Would be nice if they donate to LibreOffice then, to improve the support of various MS Office features in files, as well as comparison/diffing features. Win-win to everyone.
Do you mean that it's good that companies can profit over people's mostly voluntary efforts for free, or Free Software is meant to be used for free and never supported in any way, or what?
They just imply them not having to doesn't dismiss the original comment, thread being more about morals than laws.
That being said, hoping for any financial support from AI companies would be really naive. Using others work without retribution is at the core of their model.
> That being said, hoping for any financial support from AI companies would be really naive. Using others work without retribution is at the core of their model.
I have no such expectations. They believe that they own the world and owe nothing, as you said.
You are allowed (and encouraged) to do good things without being obligated to.
I think it would be immensely cool if OpenAI donated some of that crapload of AI money to the people behind LibreOffice to help with development - and then having like a blog post about it or something would already improve the project's visibility a bit more (hey, every bit helps). What's peanuts to them could help with the sustainability of the project a whole bunch!
> You are allowed (and encouraged) to do good things without being obligated to.
We're absolutely on the same page with you, and I try to do my best with what I can in that regard.
On the other hand, I see a perspective which thinks that companies are entitled to use everything for free and don't need to support the Free Software ecosystem because it's an externality that they don't have to care for, which bothers me a lot.
What I was trying to understand that whether this comment was supporting that perspective, or is there something I'm missing entirely.
What does donation does for open source? Surely it wont come close to pay talented developers who create it. For cloud cost, there are few companies already giving generous free tier for open source.
The only thing that donation could pay for is marketing e.g. events and meetups.
That's not true at all. Donations are the biggest source of income for The Document Foundation, the non-profit behind LibreOffice, and have been used to pay developers who've joined the team in recent years:
* Michael Weghorn (accessibility)
* Jonathan Clark (language and scripting support)
* Neil Roberts (scripting improvements)
* Dan Williams (macOS support and general UI improvements)
It obviously depends on the project and the scale and duration of a donation, but plenty of open source projects have benefited from donations. Donations can and do pay for developers, as well, part time or full time. With LibreOffice, you can answer your questions directly by browsing https://www.libreoffice.org/donate/ and as a non-profit you can easily find more detailed reports: https://www.documentfoundation.org/financials-and-reports/
I agree that it would be the right thing to do. Which is why you have to make the best attempt to make it the legal thing, because people looking to make money will not care about what's right. So, it makes sense to point out the disconnect when people use and promote pro-corporate licenses and then get upset when corporates follow them to the letter and provide them nothing but demands in return.
If you want a mutually beneficial community, you should contribute and distribute using a license that requires it.
> because people looking to make money will not care about what's right
This is two-sided: making a kind of license mandatory also shrinks adoption if it is more restrictive. So, even if I acknowledge there is truth in your side of the story, there is also another at the other side, as usual.
How many people use GPL-licensed software as opposed to MIT licensed?
That is not the problem of GPL. I'd rather have high quality software with patches shared back and always being able to see the code than some popular software that eventually is used in some corporate environment without the ability see what they changed.
Regardless, who cares about "adoption?" That's not the original point of open source which was that if you're working on something and you wanted to share it, you could, without any expectation of usage, merely that it might help just one extra person out there. It's simply human ego to care about adoption and GitHub usage and stars especially have accelerated this.
> and you wanted to share it, you could, without any expectation of usage, merely that it might help just one extra person out there
Related: how do you think you can attract more people, by setting a restrictive copyleft that some people will use in their spare time or by attracting even corporations with money that will end up committing to a repo that is used in half of the world?
Note that I am talking about adoption bc thanks to adoption things just do not get rotten. If you make a piece of software and set a license that noone wants to touch, you will see it stall and die in front of your face.
Do not take me wrong, I mean, I think it is fair to contribute back, collaborating, sponsoring and so on. But it is a fact of life that if you make certain choices you make adoption more difficult with all the consequences it entails.
I do know what the original spirit of such licenses is. I was talking about real side-effects these choices have.
"you people" means people that always mix up the legal thing with the right thing? It's tautological to say they're always doing that because that's how you defined them! Are you trying to say that you've encountered other people doing that before too and you've built up an annoyance with them?
It is somewhat interesting that the version of morality an individual possesses always feels to that individual as an absolute.
"Of course it's wrong to beat your wife!" says the person who beats their children in a society that has only recently ceased infantilizing their women (USA circa 1900 +/- 30 years).
"Of course it's wrong to own slaves!" says the person whose society only recently began protesting against and/or illegalizing slavery (USA circa 1866 +/- 10 years)
They say this not knowing that had the event of their births been moved a few decades in the wrong direction their morality would have shifted with it.
Those same people might have said "Of course its wrong to beat your wife with a rod thicker than your thumb!" or "Of course its ok to own slaves as long as you treat them well!" at the same point in their lives had they been born maybe 30-50 years earlier.
We currently eat animals as a normal part of our diet (for most of us, including me, anyway). To do this we treat the animals horribly. Incredibly badly. And we know it.
It's very easy to see how society's morals will probably change on this, in fact are changing on this, and how in 50 years' time our current stance on eating animals could be seen as monstrously immoral and indefensible.
It's not really that "absolute". Laws are not all made the same. Some start as a reflection of what society considers "right" at the time. Then the laws fall behind as society's morality reaches a tipping point. So the society pulls that part of the legal system behind it. Other laws are progressive, and they pull society's morality behind them. Some are driven by/for the majority, and some by/for the elites.
But they all reflect the morality of society to a degree, whether the democratic majority, or the powerful minority.
Well this goes into the debate of "is morality absolute or relative" which gets religious fast and there's more books on the subject than we have time to read.
The question of "are laws there to enforce morality, or enforce public order?" is the key one. And, I think, very easily settled by looking at the laws we choose to implement. Almost none of them enforce moral behaviour (e.g. you must give 10% of your income to charity), they're all about enforcing how we interact and how we're ruled.
Mostly individuals decide what they will do, and then communities decide if they respect that or not. Doesn't exactly apply to companies tho, since they're functionally sociopaths.
Surely "the right thing to do" includes some element of the authors' explicitly stated preferences about how they wish to be treated.
In this case, they chose -- explicitly -- to NOT require any payment or contribution from anyone.
Your feelings about what constitutes "the right thing to do" are apparently different from those of the authors. You believe you know better than they themselves do how they should be treated.
They clearly would like donations, but choose not to require any payments.
Your line of reasoning seems to be along the lines of "anything not forbidden is compulsory" which is not a good place. Having the choice to donate but not being required to is good.
And yes, I think that if OpenAI is choosing to include an entire copy of LibreOffice in their product, it is definitely the right thing to do to sling them a donation. Note that the moral thing to do is not always the required thing to do, or even the legal thing to do.
More like, don't expect anything if not forced. Most people only generally pay for things if there is no other option. It's about what's moral (even then debatable as everyone has different morals) versus what's realistic to expect.
That article has no detail. How much did they make? They said they hope to break even in 2019 so they weren't profitable, what are the latest stats? Compare this to NYTimes which has been crushing it after implementing their paywalled subscription.
> Surely "the right thing to do" includes some element of the authors' explicitly stated preferences about how they wish to be treated.
It does! And they wish to get donations. There's a button right at the top on the site making that clear.
> In this case, they chose -- explicitly -- to NOT require any payment or contribution from anyone.
Yes, so what? It is true that they wished to not require payment. That is one of their wishes, but they have more than one wish. And if they required payment, that wouldn't be a donation anyway.
I actually bundle LibreOffice with my app too and the reason is reading files, especially old xls files. Since I'm bundling it I'm now using it for everything docs related but the specific reason is those old files. I couldn't find anything else that I could just drop it and feel confident it'll just read anything I give it.
>How much money have you contributed back to this seemingly indispensable project?
Perhaps it's time for you to become familiar with the terms of the Mozilla Public License, under which Libre Office is released. There is no requirement for monetary compensation.
Yeah but like, we don't know if OP is making any money off this, let alone significant money. Let's not instantly hold them to the same "please contribute or you're dragging things down" standard as a zillion dollar corporation.
You believe you know better than the authors themselves about how they ought to be treated?
They chose -- explicitly, voluntarily, knowingly -- to give the thing away for free. That's their right for their own creation. Your preferences don't supersede theirs.
You've emphasized this point more than once, but I don't think it's a good counterargument to the GP. It is equally valid to say that they have explicitly (voluntarily, knowlingly) chosen to accept donations for their work.
By profiting off their work and not supporting them you are making your own choice. It says nothing about the authors' preference.
Does that really mean that it's bundling those apps from the start or did it just download and install them at some point to do some local work on some prompt or job you ask it to?
I don't see it making much sense to bundle it. I'm sure a LOT of LLM prompts are related with docs, excels, powerpoints etc, etc but don't really see it worth it for it to be bundled on the codex app from the get go, because otherwise, why not also install dozens of other apps?
I'm not sure. Someone who hasn't installed the ChatGPT (or Codex) apps yet could confirm this by installing the apps, seeing if that ~/.cache directory exists, then try running a prompt that needs Python or Node.js or LibreOffice and see if it downloads them when needed.
Is this perhaps because the aim is to read Office documents and there are (maybe, I don't know for sure) default components within Windows that can do that?
Notably: this did not exist after I installed the app, it existed after I ran the app and there was the long startup screen. Presumably, and I'm not sure I'm interested enough to redo it all and find out, that long startup screen involves the default skills plugins setting up their environment and one of those pulls it as a general app requirement.
I also saw this present after first run on macOS but not Windows.
The new app is an unbelievable mess. Settings are senselessly organized, too. The whole thing has this aesthetic slickness and then underneath it's like the people who make it have never even used it.
It's not surprising that it's pulled in absolutely massive dependencies, although I'm not sure it's the wrong call on some operating systems. LibreOffice is pretty tried and true.
Personally, I like the 3-pane organization (sidebar, chat, browser). I turned ChatGPT into my bookkeeper and social post writing/kanban space, and it works well for these script+browser workflows on desktop.
However, all of this is confusing:
- the ChatGPT/Codex split on desktop
- Chat/Work split on mobile
- how you remotely access each chat from your phone (some of my most valuable chats are buried in Remote)
- which chats propagate from device to device, and which remain on that device
This is from a recent update, and I'm on macOS. I had to re-download it, not just update from within the app.
This new version has tabs for ChatGPT and Codex. The ChatGPT tab seems way less powerful; Codex is basically a coding agent with a UI and browser built in.
Pretty sure this is the old Codex app with the ChatGPT tab bolted on. It's great in some ways, but needs work in others.
They removed the global shortcut to show a portable chat overlay. That one entrypoint must've been the source of at least 80% of my chats, yet apparently it was considered too vestigial to keep.
Where are the AI-will-render-software-engineers-obsolete and/or vibe-coding apologists? They can make all kinds of nice-sounding arguments, but if AI is contributing to a degradation in product quality, their arguments cannot stand up to the reality we see with our own eyes. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and all that.
It is the same with Claude Code. Pretty much each change Anthropic makes to it now lowers its quality. Just yesterday they auto-updated it, and now backspace in the CLI does not work reliably. It also insert the enter key command when there is a line break in text that you are pasting, causing fragments of the prompt to be sent prematurely. What the heck! And pretty much all the regressions I have experienced this year have also not been fixed.
Istg on windows, I can't get codex app, new chatgpt or chatgpt classic to work without hanging on even a moderately sized chat. I tried all of the different tricks people recommended but that shit just crawls. It was stable at some point, classic that is, but then it started being a laggy mess.
I've uninstalled new chatgpt/codex app. I can't access phone chats on it, I can't use the desktop allocated chat messages on it. I have to use up codex limits. I am so surprised that OpenAI ships that hot garbage on windows.
Kind of, Swappa has new sealed units with the original warranty (and the warranty timer only starts when you set up the device), but indeed these are resale and not directly from Apple.
Do you have any tips for running Codex on the Macbook Neo? Have you changed any setting? On mine, it stutters on every single chat, and I don't even have any plugins installed.
Are you on the recent update that handles long chat sessions much better? That made a big difference. Biasing towards lightweight and fast tool alternatives (uv over pip, bun over npm, ripgrep over grep, etc).
If that still doesn't resolve it, a free tier VM might be the move. I suspect OpenAI will be bundling some kind of VM with their new Astra release, which Sama said yesterday will be released soon (this week maybe?). If this new model supports much longer running tasks, you'll want a dedicated box that can run 24/7 even when your Neo is closed and asleep anyway.
One thing I've found - these things are pretty good at troubleshooting desktop problems. If the codex app is running slow, I'll note that it shouldn't be, and also you might get more traction than you'd expect asking the codex app why it's slow.
They're also great at powershell, you just need to tell it to do so. sh is neat but it's 55 years old, there are newer and better shell environment concepts out there and the robots can handle them well too, try it some time!
PowerShell unfortunately just isn't that first-class, even on Windows. You'll inevitably discover, if you do this, that certain things simply can't be automated via PowerShell, that some PowerShell modules wrap or lag behind older Windows CLI tools, that various things you want to do still require manual registry hacks, etc.
Try starting from a blank slate Windows machine and making a commitment to only changing settings via PowerShell, and ideally only declaring them using DSC. You'll soon discover settings where the best you can do is snapshot the registry, change a setting in the GUI, snapshot the registry again, then take a diff so you can write the registry change into your PowerShell automation. If you're on a corporate machine, you'll also likely find many corners of PowerShell that you need closed off to you, anyway.
At the end of the day, Windows is not friendly to automation because it's not CLI-first (not culturally and not technically).
Your argument is directed at Windows, not PowerShell. The shell is just a shell, if a certain thing you're looking to configure doesn't have an easy cmdlet, that doesn't mean powershell is bad, just that MS didn't give you the easy button. Similar to many unix tools, some of what you need to interact with has a dedicated CLI, other things have you poking at the configuration database directly (ini or yaml or whatever for unix, registry for windows).
If you don't like the Windows style of configuration, run powershell on linux - it's awesome there too!
I'm not sure why reading and writing the registry is considered a bad interface for programmatic system administration.
I realize text files can be processed by utilities for working with text files. And text files can be read by humans without any tools, and in that sense are rather universal.
I wonder what I'm missing.
I'd go so far as to think an OS that had a database at its core, or perhaps a persistent lisp would be even more programmable and legible.
Maybe better tools for dealing with structured data would help this?
That’s easy: you activate WSL and then ask the LLM how to get networking and stuff working since they changed it with WSL2. You need a config file flag to setup network mirroring now.
The thing that blows my mind about it is that they straight up copied Claude Code and tried to frame it as some sort of incredible accomplishment. There are no new ideas, no insightful UI/UX paradigms, no killer features. They say money can't buy taste. The ChatGPT/Codex app is proof that it cannot buy creativity either.
How so? On Windows, I like it (version 26.825.51511).
Works fast (like modern Claude Code desktop, their old versions were bad), has pretty okay UI (could have an option for wider main text display, like ZCode added), allows you to change the fonts and shells and some of the layout stuff.
I mean currently I have Paseo hooked up to OpenCode that runs the actual models and often that works a bit better for me, but as a standalone desktop offering, the ChatGPT app has been okay in my experience. I can kinda see why ZCode copied them a bunch (though ZCode also lets you run 3rd party models, which is actually preferable to me).
I do like the idea that Claude Code desktop had in the earlier versions, 3 tabs - chat, work, code, except they kinda went in the direction of merging chat and work which was very ehhhh. The ChatGPT app doesn't even have a proper split between chat and work/code.
Is that what it is using to render and manipulate MS Office documents? That'd explain the poor rendering of some of my files. Bundling all of LibreOffice seems like a pretty huge dependency.
What's ironic about this is, afaik there's no programmatic way to get a screenshot of a PowerPoint on windows other than opening up PowerPoint and screenshotting it. I only discovered this when I first tried out Anthropics official PowerPoint skill when it came out this winter.
If anything happens from this, I hope it forces Microsoft to address some of its long standing hostile to power users issues so they can stay relevant in the world of AI tooling.
This can absolutely be done programmatically. I just added the ability to do that using PowerPoint for Windows yesterday in my uv/python tool `markdown-pptx`. Codex added the functionality in less than 5 minutes.
For those that are interested, this inspired me to create a tool just for exporting images and PDFs of Word, Excel, and PowerPoint files. Check out the repo below, or if you have uv installed just run `uvx office-export skill install` or `uvx office-export --help` to check it out.
It uses Office for Windows, so it is Windows only. I don't currently have access to a Mac machine, so I can't build in Mac support yet.
Thanks for sharing, now im wondering if they did in fact grant my wish since I messed with this in January. Im lucky my job does not require me to make any pptx presentations.
Cool project! I'm playing around with some similar stuff, but via uv/Python. Impressive you aren't leveraging any other existing libraries for OpenXML parsing, editing, or rendering. Any especially tricky gotchas you've run into for this tool?
I have a skill that instructs ChatGPT/Codex to verify the rendering using the Mac versions of Microsoft Office. Even without registering, you still can open files read-only, which is enough. Apparently Office refuses to open some Open Office XML documents that LibreOffice is fine with, so that's another reason to use this. After a few times, Codex ended up storing some memories to stop producing broken files in the first place.
For a docker image of mine I was bundling the full version of LibreOffice as well but I managed to get some space savings by bundling just the no-gui version.
I don't think that's anywhere near equivalent. That's for reading and writing Microsoft Office docs. It has no office functionality. LibreOffice has a full API, for example to run calculations on spreadsheets [1].
The goal of bringing in dependencies is so you don't have to duplicate the functionality, in this case, crafted over decades of effort.
If you've ever actually gone down this route you will try exactly this realize how much of a cluster f these products are and just use libre.
I did the exact same thing in my AI system. Spent an ENOURMOUS amount of time trying everything I could and in the end libre was the only thing even somewhat functional.
Easily 2 months of my life lost to these god forsaken systems. APIs and CLIs sound reasonable until you actually attempt anything in this space.
Computer use is exactly the same thing. Go try this: go to a google doc and dev tools check out the dom and now do the same for a word doc. Eye gouging pain of trying to get anything to work.
Computer use is slow and can take control of the application focus. I’ll be doing things while Claude runs in the background. Suddenly it decides to open the app and try to do something + screenshot it.
I don't know how many times I've had to yell at codex or claude to use/implement headless versions of whatever it's doing at the time, interrupts me trying to multitask and play Battlefield or Factorio while they work :P
don't try Dyson sphere project (/s, its acrually really great), but maybe try x4 foundations, I'm contemplating how I might have my agent help manage my empire
There is a serious threat to Microsoft here, if everyone starts using AI for generating and updating Office docs. At some point Office will become just a viewer.
im stoked for that outcome, standard document tooling should not live behind subscription models anymore. i dont care that microsoft spent zillions bankrolling education systems and companies to fall into this cultural lock in over the decades
whether they like it or not spreadsheets word docs etc are just ubiquitous parts of existing in society at this point you're gonna need to reach for these tools eventually just to apply for jobs or do homework
You assume tokens will be free after these get their monopoly positions? Actual libre office is actual open source running on weak hardware. Truly free.
And I suspect we will look back at MS with nostalgia once Altman and Musk get their ai imperiums.
I have not created or read any Word document for a very long time. I only create PowerPoint presentations a few times a year for work, which could be easily replaced with PowerPoint online or Google Slides or even just some markdown files.
But I have a license for the entire office 365 including Copilot premium.
If you don't have to edit files or you are not supposed to, they should send you a PDF, unless it's an Excel. Excel is a much better viewer for itself because of many reasons (explore the formula, sort, filter) including that usually its sheets are not built to fit a particular page format.
Satya said some time ago that they expect soon to have more agents using Microsoft software than humans, and are working on transitioning their focus from serving humans to serving agents.
So they will switch to per-agent pricing instead of per-user. Fine, but that doesn't change the fact that Microsoft Office will become a just bunch of viewers as far as human usage is concerned. As far as generating Office documents, you can do that without using any Microsoft code.
This is one that's already true and "everyone" hasn't figured it out yet. But you don't really even need Office as a viewer, PDF is fine (for printable/portable fixed-layout) or just HTML. "Office" is a product that doesn't need to exist anymore, at least for the core apps. For day-to-day office work, you probably shouldn't be using those legacy apps, you should be reviewing portable document formats and asking an agent to make the revisions that you want.
> For Microsoft, this shift means products like M365 will act as the foundational layer where AI agents operate. Users will still need places to store documents, manage projects, search files, and track workflows
This sentiment is also why Microsoft crushed earnings this quarter. Their AI play is to create corpo-slop AI middleware, which sits between AI models and enterprise applications. Sure, others can go and build harnesses which can generate MS office documents, but MS is already doing it, and conveniently such harnesses will come with everyone's existing Microsoft 365 subscription.
The analogy is IBM. Just like IBM helped every old-money corporation on the planet figure out the whole "computers" thing 50 years ago, MS will help everyone solve the "AI" thing. The software will suck and will not really innovate, but it will make a ton of money
> The software will suck and will not really innovate, but it will make a ton of money
Microsoft’s goal isn’t to provide high quality software that outperforms other software, their goal is to provide an obvious and reasonably proximate answer to clueless execs trying to check things off of a procurement list so that existing contracts can snowball and competition is excluded.
We, collectively as a global species, really lost out when MS wasn’t divvied up in their anti-trust trial. Office as its own corporate entity would be in a radically different place right now, as would their enterprise customers.
Despite the title, I'm not sure it's actually bundled. Some of the skills plugins will download it on the first run. So it depends where they are grabbing it from rather than the presence of the binary on the system, but I haven't checked that deep into where they actually grab it.
The license itself may be present in the cache folder.
Alternatively, ChatGPT might happily disclose authorship and licensing if asked.
I'm not convinced of the argument that the fact that it is not bundled at download or even at install-time, would free them of the GPL responsibilities. And at this point.
I'm also not sure HOW the devs bundled libreoffice, whether they just mentioned in a prompt (use libreoffice), or whether they hardcoded a command (like apt install libreoffice), more likely the former, considering the recursive vibecoding nature of this software.
Whole lotta words to say that I don't know whether this is a GPL violation, but interested in the answer. If it is a violation, the likely fix will probably be yet another prompt that says something like "comply with licensing", which probably already exists, so a more specific "provide attribution (in a way that doesn't bother the user)"
Now someone please use ChatGPT/Codex or Claude Code to rewrite the entire LibreOffice source into a single Rust binary already! Just like Jarred Sumner did for Bun [1] or Carmine Paolino did for Fastpotify [2] - granted there are some rough edges for sure, but the slim diet trimmed down and performance gains were wrothy.
First Claude installed 10GB VM [0] without asking, but OpenAI ships LibreOffice.
What's next? Somebody ship their monorepo verbatim?
Honestly, not sure it's worth having those app on your localhost at all.
I ended up uninstalling all frontier labs bloated apps and start using Google AI Mode + Antigravity CLI / Claude Code sometimes.
Someone may need to explain to me what is wrong with this sorry. Is it because it bloats the app with functionality that some users will never use? I feel like that is fairly usual for productivity/business apps generally.
Oh right, yeah I agree. It's the kind of thing I can imagine the harness downloading in the background anyway (or instructing the user to do) at some point so I can see the sense in just skipping that bit. Kind of comforting they just do it the same way the rest of us do - if it ain't broke and so on.
I'd like to know OpenAI's approach to updating these things - their auto-updated is pretty aggressive already, but does that cover their vendored cached apps too?
It does, however, introduce a potentially enormous attack surface into ChatGPT, along with creative opportunities for less security conscious individuals and LLMs.
Yes, that's what I mean - maybe that didn't come across cos I said "bloats". I work for a business that builds web apps for corporates - LibreOffice is bundled in most of the repos of ours that I've seen, a bit like Imagick is in the broader sector.
Imagine the enormous complexity of office file formats if your business is literally building coding models/agents and still you choose to bundle LibreOffice.
I wonder if this says anything about the capabilities of AI. If it's better to bundle an entire headless office suite than ask your AI to build support for relatively well documented formats (or even to extract the file support parts it needs from Libra Office), that seems to suggest AI isn't as good as human devs just yet.
Also in the newest app I think the transcription feature is unusable. Ok, I can have a shortcut to start and stop recording. Wow, cool! Ok, but where did the transcription go? In my clipboard? To my cursor? Hey? :(
I've noticed that when I have codex read/modify word files the live reasoning snippets often allude to LibreOffice, so that makes sense. I think it was a quick and dirty way for them to interface with docx and xlsx files?
spinning up an entire copy of libreoffice sounds super heavy?, if someone here is actually using chatgpt to edit docx documents then they can feel free to use us.
vespper.com
Indeed, but that likely wouldn't have stopped someone from submitting it with a misleading title. HN is known to get a lot of misleading titles submitted and to have to change them. The <title> tag is better, it doesn't say "a full copy". In the screenshot it shows "headless" in the filename. I would simply add the tiny detail of headless to the <title> and use this title for HN: Codex Bundles Headless LibreOffice
Last time I used the Windows version it pegged all my cores at 100% usage for some reason. The machine became unusable. Instead I used Codex with JetBrains Rider (doing a C# project) and it worked flawlessly.
(I made a similar comment in a different post by Simon Willison yesterday about GPT Work)
I am unsure the direction that AI assisted document creation work will go in. I am opinionated and building something in the space. In this reply I discuss my view + what I have been building.
My opinion is: We now have AI, this new amazing flexible tool. We can throw it at any problem. But in terms of document creation we have a choice between old fashioned siloed document formats (.pptx, .pdf, .xlsx, .docx, etc.) and a freshly rendered - slightly randomly styled - html site with some basic javascript within it. I think these combinations are odd and do not maximise the powers of AI.
I've been building something called SmallDocs [0][1] which is a new take on work documents. It's all Markdown, but it always renders (100% privately) on the SmallDocs site. This means the SmallDocs renderer can convert recognised Markdown combinations into powerful traditional document formats [2]. For example, we convert a ```cells block into an in-line spreadsheet you can export to Excel.
This gives an agent the ability to express itself with a great deal of depth and flexibility. For example, your agent can produce a single data analysis "SmallDoc" with text, charts, spreadsheets, etc. [3] I find that combining formats quickens the speed I can understand a topic.
SmallDocs also have standardised and pretty boring styling. This means you spend less time understanding the layout of a flashy HTML page and more time on the content.
I also believe a pre-determined rendering engine has a lot of advantages over a freslhy built HTML artifact. It allows you to build in lot's of useful defaults that the agent doesn't have to code from scratch. These can be small things, for example, every time your agent renders a Markdown table in SmallDocs you can instantly copy it as a CSV or a PNG. And these can be bigger things, such as a rich slides DSL with solid styling defaults, which saves your agents a lot of tokens and results in consistently attractive HTML slides [4]. (Slides can also be automatically exported to .pdf and .pptx.)
I've been at it for a few months, and am still working on the project. I am looking for feedback and open source collaborators. Thanks for reading!
Ok, it's probably not a security decision. It's a common pattern with both storage and memory management to push most reservations to initialization, in order to cluster resource insufficiency errors to a specific install-time when the user or admin can do something about it. An excessive just-in-time approach in both storage and memory would cause OOM and Disk exhaustion to occur at many different times.
Walnut is the .NET and OpenXML backend. I think the point parent was trying to make it that it shouldn't be surprising Codex bundles runtimes for damn near everything.
I still don’t understand why with all their cash these companies dont redo their apps in Rust or native. They are all so heavy and dog slow. There are already some very fast cross platform (wasm too!) libraries that can do what poppler does as well as parse and produce various office file formats. Because 2gb is crazy town, these things could be around 100mb, just throw some tokens at the problem.
You should go actually try to make any basic automation work around these systems.
They purposely obscured, google doc is another example they completly hide the dom!
I spent months fighting word processing systems and ended up shipping libre. There's almost zero alternatives without that becoming your entire company.
Just throw some tokens at the problem. I’ve vibed up a Rust Crux hybrid app that runs well on macOS, iPad and wasm and does some pretty complex xml manipulation and other document work. Absolutely smokes electron and you get native UI.
On top of everyone else’s great points, if you make your own “fork” of something, then you have to consistently maintain it. Which can be done with tokens, but an extra cost with something that’s not as user tested.
Ah good point, I thought this was coming across from the "recreate" your own approach. I would fully agree with you on using native frameworks, though the eletron desktop is a great "entry" onto desktops ensuring companies only have to update 1 source, as opposed to natives everywhere.
A full implementation/rewrite of something like word, which is pretty complex and the quantity of edge cases is insane, in a relatively short amount of time, months, is very hard.
If they succeed with AI it will be huge: it's basically not possible to do it today with humans, no matter how many people you put on the job.
Me neither, but this is exactly my point: nowadays, no one will trust an "overnight word written in rust", unless someone prove that an "overnight word written in rust" is good enough.
And big AI LABs, with basically infinite tokens, are the only one in the position to do it.
Even then, I would not trust an AI lab as Microsoft does have a long history of support for word whereas I’m not sure the level of continued support from AI labs.
*support including bug fixes, vulnerabilities, continued user testing, interop with other services, standards, etc
Right now even OpenAI has its own copy of Overleaf (for latex). I’m not in the same circles as it’s intended users, though I haven’t heard any major use of it since the splash.
I mean, aside from all the NP Hard sub problems (I might not be reading your satire though), the real hard problem is that a "product" is not just software, but an ecosystem and a promise of maintenance of the abstract user experience & quality of it.
Especially when there are three different versions, and each has a different team, and they all can work together at the same time. Crazy amount of tech supporting it that breaks a humans context let alone a models context.
Ever letter is it's own object and they stitch it into the visual view. When you type one letter is turns a single word into multiple objects all versioned objects.
Can't imagine all the crazy race condition protections baked into that.
"ports like this" skips the part about Microsoft/enterprise software having a known and well tested surface area, the few examples we've seen are exceptional cases I suspect
reply