New Word Processor

[Cogito]

As a side node, Windows Vista has about 60m LOC. That would take 16,667 years for a single developer to write. Vista took about 4 years to write, which suggests that Microsoft has about 15-20K developers working on Vista, when you account for the 3-4x group complexity multiplier.

But that's assuming Vista was written from scratch... Wasn't it based on previous Windows code?

[DavidV]

BTW, I just came across some industry estimates which say that Vista took 10,000 developers 5 years to write.

[DragonMaci]

According to some estimates, there are 30 million lines of code in Mac Office. Let's assume that Word is 1/4 of that or 7.5 million. According to numerous studies, the average programmer writes about 300 lines of code per month (in terms of total development time).

Let's assume you wanted to reproduce just 1/10 the of the functionality of Microsoft Word. At 750,000 lines of code, that should take you just 208 years.

For starters I'd write a hell of a lot more than 300 lines per month. I'd be disappointed in that. Secondly, I will using VC#. That should makes things a bit easier.

[Prometheus98876]

For starters I'd write a hell of a lot more than 300 lines per month. I'd be disappointed in that. Secondly, I will using VC#. That should makes things a bit easier.

Let us say that you managed 3000 lines of code a month then, which by most standards seems pretty good. And lets us assume :

Let's assume you wanted to reproduce just 1/10 the of the functionality of Microsoft Word. At 750,000 lines of code, that should take you just 208 years

as David puts it. And now let us assume that for some reason you only need half as many lines of code as this. That is still 125 months, or over 10 years , even using REALLY generous figures. Do you see what I am saying?

[DragonMaci]

Do you see what I am saying?

Is that using Visual C#? Or a non-visual based tool? Remember with Visual C# I don't have to program as much of the interface as it does a lot of the work for me.

Further, 10% of the Word is no doubt well ahead of how much I will need to do.

[Prometheus98876]

Is that using Visual C#? Or a non-visual based tool? Remember with Visual C# I don't have to program as much of the interface as it does a lot of the work for me.

You seem to think MS hand code all the interfaces in Word etc, I would be surprised if this was the case, I am sure they use some of their own tools like VS etc to design interfaces...

Further, 10% of the Word is no doubt well ahead of how much I will need to do.

Well firstly if you are worried bout using less lines of code, VB might be a better choice as compared to C# (C# is not really any faster than VB, the difference between the languages are more a matter of syntax and style).

Programming the interface is only the start, then there comes more tricky things involving often many many lines for things like spell-checking. I would think that at some stage some features ALONE might run into hundreds of lines of code once you include proper error-checking etc etc.

The fact that you are using C# or VB or some other .NEt language does not magically replace the fact that you need a great deal of code to get your word processor to do what it needs to, it just means it might be a little simpler and a little less time consuming.

My figures cover something roughly 5% as powerful as Word remember..do you plan to do something less than 5% as powerful?

Edited January 18, 2007 by Prometheus98876

[DragonMaci]

Well firstly if you are worried bout using less lines of code, VB might be a better choice as compared to C# (C# is not really any faster than VB, the difference between the languages are more a matter of syntax and style).

I thought you once told me C# is more powerful.

Programming the interface is only the start, then there comes more tricky things involving often many many lines for things like spell-checking. I would think that at some stage some features ALONE might run into hundreds of lines of code once you include proper error-checking etc etc.

Well, duh! Mind telling me something I don't already know?

The fact that you are using C# or VB or some other .NEt language does not magically replace the fact that you need a great deal of code to get your word processor to do what it needs to, it just means it might be a little simpler and a little less time consuming.

Again, well duh! Again. minf telling me something I don't already know? had you of thought about what i said properly, you woulf seen that I was noly saying that the use VC# would result in less than the use non-visual tools and nothing else.

My figures cover something roughly 5% as powerful as Word remember..do you plan to do something less than 5% as powerful?

I have no idea of the exact comparision. I just know that I won't have the massive repitition of Word (there is quite a lot of lines gone there) and that I won't have any of Word's more advanced features that I don't think are directly relevant to authors (again a lot of lines gone, more than before in fact). Remember, Writer's Word is trying aimed mainly at writer's, not the people that need Word's more advanced features. Cutting out those features will make a big difference as to the code.

On a side, note: eventually a version will use a dictionary I myself will write, one that only contains words I think are poorly defined in dictionaries (such as ones with looping definitons). However, since I plan to write this any, it will not add anything to what I will have to do beyond a simple means of reference.

[Prometheus98876]

I might have told you that, but if so then I suspect I was missing the point at the time.

We are quite easily still looking at 350,000 lines of code....

So lets say you then cut it down to 125000 lines of code (which might be a little unlikely if you want this to be competitive product) that is still 5 years work at the unlikely rate of 3000 lines of code a month. And you are very unlikely to do this many lines of code a month, that is an average of 100 lines of code a day, and then unless you are master of efficient coding you have something that has like 1.5-3% of the capabilities of Word. Now let us go further down and say you get it down to 50000 lines of code and make a super trim world processor for authors. OK, cool, now you might be able to do it in about 2-3 years, however is it then a commercially viable product? Probably not, even though the number of code lines is not everything (you can do some amazing things with very little code after all).

[DragonMaci]

Well it may be that some don't think of it as much of a word processor, but it's too advanced to be a text editor. Think about 2 times as much as RoughDraft's power, which still isn't much.

[Prometheus98876]

Well I have no idea how many lines of code Roughdraft contains, I would imagine quite a lot, but if had been done in say VC# probably quite a lot less (while still having many thousands of lines).

I am not trying to put you off here, I am just making sure that you do realize what you might be in for, depending on whatever level of complexity you decide is right for the project in the end. It sounds like a good project, do not get me wrong, I just think you need to be make sure you know what you are in for. If you want I can provide some help with the coding/testing, however only to a quite limited extent when it comes to coding due to time constraints.

[DragonMaci]

I understand and appreciate the intent. I also appreciate the offer.

Also please bear in mind that the main target is authors, not the average person. However, anyone who wants a word processor that is not cluttered the Word, and even OpenOffice is to a lesser extent, but wants something better than say, RoughDraft or WordTabs, is welcome to it. Well really any individual willing to pay for it is welcome.

[DavidV]

For starters I'd write a hell of a lot more than 300 lines per month. I'd be disappointed in that. Secondly, I will using VC#. That should makes things a bit easier.

Do you realize at Microsoft has some of the best developers in the world? They've been at this a lot longer than you. Furthermore, they use productivity tools and procedures that other companies only dream about.

Visual Studio? .Net? Microsoft invented it. How exactly do you intend to be 10X as productive as the world's best engineers working at the world's best software company?

[DragonMaci]

Do you realize at Microsoft has some of the best developers in the world? They've been at this a lot longer than you. Furthermore, they use productivity tools and procedures that other companies only dream about.

Visual Studio? .Net? Microsoft invented it. How exactly do you intend to be 10X as productive as the world's best engineers working at the world's best software company?

Uh, I never said anyhting about how mant lines. That was Dwayne that said 3000 lines a month. I didn't say anything about that. If you are going to criticise me at least criticise me for things I actually said.

[DavidV]

Well, whatever. Just how do you plan to beat a full time senior software engineer by "a hell of a lot" at all?

As I mentioned before, Mac Office has 30,000,000 lines of code. Assuming that you can equal a full-time MS professional (which I doubt) it would take you 8,333 years to reproduce office. If you try to do just 1/100th, it would still take you 83 years. 1/1000th = 8.3 years.

You mentioned RoughDraft. The installer for it is 1232 KB. Assuming that's the size of the final executable, that's about 10,000 LOC. Even that would take about 3 years of full time work to recreate.

[DragonMaci]

Well, whatever. Just how do you plan to beat a full time senior software engineer by "a hell of a lot" at all?

For starters, I thought you meant the average, not senior ones. Secondly, with less features I can spend less time on planning and trying to think of the code. Less features also means less time spent on testing. Thirdly, I don't have to spend times on some things they have to, such as meetings, collaboration, and much much more. All of this results in a hell of a lot more time for programming.

Even that would take about 3 years of full time work to recreate.

I am pretty sure, based on my interpreations of things he has said, that it didn't take the creator of it anywhere near that long and he was by himself.

[Prometheus98876]

Well apparently if you believe what the author says on his site and the release date of Roughdraft 1, then it might have taken him about 2 years to produce (something around 2001) and he then spent years getting it up to its most current form. However after all this it is still a very crude product (for instance Page Breaks are not supported in Roughdraft 3, the latest version)..that is after many many years to get it to its current form. Hopefully you are aiming a great deal higher than RoughDraft...

[DragonMaci]

I have decided to look into making it a set of extensions for OpenOffice. That should cut down on the required coding by a massive amount. However there is one problem. The installer for it uses Windows Installer and my Windows Installer won't work.

[DragonMaci]

Never mind that. Windows Installer is fixed now. I am now looking into OpenOffice extension development.

[DragonMaci]

I am now looking into OpenOffice extension development.

Better yet, I will look into making it a suite of Microsoft Office extensions. Microsoft claim that there are 450 million office users. Just 1% of the market would mean 4.5 million customers. Unlikely, but something worth aiming for.

[DragonMaci]

Writer's Word is dead and a phoenix known as Writer's Office has arisen from the ashes. Writer's Office is a suite of Word add-ons. The reason for the change of mind is that the Ribbon is Office 2007 eliminates my complaint of bloat and this way is an easier and more efficient way of getting the product, not to mention ,more features being available to the customer.

The Writer's Office applications and features are:

Writer's Office Project Manager

- Top half of left pane has a tree structure showing headings, scenes, sequences and chapters that can be laid-out under chapter headings (with parts above that) and given their own names that can optionally show-up in the printout. They are linked to from the left pane.

- The ability to have alternate headings, scenes, sequences, and chapters.

- The ability to distinguish turning-point scenes/sequences from simple story-lines (in bottom half of left pane). Ability to show concurrency of action (when using a convergent story-lines plot) or dependency of action (when using a Hero's Journey or Coming of Age type story-line). They are linked to from the left pane.

- The ability to manipulate the tree-outline of a novel to easily move scenes, sequences, parts, and chapters around.

- Real version control for each project. The ability to hover the mouse cursor over a file's name in the directory and see a good paragraph's worth of description/summary about what that file is in terms of the writing in it. The author must enter this information. The File Browser can be set to show a snippet of the manuscript as well (the snippet is chosen by the author).

- Tracks chapters, scenes, sections, parts, sequences, projects, characters, words, phrases, sentences.

- Can link multiple documents as one project and open them all at once.

- Context sensitive Ribbon.

- Integrates with Book Planner and Submission Tracker.

Writer's Office Project Planner

- Outline, plot, theme, subject, style, genre, character, chapter, setting, part, section/sequence, philosophies, histories, and research notes.

- Context sensitive Ribbon.

- Integrates with Project Manager and Submission Tracker.

Writer's Office Submission Tracker

- Tracks submissions, projects, progress, deadlines, and time spent on projects.

- Integrates with Project Manager and Book Planner.

Writer's Office Dictionary

- Traditonal definitons.

- Objective definitions.

- Synonms.

- Database can be edited.

- Can use third party databases.

- Can check online dictionaries, thesauruses, and encyclopedias.

Writer's Office Diary

- Time.

- Date.

- Calander.

- Diary.

- Planner.

- To-do lists.

- Reminder.

- Alarm.

- Timer.

- Context sensitive Ribbon.

Note: These will be accessible from a special tab in the Ribbon in Microsoft Word.

Does anyone still think I am asking too much of myself?

Edited March 21, 2007 by DragonMaci

[Prometheus98876]

It does remove bloat, at least on your behalf, some might say Office itself is a little bloated (not me), but lets not blame you for that

Im glad you decided to take my advice on this, if not for the same reasons I gave entirely, it as you say, means a lot less w\ork for yu and allows you to focus on what you really want to get done.

Just remember, if you uses the MS Ribbon License, not to compete with Office in any way, but that doesnt seem likely to happen at this stage (the license says not to compete with Office products), and if anything this might attract a few people to MS Office. Last I checked that was a good thing for MS.

I would suggest renaming the Project Planner to prevent confusion between your app and Project. The name implies it has a similar function, when it is actually quite different. However, this is probably not a biggie, anyone can with some effort tell them apart easily enough.

I like the tree-layout for the major sections in the Project Manager, I hope you will be able to drag and drop sections around, that would be rather handy..\

Dont bother giving "traditional ' definitions, dont cater to non-objective use of the English language, why should you?

I think the abilty to password lock the dictionary is wise, to prevent unwanted editing.

Which db formats will it be able to communicate with ad which format will it use? MS SQL / Access probably. But as many formats as possible would be nice, as mgiht the option to use MySQL dbs natively, then people can use PHPMyAdmin or such to edit it.

Perhaps the abilty to backup the dictioinary database?

Will the diary be able to deal with say iCal files from calender programs?

I will ask more or point things out more as I have time and they arise...

Sounds pretty good so far though.

[DragonMaci]

It does remove bloat, at least on your behalf, some might say Office itself is a little bloated (not me), but lets not blame you for that

I wouldn't say it removes the bloat, but it removes my complaint about the bloat due to the better grouping of functions.

Just remember, if you uses the MS Ribbon License, not to compete with Office in any way, but that doesnt seem likely to happen at this stage (the license says not to compete with Office products), and if anything this might attract a few people to MS Office. Last I checked that was a good thing for MS.

For starters it will be a word add-on that only adds stuff Office doesn't have. Secondly, I will recommend people get Office not just Word, so I might cause a few extra copies of Office to be sold. So in no way will I be competing. Besides covering Office features would just be pointless.

I would suggest renaming the Project Planner to prevent confusion between your app and Project. The name implies it has a similar function, when it is actually quite different. However, this is probably not a biggie, anyone can with some effort tell them apart easily enough.

Given that it meant to cover all sorts of writing projects, not just books the name Project Planner is a good one. For that reason Book Planner should be called Project Planner (and it now is).

I like the tree-layout for the major sections in the Project Manager, I hope you will be able to drag and drop sections around, that would be rather handy..\

You can.

Dont bother giving "traditional ' definitions, dont cater to non-objective use of the English language, why should you?

Some words don't need redefining.

I think the abilty to password lock the dictionary is wise, to prevent unwanted editing.

Ah, didn't you see that one of the features is the ability to edit the dictionary database> So, no.

Which db formats will it be able to communicate with ad which format will it use? MS SQL / Access probably. But as many formats as possible would be nice, as mgiht the option to use MySQL dbs natively, then people can use PHPMyAdmin or such to edit it.

MS SQL. Can I add support for My SQL or other non-MS one ones with Visual Basic?

Perhaps the abilty to backup the dictioinary database?

Good idea.

Will the diary be able to deal with say iCal files from calender programs?

I suppose

Thanks for the advice.

Edited March 21, 2007 by DragonMaci

[DragonMaci]

By the way, I have yet to decide on an exact pricing model, but I can say that each application will be available seperately or in a suite with all five applications.

[Prometheus98876]

"Some words don't need redefining."

Sure, so keep those definitions in your Objective dictionary then, there is still no reason to provide non-Objective definitions, or a dictionary just for them.

"Ah, didn't you see that one of the features is the ability to edit the dictionary database> So, no."

Even the ability for unauthorised users to edit it? Authorised users can edit it with a password right? Imagine if you installed the dictionary but then say your sister came on and edited the db so some words had poor definitions or deleted entire words...not good huh? Or even if a hacker did that....unlikely as that might be.

'MS SQL. Can I add support for My SQL or other non-MS one ones with Visual Basic? "

well, you shouldnt find it to hard to be able to communicate with other common database formats.

[DragonMaci]

Sure, so keep those definitions in your Objective dictionary then, there is still no reason to provide non-Objective definitions, or a dictionary just for them.

I said "traditional" not non-objective. Those words don't need redefing so the traditional defines get to stay in.

Even the ability for unauthorised users to edit it? Authorised users can edit it with a password right? Imagine if you installed the dictionary but then say your sister came on and edited the db so some words had poor definitions or deleted entire words...not good huh? Or even if a hacker did that....unlikely as that might be.

Then password protect your user account. Besides backing up databases mitigates that problem.

well, you shouldnt find it to hard to be able to communicate with other common database formats.

If so, then yes, I will include support for other database formats, though, MS SQL and MySQL are the only ones I know. But that can be fixed with research.