OpenOffice separating itself from Oracle and going it's separate way

[CarlTR6]

I have used LibreOffice and it is fine. I run Office 2007 because I like Outlook. If I could find an email client that I liked, I would use it and LibreOffice.

 

[madtownidiot]

Most of the people I know who use office 2007 or 2010 only have it because it's an MSDN or Enterprise edition, provided free of charge, but don't seem to like it very much. In fact, I can't think of anyone I know in person who has actually paid for Office '10.

I would bet microsoft would find some way to break whatever compatibility exists between MSoffice and "OpenOffice LibreOffice" if the latter were ever perceived as a threat to MSoffice sales.

Most average people I know simply want basic, easy to use word processing software.. Wordpad is more than adequate, but it's curious how well they've managed to hide that app.

 

[fseal]

Office 10 is still way too new for much penetration.

Comments about using a simple office suite and OO being a perfect fit are true if you are merely using it by yourself.

But if you are required to submit documents in any MS office formats like docx etc then you are better off having compatible software rather than put up with the formatting glitches of conversions between suites.

So anyone needing wide ranging compatibility would be better served by MS office (regardless of price).

If you were merely writing stuff for yourself or to print out at home and work out simple finances in a spreadsheet OR if you happen to work somplace that has standardized on OpenOffice.org then that makes more sense...

In my circles I see about 95% MS office use at work and at home. Unless you are a starving student, the low cost suites for MS office are as resonable as anything assuming your not someone that doen;t belive that software should ever cost money

 

[bobtran]

Office 10 is still way too new for much penetration.

Comments about using a simple office suite and OO being a perfect fit are true if you are merely using it by yourself.

But if you are required to submit documents in any MS office formats like docx etc then you are better off having compatible software rather than put up with the formatting glitches of conversions between suites.

So anyone needing wide ranging compatibility would be better served by MS office (regardless of price).

If you were merely writing stuff for yourself or to print out at home and work out simple finances in a spreadsheet OR if you happen to work somplace that has standardized on OpenOffice.org then that makes more sense...

In my circles I see about 95% MS office use at work and at home. Unless you are a starving student, the low cost suites for MS office are as resonable as anything assuming your not someone that doen;t belive that software should ever cost money

The other alternative it to use OpenOffice suit included with a Linux system, set default to Office 2007 XML and poof your docs save as .docx, .xlsx, etc. With Windows you will have to settle for the doc and xls formats....but, any Office 2007 and 2010 can open .doc and .xls's

If however your company requires 2007/2010 xml format (docx, xlsx) I'm sure they will be glad to provide the copy at no charge to you. I however consider $150 is a bit steep just to save as docx/xlsx instead of doc/xls for which there are free viewers if the client does not have Microsoft office installed and Office 2007/2010 will save a doc or xls to docx or xlsx meaning that this is not really an issue for a home machine in my book.

 

[madtownidiot]

The other alternative it to use OpenOffice suit included with a Linux system, set default to Office 2007 XML and poof your docs save as .docx, .xlsx, etc. With Windows you will have to settle for the doc and xls formats....but, any Office 2007 and 2010 can open .doc and .xls's

Plus native support for xml and PDF files and the ability to create SWF objects from PPT files.

 

[WindowsStar]

Ah. If Oracle has any sense left, they'd give them the name.

Oracle and sense really do not belong in the same sentence anymore.

+1

 

[si8mon]

but maybe at least now they'll be able to make a product that can realistically compete with MS Office, if even just a better GUI.

IMO ever since Office 2007, Open Office GUI has looked old and in need of an overhaul. Because the software suite has most of the features of Microsoft Office, except it is missing a modern GUI.

 

[BCXtreme]

but maybe at least now they'll be able to make a product that can realistically compete with MS Office, if even just a better GUI.

IMO ever since Office 2007, Open Office GUI has looked old and in need of an overhaul. Because the software suite has most of the features of Microsoft Office, except it is missing a modern GUI.

+1. Whether or not anyone wants to consider the ribbon specifically an "improvement", most programs have moved on from menu-submenu-subsubmenu, and are now using more visually-attractive ways to organize commands. Windows 7 itself has done away with the menu bar (at least as a default), most browsers have as well.

There are most likely a lot of different approaches that LibreOffice could use to make their GUI more modern without copying the ribbon. So it's not just a choice between ribbon or menu bar.

 

[madtownidiot]

I guess it's a matter of opinion, the ribbon UI may be more visually attractive, but it makes features more difficult to find and adds a lot of unnecessary bloat to programs. Personally, if there were a way to update office xp to current file formats, I would use that instead.

 

[BCXtreme]

I guess it's a matter of opinion, the ribbon UI may be more visually attractive, but it makes features more difficult to find and adds a lot of unnecessary bloat to programs. Personally, if there were a way to update office xp to current file formats, I would use that instead.

That was interesting. You confirmed it was a matter of opinion, and then stated yours as fact. :huh:

I can't imagine why you would want Office XP's GUI, it wouldn't blend into the look of Windows 7 at all... unless of course you use the Windows Classic theme (which I know some do, incredibly)...

 

[AVCHD]

Office 10 is still way too new for much penetration.

Comments about using a simple office suite and OO being a perfect fit are true if you are merely using it by yourself.

But if you are required to submit documents in any MS office formats like docx etc then you are better off having compatible software rather than put up with the formatting glitches of conversions between suites.

So anyone needing wide ranging compatibility would be better served by MS office (regardless of price).

If you were merely writing stuff for yourself or to print out at home and work out simple finances in a spreadsheet OR if you happen to work somplace that has standardized on OpenOffice.org then that makes more sense...

In my circles I see about 95% MS office use at work and at home. Unless you are a starving student, the low cost suites for MS office are as resonable as anything assuming your not someone that doen;t belive that software should ever cost money

I feel like a Ludite as I'm still using Office 2003. It does what I want and the 2010 trial looked more like a game than serious business software.

 

[pezzonovante]

I won't ever touch OpenOffice untill they implement the Ribbon UI. The menus and toolbars are fugly and counter-productive. Plus OneNote 2010 is the greatest software ever.

 

[Benjamin Hall]

Open office is leaving Oracle? oO

 

[CarlTR6]

I guess it's a matter of opinion, the ribbon UI may be more visually attractive, but it makes features more difficult to find and adds a lot of unnecessary bloat to programs. Personally, if there were a way to update office xp to current file formats, I would use that instead.

I concur. To me the ribbon is needlessly complex and difficult to use. But to each his own.

 

[Klaw117]

I thought both the menus and the ribbon were equally difficult when trying to find things. I would have to spend a few minutes sorting through the menus or through the ribbon options. However, since the ribbon is more visually attractive, I would consider it superior.

 

[pparks1]

I guess it's a matter of opinion, the ribbon UI may be more visually attractive, but it makes features more difficult to find and adds a lot of unnecessary bloat to programs. Personally, if there were a way to update office xp to current file formats, I would use that instead.

I concur. To me the ribbon is needlessly complex and difficult to use. But to each his own.

Yeah, not a ribbon fan here. I have such a hard time finding anything that is not obviously right in front of me.

 

[madtownidiot]

Office XP pro used what? Maybe 400MB HDD space? A full install of Office 2010 takes just under 2GB HDD space to perform the exact same functions, is harder to use, and on a system with anything less than 1 GB RAM, a SATA HDD and a dual core CPU, is barely functional.