Author Topic: Goodbye OpenOffice, Hello LibreOffice (Read 59879 times)

zridling · « **on:** October 11, 2010, 01:44 PM »

Since Oracle acquired Sun, it's shown aggressive hostility toward open source software by flooding the software landscape with patent lawsuits. With the acquisition of Sun came its more overt corporate control of OpenOffice. Not content to have a corporation control such a large open source project, the Document Foundation has forked OpenOffice into LibreOffice, which is "a better match to the values of our contributors, users, and supporters, and will enable a more effective, efficient, transparent, and inclusive Community." Among other things, their first goal is to clean the kludge in the code and improve its auto-update feature.

Linux distros are already updating their repositories with the LibreOffice beta, and it's only a matter of time before OpenOffice dies a well-deserved death.

Deozaan · « **Reply #1 on:** October 11, 2010, 04:55 PM »

I haven't been following OpenOffice much, but I recently read about http://go-oo.org/ here on DC and was wondering if someone could briefly explain the fundamental differences between Go-OO and LibreOffice.

Lashiec · « **Reply #2 on:** October 11, 2010, 05:40 PM »

Name and branding. That's all. All the patches Go-oo integrates are being merged into LibreOffice, so it's kind of a spiritual successor, with much stronger backing this time, or so I hope.

zridling · « **Reply #3 on:** March 01, 2011, 11:46 AM »

The Document Foundation raised the 50,000 Euros needed to incorporate in Germany in only eight days. Looks like they're off to a great start and here to stay. Woohoo!
http://www.pcworld.c...is_here_to_stay.html

Lashiec · « **Reply #4 on:** June 01, 2011, 04:50 PM »

Oracle finally gives up

40hz · « **Reply #5 on:** June 01, 2011, 05:30 PM »

Some play.
Some lose.

And some just fold their cards and go home.

Hard to feel sorry for them since they were the ones who precipitated the whole situation by trying to get heavy with everybody. Maybe Oracle will finally learn a hard truth: the world is a complex place. You don't get to make up all the rules of the game just because you happen to own the bat and the ball.

Even Microsoft knows that by now.

xtabber · « **Reply #6 on:** June 01, 2011, 10:02 PM »

Even Microsoft knows that by now.

-40hz (June 01, 2011, 05:30 PM)

In the early days, when there was real competition among word processing and spreadsheet programs, Microsoft Word and Excel were not copy protected, whereas the market leaders, WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3 were.

Once Microsoft had demolished the competition, it added copy protection to its office software.

zridling · « **Reply #7 on:** June 02, 2011, 11:44 AM »

Oracle finally gives up
-Lashiec (June 01, 2011, 04:50 PM)

For the sake of the license, that's good news, especially for IBM. But for now, OpenOffice died the minute LibreOffice released its first update after incorporating. Now if they will just work on making it easier to save a file more accurately to ePUB format, I'll be ecstatic.
http://www.zdnet.com...ffice-to-apache/9035

40hz · « **Reply #8 on:** June 02, 2011, 01:20 PM »

Once Microsoft had demolished the competition, it added copy protection to its office software.

-xtabber (June 01, 2011, 10:02 PM)

Can't really fault them for that. The casual theft of Office and Windows was completely out of control for about 20 years. Even normally honorable companies and organizations were pirating copies like there was no tomorrow because nothing was stopping them from doing it. It almost became a habit after a while.

I'm not a Microsoft apologist, but they do have a business to run. And activation and "genuine advantage" aren't too burdensome the way they've implemented it. I only know of one person that had a legitimate tech issue with it. And a simple phone call got it cleared up in less than fifteen minutes. Everybody else I've run into that had problems was playing licensing games with Microsoft.

----------

Note: It comes as as a shock to most people when they discover that the less expensive OEM copy of Windows and/or Office (which came pre-installed on the brand new PC they bought) is usually licensed for use on that specific PC only, and is not transferable to a different machine. Even if the machine it was originally installed on died. It's up to the PC manufacturer how best to cover you if that happens. If you're out of warranty, you're likely out of luck.

It pays to read the EULAs. (You did read them didn't you? $:-\$ )

xtabber · « **Reply #9 on:** June 03, 2011, 09:54 AM »

Once Microsoft had demolished the competition, it added copy protection to its office software.

-xtabber (June 01, 2011, 10:02 PM)

Can't really fault them for that. The casual theft of Office and Windows was completely out of control for about 20 years. Even normally honorable companies and organizations were pirating copies like there was no tomorrow because nothing was stopping them from doing it. It almost became a habit after a while.

I'm not a Microsoft apologist, but they do have a business to run. And activation and "genuine advantage" aren't too burdensome the way they've implemented it. I only know of one person that had a legitimate tech issue with it. And a simple phone call got it cleared up in less than fifteen minutes. Everybody else I've run into that had problems was playing licensing games with Microsoft.

-40hz (June 02, 2011, 01:20 PM)

I think you missed the point. Microsoft could afford to allow piracy 20 years ago because Word and Excel were not their main source of revenue and were not major players in the office market. They winked at unlicensed users because they knew that would get them a huge share of the market among those who could or would not pay for WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3 or other programs that typically cost $300 and up per user at the time.

Microsoft later bundled free or very low cost copies of Office with computers running Windows 3.1 and 95, which further undercut the comptetion. The approach was purely predatory, and it was successful. Microsoft Office became the single standard in the workplace, after which they were able to raise prices and institute draconian anti-piracy measures, both techonolgical and legal, to preserve their position.

Microsoft continues to provide free or very low cost legal copies of Office software to students and academics, not out of generosity or social conscience, but because they know that keeps new workers entering the job market from bringing other, lower cost alternatives into the corporate workplace.

You are right, of course, that they have a business to run, and while bare-knuckled, these practices were not necessarily abusive, unlike some of their others (e.g., IE vs. Netscape). But it does illustrate the importance of preserving a competitive marketplace in software, as in any other product.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #10 on:** June 03, 2011, 11:24 AM »

I'm not a Microsoft apologist, but they do have a business to run. And activation and "genuine advantage" aren't too burdensome the way they've implemented it.
-40hz (June 02, 2011, 01:20 PM)

Well... That's easy to say when your sitting there with an MSDN subscription and a spread sheet full of keys (which we both have iirc) for anything you might want/need to play with. But the view is not quite as clear cut for everybody. Mind you I'm not disagreeing, I'm just pointing out a teency bit of a glass house factor to the position on something we're sort of insulated from.

40hz · « **Reply #11 on:** June 03, 2011, 12:26 PM »

I think you missed the point. Microsoft could afford to allow piracy 20 years ago because Word and Excel were not their main source of revenue and were not major players in the office market. They winked at unlicensed users because they knew that would get them a huge share of the market among those who could or would not pay for WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3 or other programs that typically cost $300 and up per user at the time.
-xtabber (June 03, 2011, 09:54 AM)

Maybe. But having worked as a part of a Fortune 5 (not 500) company team that hammered out one of the first corporate site license deals ever made with Microsoft back in the 80s, saying that Redmond "winked" at bootlegging Office (or was not viewing it as an important part of their revenue stream and overall sales strategy) does not coincide with what we learned about Microsoft, either through official or unofficial channels. Quite the contrary in fact. They were absolutely incensed about it. But there was a looming antitrust issue confronting them, and they decided to let it go until the issue with the Feds got resolved. IBM did the same thing with people cloning its PC design. At the time, it wasn't considered an issue they wanted to bring to a head - for exactly the same reason.

I'm not a Microsoft apologist, but they do have a business to run. And activation and "genuine advantage" aren't too burdensome the way they've implemented it.
-40hz (June 02, 2011, 01:20 PM)

Well... That's easy to say when your sitting there with an MSDN subscription and a spread sheet full of keys (which we both have iirc) for anything you might want/need to play with. But the view is not quite as clear cut for everybody. Mind you I'm not disagreeing, I'm just pointing out a teency bit of a glass house factor to the position on something we're sort of insulated from.
-Stoic Joker (June 03, 2011, 11:24 AM)

I have a little trouble with this new 'grass roots socialism' I'm starting to see, where anytime somebody wants something they can't afford brings up accusations of greed and "not playing fair." One reason I have a problem with that is because there are viable alternatives to Windows and Office which are available for free.

And yes it is true that I have a Partner Action Pack subscription (not the MSDN - because I couldn't afford that one - and it's not bloody fair either!

) which I use in my business. But it's primarily there to stay up on the Microsoft products we provide support for.

For home and personal use, I'm virtually 100% Linux/FOSS these days.

I'd love to migrate all our internal business systems over to Linux. But I won't for the simple reason it forces us to use Microsoft's technology on a day-to-day basis. If you want to support something it's best you be an actual user in order to not lose sight of your client's perspective. I think the expression "Eat your own dog food" is what the team that developed Windows NT called it.

Regarding activation and WGA, I'll stand by my contention it's not too burdensome. One click and an Internet connection is all it takes. If something screams at you, a call to Microsoft's toll-free number will get it straightened out very quickly and you're off and running. I've never known anybody that had a problem with the way Microsoft handles those calls. Especially since they almost always give the caller the benefit of the doubt, even if they're suspicious. I have heard anecdotal evidence to the contrary. But neither I nor my clients have ever experienced any problems.

Going back to my earlier note, the most common problem is people attempting to migrate a PC manufacturer's OEM copy of Office over to a new PC they bought. Usually they order a new machine and just figure they can use their old copy on that. Unfortunately, the standard OEM EULA specifically says it doesn't allow that.

One of the reasons why those "cheap copies of Office" are so cheap is because they're pegged to the machine they came with. But even then, most times if it's a current Office release, and it's being installed on the same make of PC, it will go on and authenticate without any problems.

Dunno. It still doesn't seem like such a big deal to me

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #12 on:** June 03, 2011, 01:02 PM »

Or me, but like I said, we're used to it (and or have/know alternatives). Let me phrase this a bit differently.

You know that call you get from a client now and then, they're in a cold sweat, panic in their voice, 'cause -even if they are completely innocent- they're worried about what the MS guy will think when/if they call? These are the same people that would peak nervously out the window for hours after getting an Illegal Operation error in the Win9x days.

^^^Those People^^^ think it's annoying to have the shit scared out of them...

40hz · « **Reply #13 on:** June 03, 2011, 02:04 PM »

^Ok, I see your point, and I'll concede it can be a genuine problem for some people.

zridling · « **Reply #14 on:** June 03, 2011, 06:15 PM »

Don't forget that probably half the (small) businesses on the planet using MS Office are still using v.2003< or earlier. For some, you'd think at some point, they'd want to make a clean break and use LibreOffice (or a Web 2.0 solution). Whether they can't afford later versions or don't want the UI or OS upgrade it would require, I'm surprised it's just not considered.

Given that I regularly convert MSOffice files back and forth to LibreOffice (mostly spreadsheets), it's pretty hard to make the argument that LO garbles the format.

40hz · « **Reply #15 on:** June 03, 2011, 09:33 PM »

Don't forget that probably half the (small) businesses on the planet using MS Office are still using v.2003< or earlier. For some, you'd think at some point, they'd want to make a clean break and use LibreOffice (or a Web 2.0 solution). Whether they can't afford later versions or don't want the UI or OS upgrade it would require, I'm surprised it's just not considered.

-zridling (June 03, 2011, 06:15 PM)

Or that they don't take advantage of SoftMaker's offer for a free copy of their own very capable 2008 Office package, which is available here if they don't like LibreOffice. (There's also a free Linux version available.)

You can now download a fully functional and permanently usable version of the SoftMaker Office 2008 office suite.

SoftMaker Office is a complete and full-featured office that comes with a word processor, a spreadsheet, and a presentation-graphics program. If you like SoftMaker Office 2008 as much as hundreds of thousands of other people do, you should consider upgrading to its successor, SoftMaker Office 2010.

I actually prefer using SoftMaker's wordprocessor TextMaker over Word on older laptops or PCs without much RAM.

Can't afford Office? No need to pirate or complain about price tags. Just grab a free copy of Softmaker's Office suite and be done with it.

cyberdiva · « **Reply #16 on:** June 04, 2011, 09:42 AM »

I actually prefer using SoftMaker's wordprocessor TextMaker over Word on older laptops or PCs without much RAM.

-40hz (June 03, 2011, 09:33 PM)

I prefer SoftMaker's TextMaker over Word, period.

I had the free SoftMaker 2008 on an old, slow desktop running WinXP Pro, and I now have SoftMaker 2010 on my Toshiba netbook and my new, fast Dell XPS 8300 desktop. (At some point SoftMaker made me an offer I couldn't refuse and I upgraded to the 2010 version.) I've been very pleased. Admittedly, much of the time I use a text editor (UltraEdit) rather than a program like TextMaker or Word, so my needs may not be as complex as those of some people who use Word all the time, but I've found that TextMaker2010 meets my needs very well with less bulk and a lower price than Word.

cmpm · « **Reply #17 on:** June 04, 2011, 10:43 AM »

So what is Oracle's main business?
Servers and products in that line of work?

I signed up at Oracle for news and they called me, left a message to call them.
Yes they have my #, but no big deal to me.

I don't think they have what I would use, ever.

But considering they called, I suspect there is an aggressive sales force to incorporate their products as a business standard, of which I have not much to do with.

http://www.oracle.com/index.html

40hz · « **Reply #18 on:** June 04, 2011, 11:21 AM »

Servers and products in that line of work?
-cmpm (June 04, 2011, 10:43 AM)

Yes. And more recently, a bit of patent trolling.

Gothi[c] · « **Reply #19 on:** June 04, 2011, 12:01 PM »

I signed up at Oracle for news and they called me, left a message to call them.
Yes they have my #, but no big deal to me.

I don't think they have what I would use, ever.

But considering they called, I suspect there is an aggressive sales force to incorporate their products as a business standard, of which I have not much to do with.

Oracle has been doing that since the 90's
I remember getting a call from them about their oracle database products way back in the 90's just because i had created an account to download something (forget what) ...

Shades · « **Reply #20 on:** June 04, 2011, 03:34 PM »

I think they (Oracle) exchange their sales-force on a regular basis with Quest Software (creators of TOAD, a very extensive manager for Oracle databases).

Both are very aggressive. They even used the "...or else..." sales-pitch on me when they called years ago. As I have to work with Oracle, I couldn't drop Oracle, but QUEST got some verbal abuse back and lost me forever as customer.

Hmmm...memory lane definitely has some "potholes" in it.

tosim · « **Reply #21 on:** March 28, 2012, 09:49 AM »

Overall, it appears that LibreOffice has OpenOffice beat. However, can somebody please compare LibreOffice with SoftmakerOffice,2008? Thank you.

Shades · « **Reply #22 on:** March 28, 2012, 10:18 AM »

LibreOffice comes default with a PDF generator/printer that is actually very good (at least for the .doc/.docx documents that I convert to PDF). It also is able to handle the new .docx/.xlsx/.pptx formats.

The portable version of LibreOffice that I am using (3.3) is not fast with booting its components, though. Part of that is the fact that it is portable and LibreOffice is 2 to 3 times bigger than SoftMaker Office 2008.

40hz · « **Reply #23 on:** March 28, 2012, 12:28 PM »

Overall, it appears that LibreOffice has OpenOffice beat. However, can somebody please compare LibreOffice with SoftmakerOffice,2008? Thank you.
-tosim (March 28, 2012, 09:49 AM)

To do a feature by feature comparison of Libre vs Softmaker would take a team and fill a book.

The easiest way to see what you think is to either download a free manual from their website, or grab a free copy of the 2008 executable and give it a try. If you like the 2008 version, you'll like the later editions as well since most of the changes have more to do with achieving closer compatibility with MS Office than they do with enhancing Softmaker's already huge feature set.

This is what it looks like:

Goodbye OpenOffice, Hello LibreOffice

Grab a copy of the 2008 version here.

If I were to compare it, I'd see Softmaker's wordprocessor more like an earlier version of MS Word. Something like the Office XP or 2003 version. Libre is more like an 800lb gorilla that does just about everything - but has it's own distinctive look and feel. It's definitely heavier feeling than Softmaker. I'm guessing that will change as more and more of the old OpenOffice codebase gets rewritten and replaced by the Libre team. But only time will tell.

FWIW - I pretty much use Softmaker's TextMaker for all my wordprocessing these days. For spreadsheets I still use Excel because I share many of my spreadsheets with clients. So I can't risk glitches or macro/basic hassles when I send files over.

Can't speak about presentation graphics because I hate slides and overheads during presentations. So I'll only use PowerPoint or SM Presentations if there's a gun pointed at my head.

If I do need to create infographics for a talk I'm giving I'm much more likely to use standard illustration apps. I don't need the fancy tray organizers and templates in PowerPoint since I'll seldom ever need more than two or three slides no matter what. I do create handouts however. But they're outlines or notes - not a stack of bullet point charts. I'll usually just do those in a wordprocessor or outliner app.

tosim · « **Reply #24 on:** March 29, 2012, 10:11 AM »

Thanks for the info. I had already downloaded, but not installed, awhile back Softmaker Office2008. I've just finished downloading the portable version of LibreOffice. I'll wait on that too, as LibreOffice came along with my installalling Linux Mint12 on another machine, and I'd like to check it out there. As an aside, I've been using WinOffice2007 since it came out, but only use Word and Excel.