Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Applications > GOBE response for OSX port:

GOBE response for OSX port:
Thread Tools
<MacGorilla>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Jun 16, 1990, 08:06 PM
 
To clarify myself, AppleWorks in itself isn't a POS, but I think the OSX version is a very, very bad Carbon port.
Yes, I agree. It is a horrible carbon port.
     
muchfresh
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ny ny usa
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2002, 09:25 PM
 
I recently emailed GOBE sales to see if they were going to port Productive to OSX. Heres the response:

We hope to do an OSX version when we get the resources to put on it.
oh well looks like a cool productivity suite.

for those that don't know www.gobe.com made a office suite for BeOS called productive. Now that Be is gone they ported their app to Windows and Linux but no OSX.
'Satisfy the urge and discover the need' Q-Tip
     
Northform
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Boston/Cambridge
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2002, 12:58 AM
 
I heard that a lot of the gobe team comes from the ClarisWorks camp. It was in a review of gobeProductive 3, but I'm not sure if that's accurate.

I like gobeProductive and would easily replace MS Office with it, but then again I would easily replace Office with AppleWorks so go figure.
     
velocitychannel
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Appleville, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2002, 07:34 PM
 
I definitely could not replace Office with anything, unfortunately. AppleWorks is just not powerful enough and isn't designed to handle manuscripts that are 500 + pages. Not gracefully anyway.

I used Gobe under BeOS and it was very impressive. I can understand them developing a Windows version but Linux? First of all, there are more application suites available on Linux than anyother OS, it seems. WordPerfect Office, StarOffice, KOffice, The GNOME apps, etc all run under Linux. They should have done an OSX version first because AppleWorks is a real POS under X, and not everyone needs something as feature-rich and powerful as Office:mac.
     
MacGorilla
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Retired
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2002, 08:57 PM
 
[
I definitely could not replace Office with anything, unfortunately. AppleWorks is just not powerful enough and isn't designed to handle manuscripts that are 500 + pages. Not gracefully anyway.
Really? I write novels using AppleWorks and I have no problems with it at all, even the 700+ ones.

AppleWorks is not a POS. It was designed to be a simple office suite and it does the job.

But I do agree about the Linux port...It made me scratch my head considering that most the of the office apps on Linux are free. WordPerfect bombed on Linux because it wasn't free. I can't see how Gobe is going to do it.
Power Macintosh Dual G4
SGI Indigo2 6.5.21f
     
velocitychannel
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Appleville, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2002, 10:01 PM
 
Originally posted by MacGorilla:
<STRONG>[

Really? I write novels using AppleWorks and I have no problems with it at all, even the 700+ ones.

AppleWorks is not a POS. It was designed to be a simple office suite and it does the job.

</STRONG>
Man, I don't know how you work on 700+ novels in Appleworks. How do you manage and get around a document that size in AppleWorks?? I have to give you credit though.

I have been using Word since version 1.1 (still have it in the box. haha) Of course back then I had to seperate chapters into indivdual files. Anyway, my agent and editor use Word:mac, so we don't have to fool around with translators and file conversions.
To clarify myself, AppleWorks in itself isn't a POS, but I think the OSX version is a very, very bad Carbon port. My son uses it for papers and school work and switched to Office because it was so unusable. I don't know if the new update changes any of that.
     
velocitychannel
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Appleville, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2002, 03:34 PM
 
Originally posted by &lt;MacGorilla&gt;:
<STRONG>

Yes, I agree. It is a horrible carbon port.</STRONG>
Internet Explorer is another one. But I really thought is anyone could do a GOOD Carbon port, it would have been Apple.
     
strepidus
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: St. Louis
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2002, 05:13 PM
 
But I really thought is anyone could do a GOOD Carbon port, it would have been Apple.
But the Finder is a Carbon port, and it's grea--oh wait, never mind.
     
   
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:07 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,