turn its nose up on the major MS Office rival format Speaking of which, even Word can open ODT files: there's a plugin for it. You might support Office plugins of course, but probabely just natively supporting a format based on XML and ZIP/JARwould be easier

[JohnKS]

I agree with the last poster. MS has just released beta 2 of Office 2007 and docx is the new MS file format that parallels odt. Also, a converter is available for earlier versions of Office from MS, in anticipation of this move in file format. So it might be worth considering, at least strategically, some readiness for this format change, even of the change takes time to implement. Good wishes, John

[josephrot]

Sorry but we do not plan supporting the OpenOffice or AbiWord document formats.

Sorry but we do not plan supporting the OpenOffice or AbiWord document formats.

Having done a great deal of work and Beta testing with OpenOffice.org 2, and I know the principles there...

I believe that OpenSource.org and OpenOffice.org people would gladly assist you on anything needed to bring up a quick I/O to ODT for use by Atlantis.

But I do agree with other feelings stated here in the Forum:

ODT is a valid, needed "standard" that's already here, and I believe that Atlantis would actually become more popular and better supported by paying users if it does support ODT.

Joe
Voice: 865.521.6900 / Cunningham Window Building
Knoxville, TN

[admin]

For document exchange, it is always best to use formats that can be read on most systems. As things stand, this is the case of the MS DOC and RTF document format. On the contrary, the ODT format is a proprietary format with a rather limited currency as yet.

[josephrot]

For document exchange, it is always best to use formats that can be read on most systems. As things stand, this is the case of the MS DOC and RTF document format. On the contrary, the ODT format is a proprietary format with a rather limited currency as yet.

Not to sound argumentative, but the above is the same (basically) argument that Microsoft tried using to not support ODT. I proffer that they were dead-wrong in that assessment of ODT.

- History, and MS's eventual actions, actually show that they came around to accepting ODT as a international standard.

- OpenSource ODT IS accepted, and it IS in wide usage. Agreed, is WAS an orphan standard, say, two years ago, mainly because ODT 1.x was a poor standard indeed.

- However, with the production of ODT 2, it has certainly arrived. It's in use worldwide, and its usage will only increase.

Might be better to be proactive than reactive, as it pertains to ODT.

Atlantis doesn't HAVE to offer it lightning fast; but sooner-than-later would likely be warranted.

Joe

[maxqnz]

On the contrary, the ODT format is a proprietary format

That statement is just plain wrong, and betrays staggering ignorance. ODT is most definitely NOT a proprietary format. How anybody could make such an utterly stupid and completely erroneous assertion is beyond me. Both MS DOC and RTF on the other hand, ARE proprietary formats, and not officially endorsed international standards.

Just to make this clear, the definition of proprietary offered by most dictionaries is like this:
"protected by trademark or patent or copyright; made or produced or distributed by one having exclusive rights"

That definition EXACTLY fits the RTF and DOC formats but does apply to the ODT format AT ALL. The makers of Atlantis are free to make whatever choices they wish about the formats they support, but they ought not lie in support of those decisions. Claiming that ODT is "a proprietary statement" is so utterly wrong that one making it must either be utterly ignorant of the truth or actively contradicting it.

[Robert]

On the contrary, the ODT format is a proprietary format

That statement is just plain wrong, and betrays staggering ignorance. ODT is most definitely NOT a proprietary format. How anybody could make such an utterly stupid and completely erroneous assertion is beyond me.

Greetings–
OK. Sorry for being so “stupid”. We do apologize for using the word “proprietary” rather inappropriately. We hope that you can find it in yourself to forgive us.

But when all is said and done, the main points are these:

1. A lot of office workers have to create documents in the DOC format because of company requirements. The MS Office suite is the most widely used suite in offices worldwide, whether we like it or not. Accordingly, the MS DOC and RTF formats are ipso facto endorsed international standards.

By the way, there is actually no such thing as “officially” endorsed international standards regarding document formats. Who would decide which document formats are official standards? Who would impose them as such? Actually, the decision belongs to the market. And as things stand, the market is massively in favor of the DOC format, for better or for worse.

As much as people might wish this state of things to change, it won’t happen overnight, just because an open source format was created. We all have to take this fact of life into account.

2. This is not an ideological position on our part. It is just a fact of life that we have to accept. We would very much prefer all document formats to be “open source”, or at least as “public” as the RTF format. Having to implement support for undocumented or only partially documented document formats involves a lot of extra work that could be best used for other more rewarding tasks.

3. I hate to have to say this, but Atlantis Word Processor is a commercial venture (and so is MS Word for that matter). Even if it does not look like so to some, Atlantis Word Processor is the result of many years of hard dedicated work by a small team. Again, as incredible as it might seem to some, the developers of Atlantis Word Processor are trying to earn a living out of their work, and, why not, to make a commercial success of it. Then, why should we ever encourage the use of “open source” free software? It would be like shooting ourselves in the foot.

If you are using Atlantis to create documents, why not create them in the formats currently available in Atlantis? The actual format of documents is irrelevant when documents are meant to be read on screen and/or printed.

And when documents are meant to be sent electronically, the best formats are those having the widest currency. As things stand, they are the DOC and RTF formats.

If the persons you exchange documents with do not have software that can read (or edit) DOC or RTF files, why send them ODT files? Instead, why not send them DOC or RTF files and encourage them to download and try Atlantis Word Processor?

If the persons you exchange documents with send ODT files to you, why not encourage them to send DOC or RTF files? Created in Atlantis Word Processor of course!

Please, do not waste time crusading for document formats, tell your friends about Atlantis Word Processor…

Cheers
Robert

[josephrot]

RE: << Again, as incredible as it might seem to some, the developers of Atlantis Word Processor are trying to earn a living out of their work, and, why not, to make a commercial success of it. Then, why should we ever encourage the use of “open source” free software? It would be like shooting ourselves in the foot. >>

Actually, Atlantis and the team would not be supporting free software.

OpenSource, and ODT, is NOT free, regardless of what people want to say. It costs in support, as well as a few other factors.

Note that RE: ODT as a I/O format, keep in mind that Sun, via StarOffice which is a commercial venture on Suns part, also uses ODT as its standard format.

If Atlantis supports ODT:

Then when users want to jump TO Atlantis, the ODT users of OpenOffice 2 and StarOffice have a convenient upgrade path.

If Atlantis does not support ODT:

Then that path is sealed off, and there are potential and real losses to Atlantis in terms of lost sales, registrations and etc.

RE: << And when documents are meant to be sent electronically, the best formats are those having the widest currency. As things stand, they are the DOC and RTF formats. >>

Make that .DOC, .RTF, .PDF and .ODT.

RE: << Instead, why not send them DOC or RTF files and encourage them to download and try Atlantis Word Processor? >>

That can be a good argument,...

Then again, so can the idea of having Atlantis support ODT was well, so the potential users see Atlantis as supporting .DOC/.RTF and .ODT, therefore, they can go directly TO Atlantis and have a happy purchase-and-use event.

RE: << Please, do not waste time crusading for document formats, tell your friends about Atlantis Word Processor… >>

We do, we do.

Joe

[maxqnz]

It's worth noting that Google's wordprocessor will support ODT, and that even MS has (grudgingly) given approval to a converter, allowing interoperability between it and ODT. If Redmond can see the growth of ODT, it must be real.

I use Atlantis almost everyday, but its limitations prevent me from recommending it to others. Its implementation of Unicode is sloppy and half-baked, and of no use at all for those who use Indic or other South Asian languages, it still has no tables, and now it risks being left behind in the move toward compliance/interoperability with ODT. As fond as I am of it (and I bought it on the very first day it went on sale), it is increasingly becoming for me little more than a glorified Notepad.

[keithsa]

Greetings, all.

As you can see, this is my first post. I am a complete newbie to Atlantis.

Before I post my response to the posts in this thread, I feel a little blurb about how i came to find the Atlantis word processor is in order, so that everybody, especially those who work for the Atlantis, can see where I'm coming from.

I work for an OEM on third shift and I do a whole ton of word processing, both here at home, and at work. I write a lot of KB articles, training articles, etc, for work, and split this extra duty between my home PC and work PC. Naturally, I carry my work on a USB drive. Also, I do a lot of word processing for family members (Example: daddy-in-law is writing a novel and his typing sucks, so I get to do that for him.)

In addition to using computers at home and at work, I often have to use computers at other locations, and am reliant on the applications I can carry with me. Basically, I live and die by my pen drive and the portable applications installed on it.

All that being said, I've been hunting a good, small, fast portable word processor for the longest time and in the early hours of this morning, stumbled upon Atlantis. I've used a bunch of portable office apps, and to be quite honest, to date, none of them have made the cut. OO.o is a pig. Way too large, way to slow for a pen drive. I don't need all the bloat. All I need is the word processor.

Abiword is a watered down app with much potential that is simply not being realized in my opinion. Besides which, it screws up my document formatting royally.

The list goes on.

Enter Atlantis. When I found it, I thought that it would be more of the same. You can't imagine how thrilled I was to find that it was almost, yeah, almost, perfect for my needs. I've been using it for less than a day and am just about ready to haul out the $35.00 for it. Yes, I believe in paying for good software, not pirating it.

Then I stumbled upon this thread.

While I can agree that the ODT format is not the defacto standard... yet, there is a very good chance that one day in the not too distant future, it might just be. So yes, I can agree with what the supporters of the ODT format are saying in this thread.

I can also agree with what the Administrator and Robert are saying, as well. The company that writes the Atlantis word processor is a business and it is safe for them, from a business standpoint, to support the popular formats.

What I don't agree with here is the attitude that I'm seeing, which is one of: "Hey, it's our product, and we'll make it the way we want, and that's it!" At least, that's what I'm getting from both the Administrator's and Robert's comments.

Here's a tip for you guys, It isn't about what you want. It's about what your customers and potential customers want. You have a great product here. If you want to make it better, and if you want to continue being a viable business concern, I'd suggest that you start listening to them and considering their requests before going off half-cocked and making decisions that may hurt your potential growth down the line.

I'm not saying that you have to immediately adopt the ODT format simply because a handful of your customers and/ or potential customers have suggested it. I'm saying that you should give it serious consideration before you draw your conclusions as to what is the best way to go, and then make your decisions accordingly. Telling the people who keep you alive as a business entity arbitrarily, is a bad idea.

As I mentioned, I'm almost ready to pay for your product, however the attitudes of the Administrator and Robert, both of whom I am assuming are employees of the company, with regards to this particular topic are making me think twice about whether or not to make this particular purchase.

As I have already said, it is not about what you want, it's about what we, your customers and potential customers, want.

[admin]

We value your comments, suggestions, and feature requests. We take your opinion into account. But the strategy of product development cannot be decided through polls. Requesting (not demanding) a feature is one thing. But taking responsibility for the product’s future is a different thing. We do not make decisions blindly. We take all the aspects into account. And if one day the situation changes, we would adjust the development strategy correspondingly.

[Robert]

Greetings–
It seems that we need to clarify our position.

1. First we are glad to hear that some of you think that Atlantis is a “little more than a glorified Notepad”.

Calling Atlantis “a glorified Notepad” is grossly unfair and it is overstating the case for ODT.

2. We only want to create a powerful user-friendly word processor. Accordingly, we are very attentive to the needs and wishes of our (potential) customers. Make no mistake about this. We genuinely care about our end-users’ needs. In many ways we want only what our customers want.

This said, we are a small team. This is a deliberate choice, to keep things neat and tidy as much as possible. So there are limits to what we can do in a day’s work. We have to prioritize jobs. Currently, we are concentrating on implementation of the table feature. This requires a lot more hard work than some seem to think. It is a major step in the development of Atlantis and we cannot afford to be distracted by anything else. Not even the ODT format.

3. We would be overjoyed to see a truly universal open document format impose itself on the market. As said above, we want to create a user-friendly word processor, and we would very much appreciate not to have to waste time implementing undocumented proprietary document formats. We also want end-users to concentrate on document creation, and not have to worry about whichever file format is required.

But we are still a long way from a universal document format. We have to take this into account if we don’t want to live in cloud land.

4. Now, if you go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument, you’ll read this:

“A possible problem is that the current ODF implementations of OpenOffice.org and KOffice are not compatible [3]. Exchanging documents for rediting purposes between applications that support ODF may risk losing formatting or data. The OpenDocument Fellowship stated that "[o]ur tests show that OpenOffice and KOffice have some problems opening each other's OpenDocument files",[4] while the Abiword plugin does not properly handle complex documents.[5]”

So things about ODT might not be as simple and rosy as they sound to some on first approximation.

ODT is still very much a thing of the future as a universal document format.

5. As is the case with most of our customers, we think that Atlantis is very good value for money. Of course, plenty of features remain to be implemented. But, please do not throw the baby with the bath water. Try Atlantis for what it does offer right now. If it suits your needs, simply register to show your support. We are currently working hard at developing the table feature. If you will bear with us, we are confident that you will be as happy with the new feature as you have been with the ones already implemented.

Please make sure you do not miss the forest for the ODT tree...

Cheers
Robert

[josephrot]

Thank you for taking time time and kind efforts to respond, Robert...

RE: << 1. First we are glad to hear that some of you think that Atlantis is a “little more than a glorified Notepad”.

Calling Atlantis “a glorified Notepad” is grossly unfair and it is overstating the case for ODT. >>

Agreed! Atlantis to me and others is a professional grade mini-powerhouse word processor that is of excellent working, ease of learning and productive use.

RE: << This said, we are a small team. This is a deliberate choice, to keep things neat and tidy as much as possible. So there are limits to what we can do in a day’s work. We have to prioritize jobs. >>

Definitely agreed. That's one reason that OpenSource staffers could be polled, and a critical exchange of ideas would likely bring ODT I/O much closer, and with a lot less effort on Atlantis small size (but not in quality!) staffers.

Agreed also, ODT and anything else comes at its own time... not everything can be operated on, researched, coded, tested and made ready at once.

RE: << Currently, we are concentrating on implementation of the table feature. This requires a lot more hard work than some seem to think. It is a major step in the development of Atlantis and we cannot afford to be distracted by anything else. Not even the ODT format. >>

102% agreed on that. Tables are buggers for sure. They seem "simple!", but they are clearly not that, code or stability wise.

RE: << ld be overjoyed to see a truly universal open document format impose itself on the market. As said above, we want to create a user-friendly word processor, and we would very much appreciate not to have to waste time implementing undocumented proprietary document formats. >>

Then ODT is the most likely candidate for that. "Everyone" is going to it, or including even the "best we can do for now" in their efforts. Either that, or ODT is on their radar and their short list of vitals to accomplish.

RE: << e still a long way from a universal document format. We have to take this into account if we don’t want to live in cloud land. >>

Well.... ODT is here, and it is nearest relatively "well done" to an Open Standard that's out there. It will clearly improve in scope and stature, but nothing truly major will advance.

RE: << you go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument, you’ll read this:

“A possible problem is that the current ODF implementations of OpenOffice.org and KOffice are not compatible [3]. Exchanging documents for rediting purposes between applications that support ODF may risk losing formatting or data. The OpenDocument Fellowship stated that "[o]ur tests show that OpenOffice and KOffice have some problems opening each other's OpenDocument files",[4] while the Abiword plugin does not properly handle complex documents.[5]” >>

Egad! That WAS true, but that situation was many months ago. This have radically improved.

Wikipedia is a neat idea overall, but it can be woefully behind the times, as the authors are not necessarily groups or organization's of experts, scholars, etc. Things can take a while to play catch-up.

RE: << ... ODT might not be as simple and rosy as they sound to some on first approximation.

ODT is still very much a thing of the future as a universal document format. >>

It's already here, has been for over two years, maybe one year as a solidified standard, usable (not perfect!) open format.

RE: << As is the case with most of our customers, we think that Atlantis is very good value for money. Of course, plenty of features remain to be implemented. But, please do not throw the baby with the bath water. Try Atlantis for what it does offer right now. If it suits your needs, simply register to show your support. We are currently working hard at developing the table feature. If you will bear with us, we are confident that you will be as happy with the new feature as you have been with the ones already implemented. >>

Great to hear that, and it signifies that Atlantis is a great little product produced by a small, likely over-worked staff that really cares about both product and people.

RE: << Please make sure you do not miss the forest for the ODT tree... >>

Definitely! Just think...ODT is actually "just ODT"... XML is coming up the rear fast(!)

Joe

[Robert]

By the way, I am getting a "404 not found" blank page each time I go to http://www.windowgroup.com
Is there any problem with the site server?

[josephrot]

By the way, I am getting a "404 not found" blank page each time I go to http://www.windowgroup.com
Is there any problem with the site server?

Major depth changing servers internally at 1and1 ( the hosting company)...

SHOULD be completed Tuesday Aug 8... perhaps sooner.

Joe

[janniklindquist]

3. I hate to have to say this, but Atlantis Word Processor is a commercial venture (and so is MS Word for that matter). Even if it does not look like so to some, Atlantis Word Processor is the result of many years of hard dedicated work by a small team. Again, as incredible as it might seem to some, the developers of Atlantis Word Processor are trying to earn a living out of their work, and, why not, to make a commercial success of it. Then, why should we ever encourage the use of &#8220;open source&#8221; free software? It would be like shooting ourselves in the foot.

Actually, I think it works the other way, Robert. A lot of people - myself included - do not have any doubt whatsoever that ODT is the file-format to bet on and a lot of those people - myself included - would be more than willing to pay for a good product supporting that format and not very willing to pay for products neglecting that format.

As much as I love Atlantis, I am on the verge of giving up Atlantis in favour of OpenOffice simply for this reason.

[josephrot]

OpenSource file format and Atlantis Sep 2007

Having seen my 2006 comment RE: ODT, or OpenOffice's format and ideas...

Position still is:

ODT is worth allowing I/O to, as another format to add to Atlantis.

OpenSource staffers and programmers are normally happy to very much assist in this, as they will share code and I/O modules that could be integrated into Atlantis.

Without question, allowing ODT I/O in and out of Atlantis would raise the need and interest in seeing and registering Atlantis, instead of diluting Atlantis's "use-ability or popularity."

[janniklindquist]

As much as I love Atlantis, I am on the verge of giving up Atlantis in favour of OpenOffice simply for this reason.

But, of course, Atlantis is so slick that I probably wont