Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Sun Microsystems Software IT Linux

Associated Press Reviews OpenOffice 481

blacklily8 writes "Peter Svensson of the Associated Press has reviewed OpenOffice and declared it a Microsoft Office killer: 'Microsoft Corp. killed off the competition for office software suites and became a de facto monopoly in the area, with what result? The competition is back and, this time, it's free!' Svensson thinks the better Word/WordPerfect file conversion, ability to save as PDF, and new BASE database component make the beta a better candidate for success than the previous versions--and when the kinks get worked out, step back!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Associated Press Reviews OpenOffice

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:36PM (#12455552)
    We won, the battle boys! Microsoft is no more!
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 06, 2005 @04:38PM (#12456512)

      I know you are being sarcastic, but the fact is that Microsoft Office is destined to be a niche product like WordPerfect. In the case of WordPerfect it's law firms, for example. In the case of Word, it'll be the businesses who got sucked into Microsoft's "business automation" lock-in strategy too deep to bail out.

      In a way, this reminds me of all the proprietary TCP/IP-work-alikes back in the day. There were lots of proprietary networks, and some companies even invested millions into their infrastructures. Now, those proprietary networks still exist, but in very limited numbers and the companies using them pay rediculous sums of money to maintain them. This is the future for Microsoft Office.

      For everyone else, such as myself, my family, university students, huge numbers of small businesses, large corps looking to save a few million dollars, and governments looking to control their own data, OO.org really is an Office killer.

      Yes, soon, we can break out the champagne!

    • by Uruk ( 4907 )
      Oh, wait...the battle's not quite over.

      My biggest problem with applications like Open Office and Microsoft Word is that the general way they're put together sucks. It seems everybody thinks that applications always have to be built based off of what people are familiar with. Certainly there are strong arguments for that.

      But wouldn't it be cool if one of these "Microsoft Killing Apps" would strike out in a truly new, really interesting direction, rather than focusing on reimplementing everything Microsof
      • by Anonymous Coward
        Only people who have never worked in tech support make comments like this. If you've ever had to support a product that had a major UI change, you would understand that it really pisses people off.

        If the point is to get everyone to move off of Office, then you *MUST* emulate Office to a large degree, and yes this includes look and feel.

        I'm not saying that innovative new ways to handle the UI are bad, I am saying that the average joe needs them in moderation in order to be able to cope with the least amoun
  • by shreevatsa ( 845645 ) <<shreevatsa.slashdot> <at> <gmail.com>> on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:37PM (#12455569)
    and when the kinks get worked out, step back!
    You mean it's still buggy?
    Yes it is, but it's already a lot better MS Office, and doesn't have annoying clips, dogs and cats either.
    • Rocky the dog makes a fine corporate workplace companion. I could spend all day clicking the "Animate!" option on him.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      No, it's not better than MS Office. Look, yes, MS is a law-breaking, convicted monopolist whose office products have, at best, stagnated.

      But OO.o isn't better. It's not nearly "as good" even, and until those that promote open source products figure out that advocacy isn't a replacement for solid code and high-usabilty, highly-polished interface, it won't get there.
      • You've obviously never used OO... maybe not even M$... I've used both and for 90+% of the tasks OO is as good or better.... Sure there might be some obscure thing that M$ supports, but I can't think of it right now....

        OO works, M$ Works.. OO does'nt cost me 300-400$
        • If OpenOffice ships with Solaris 10, Aix 5.4, all linux distros, Mac OS... then it's a matter of time before it becomes the standard.

          • After it achieves market dominance the OO team will continue to refine and make it more usable, as opposed to M$ who seems only worried about making convuluted data formats that are harder for other apps to read.
        • Obscure? Try the total lack of support for video in Impress.

          That's not Impress-ive at all.
        • Come on now... what is OO "better" at? For some things, it's as good, for other things it's not as good, for some things it's useless. I haven't found anything it's "better" at.
        • by cecille ( 583022 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @04:34PM (#12456464)
          Although there are still areas where Open Office still needs some help. I just TA'd a class at the university (intro to computer applications - basic computer couse with lectures on basic computer theory and labs on software and web development). One of the assignment was done in word, using some of their nice pretty features (hey, it's an applications course...). The assignment included a section where they were to write a few paragraphs comparing open office to word. Overall, the comparions found them to be fairly equal, with OO having the added bonus of being free. However, I did get a few comments on how hard it was to apply styles correctly in OO and also to use some of their auto generated content functions. On the bright side, their approach to figure and table captaions is fantastic, and IMHO is vastly superior to the microsoft approach.

          Overall though, the biggest complaint was that when you boot up OO all you get is a big blank grey screen with no instructions on where to go from there. For a beginner computer user, this is a big stumbling block. Very little problem technically, but it does seem to create a bit of a barier to learning how to use the software, particularily for new computer users. I find this is a fairly common problem with open source software in particular (although I can mention a few pieces of commercial software that have this problem in spades).
    • But when you have questions, who will you turn to? The world lost a great thinker when MS "retired" Clippy.
    • by STrinity ( 723872 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:56PM (#12455915) Homepage
      Yes it is, but it's already a lot better MS Office, and doesn't have annoying clips, dogs and cats either.

      No, it just has that stupid sun that appears anytime you do anything and says, for example, "If you want to type, press the keys on your keyboard."
  • Um, where is this? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Reignking ( 832642 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:38PM (#12455583) Journal
    Peter Svensson of the Associated Press has reviewed OpenOffice and declared it a Microsoft Office killer:

    Anyone care to point out where this was said, because I obviously missed it when I RTFA...
  • by Heem ( 448667 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:39PM (#12455601) Homepage Journal
    A few months back I was in the job market, and making my resume look correct in MS word was a chore, since I use Open Office on my machines at home. I did still have a windows laptop, so I was able to fix the formatting each time I made a change, but, point being, untill either EVERYONE is running open office, OR the formatting translates 100% correct, it's not a 100% viable option for the enterprise.

    (Ironically, I got hired by a company that uses Open Office instead of MS office)
    • That's what "export to PDF' is for.

      Or heck, you can even save it in MS Office doc format.

      • Or heck, you can even save it in MS Office doc format.

        The way I read his message, he is doing that. His problem is formatting his resume so it looks right when potential employers view it in Word.
      • unfortunately, for some god-awful reason a lot of companies like getting resumes in MS Word format.

        This makes no sense to me and i agree with you, I prefer PDF too, but for some reason they want it in .doc format so they can edit it i guess. I mean PDF is far more universal than .doc and they only need to read the file, so this should be a non-issue.

    • Don't worry about word compatible. Just make it a PDF.

    • I still use Latex for my resumé. Initialy I used Latex because it was the easiest way to get a PDF output cross-platform, now because I have some nifty macros defined which really have me a personal taste to the CV. Would go for OO if starting from scratch now though.
      • by Coryoth ( 254751 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @04:14PM (#12456178) Homepage Journal
        I actually find LaTeX resumés have the subtle advantage that they just look better. No, seriously. Everyone does their resumés in Word, and it isn't hard to spot Word documents, no matter how you mess with fonts. A LaTeX document just looks different - a little cleaner and sharper and more like professional typesetting.

        Anything that can make your resumé stand out from the others in a good way is well worth pursuing.

        Jedidiah.
        • by XanC ( 644172 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @04:33PM (#12456455)
          it isn't hard to spot Word documents, no matter how you mess with fonts

          Dan Rather found this out the hard way, didn't he?

        • Bad idea (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Nik13 ( 837926 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @06:28PM (#12457874) Homepage
          While it may look better to you, a lot of companies won't even be able to open it (most wouldn't even know what it is).

          Sadly, the actual format it's submitted in does matter, and not so much for the look. The format they use is the format one should submit into so it doesn't go thru multiple conversions or even OCR. If you use another format, it may come out looking VERY crappy after conversion (all formatting and basic layout may be lost, words split across columns, ...) Best thing to do is to ask what format they prefer.

          Besides, unless you're applying as a graphics designer job or something like that, experience, knowledge and interview skills will matter a lot more than some fancy looking resume. I doubt it'll really help landing a job. I've used the word format most of the time as I was told to, and I never had much problem finding employment (haven't been unemployed over the last 10 years).
          • Re:Bad idea (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Coryoth ( 254751 )
            Sadly, the actual format it's submitted in does matter, and not so much for the look.

            I usually use paper myself, which means format is quite irrelevant, unless of course it is some format that is incapable of being printed.

            Besides, unless you're applying as a graphics designer job or something like that, experience, knowledge and interview skills will matter a lot more than some fancy looking resume.

            Actually I was applying for a job as a mathematician, so having a resume that was prepared by someone w
          • Best resume format: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by Atario ( 673917 )
            Simple HTML.

            I keep mine in this format. When people -- inevitably -- specifically request a Word-formatted resume, I rename the file from resume.html to resume.doc and send. Works like a charm.
      • problem is most employers require .DOC format, and it's not even a matter of that being simply a preference, and an RTF or PDF would just be fine (which, in the real world, of course it would be) - but a matter of their resume submittal forms simply won't accept anything that is not named *.DOC
    • My experience has been that not even microsoft office opens microsoft office docs with 100% formatting accuracy 100% of the time. try opening and editing back and forth between two differant versions and see for your self!
  • StarOffice? (Score:2, Interesting)

    Wasen't StarOffice supposed to be an "Office Killer" too?

    The battle for Office Suites is no longer on the desktop. MS Office as A LOT of features built in. Frankly, more than anyone will ever use.

    The new battle field is Online Collaboration both in business and personal arenas.
  • by amichalo ( 132545 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:39PM (#12455617)
    I enjoy NeoOffice/J on my Mac, but I fear these types of reviews that have people comparing a mature, decade old Office Suite to a FOSS project still so very immature.

    By drawing attention to it, it incites review. A good thing. But if CIOs and CTOs have a team review these early versions of OO.o for deployment in their enterprises, and the teams recommend against them, it will be that much harder to have a further review at a later date. "We already looked at OO.o, we didn't want to use it. Move on" they might say.

    Timing is crucial in marketing and the FOSS community has made great strides with Linux, but only when Linux got to a maturity level somewhat past what I see from NeoOffice/J and OO.o
    • but I fear these types of reviews that have people comparing a mature, decade old Office Suite to a FOSS project still so very immature.

      I'm not sure what you're trying to say. According to Wikipedia, StarOffice [wikipedia.org] began development in 1994. This is 11 years by my math. It's like saying that Windows-NT is old and mature but Linux is brand new.
    • Disclaimer: I am a Mac OS X OpenOffice.org developer and a founder of the NeoOffice [neooffice.org] project.

      I personally agree with the parent...marketing something that's not yet ready is a horrible idea and bad impressions have worse long term damage than no impressions at all. Part of the problem lies with the way that OpenOffice.org was built as a community. Unlike Linux and some other FOSS projects, the community wasn't built up around engineers. There are very few engineers outside of Sun that actually are rea

  • Not only Office (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tehshen ( 794722 ) <tehshen@gmail.com> on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:40PM (#12455618)
    The article makes a point about it being able to save as PDFs - if OpenOffice becomes as popular as they say it will, would it kill Microsoft's own upcoming Metro [slashdot.org] format?
    • by nizo ( 81281 ) * on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:59PM (#12455956) Homepage Journal
      I think the Metro format would be great, if they can travel back in time about 8 years and release it then. The picture that comes to mind when I think about Metro is a horse race where Adobe is about 50 laps ahead and Microsoft's little dead racing pony is still being pushed into the starting gate.
  • I've heard of problems with macros, and some of the other more advanced features of Office. As much as I want to see it go, I don't think this guy's looking as hard as he needs to to really make such broad statements.... 'There are some bugs' in a single-page review is kinda... lacking.
    • *disclaimer -- I haven't tried the OO.o 2.0 beta (technically 1.9) yet, I've only used 1.1.4 and whatever version was current in 2002.*

      In my office, we use Word and Excel, a lot. I regularly use 5 spreadsheets totaling 15MB in size (one is 10MB). Fear of loosing something (and not noticing it) has kept us from trying other office suites or even upgrading from Office 97.

      That's the minor of the two issues however. IIRC, OpenOffice doesn't even have any OLE Automation, so I can't call Calc from Writer

  • by handmedowns ( 628517 ) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <elgolper.werdna>> on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:41PM (#12455643) Homepage
    I hear many people complain about OpenOffice.org not opening their MS documents with correct formatting, but these people don't realize that this is not a limitation of OpenOffice, but a result of Microsofts closed and proprietary document formats.

    When I've used OpenOffice.org's document format, I've been very pleased. Especially since sxw is just a zip package that you can open up and edit by hand.. this make automating document processing really easy..

    I'll be perfectly fine if MS Office disappears and never returns.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      "but these people don't realize that this is not a limitation of OpenOffice, but a result of Microsofts closed and proprietary document formats."

      Most people don't care and just want it to work.
    • by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:52PM (#12455862)
      I hear many people complain about OpenOffice.org not opening their MS documents with correct formatting, but these people don't realize that this is not a limitation of OpenOffice, but a result of Microsofts closed and proprietary document formats.

      I am one of these people who complain about exactly that. Well, not exactly complain, because what you say is true (it's not OOo's fault that the .DOC format was purposedly designed to be a minefield), but lamenting about it.

      However, the result is the same: as long as OOo doesn't reach 99.999% compatibility with some version of the .DOC format, people won't ditch Word for OOo. Period.

      My opinion is that the OOo guys should drop whatever they're doing for a while, choose one version of the .DOC format, and keep working on the import filter until it's near-perfect. Then OOo will really take over Word, and they can resume their normal development cicle...
      • by jbolden ( 176878 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @05:37PM (#12457302) Homepage
        However, the result is the same: as long as OOo doesn't reach 99.999% compatibility with some version of the .DOC format, people won't ditch Word for OOo. Period

        I hear people say this all the time but I don't buy it. The fact is people have shown a willingness to do painful conversions when there is substantial benefit. That's how PCs replaced minis and mainframes in corporate America on desktops (and yes that was a very difficult transition). That's how Word replaced WordPerfect. That's how Excel replaced Lotus 1-2-3. That's how WWW replaced dialup boards. etc...

        A free office suite will replace MSOffice in corporate America when it becomes substantially better. We are a long way off from that. 90% is an impossible goal given how closely tied Word is to Microsoft technologies.

      • .DOC is NOT a standard. It's not even a format that's 100% interchangable between different versions of Word/Works. And let's not go there about the foreign (mainly Asian) troubles with compatibility.

        MS thrives on changing it just enough to force people into buying the newest versions.

        Go OOo!

    • This is not only a problem with OpenOffice, it is a problem with Microsoft Office. Using a differenct version of MS Office, different fonts or even have a different default printer will throw off the formatting.

      Formatting Microsoft Word Documents [about.com]

      The only way to get a document to appear the same way on different computers is to use the PDF format (which is one of the export formats for OpenOffice).

  • "The beta of version 2 fixes many of those problems. It opens Word, WordPerfect and Excel files flawlessly. Saved files open fine on Microsoft programs. It also adds a database program that's similar to Access." Opens Word files flawlessly my ass.
  • Nice review (Score:5, Insightful)

    by illtron ( 722358 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:42PM (#12455663) Homepage Journal
    I'm glad that OpenOffice is getting some mainstream press. I still have my doubts if it'll ever come out for OS X (and yes, I know it'll run in X11, and no, that doesn't count).

    What they really need to do is stop trying to emulate Microsoft Office. You'll never make the MS Office killer by making MS Office.

    Here's how average Joe Idiot thinks:

    "So you're saying it's exactly like office except free? I don't trust it. I'll just pirate Microsoft's instead."

    MS Office is bloated, awkward and confusing. They need to make it *better* than MS Office. Do something innovative, instead of just copying.

    I don't know how well Apple's iWork is selling (I heard not so well), but it's a hell of a lot nicer to use than Office because they looked at it from a different angle. It's missing some stuff, but Pages is a hell of a nice app for version 1.0.

    OpenOffice needs to do the same thing.
    • They need to provide similar features in order for it to be considered a viable alternative.

      OOo is by no means an MSO-killer, but it is a competitor and an alternative. With OOo 2.0 they'd have made a product that can be used in most situations.

      Now is where the fight begins.
    • Re:Nice review (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:51PM (#12455833)
      Neo office [neooffice.org]

      NeoOffice/J uses a combination of Carbon and Java and features Aqua menus.

    • MS Office is bloated, awkward and confusing. They need to make it *better* than MS Office. Do something innovative, instead of just copying.

      I don't know how well Apple's iWork is selling (I heard not so well), but it's a hell of a lot nicer to use than Office because they looked at it from a different angle. It's missing some stuff, but Pages is a hell of a nice app for version 1.0.


      It's a nice thought, but unfortunately there are different markets beign targetted here. I know it doesn't look like it: a
    • All right, I constantly hear that MSO is bloated, but is it really? My files in Word open in 2 seconds tops. OO.o takes ~10 seconds, even with the Quickstarter. And IIRC the install sizes of both programs are about the same.
      • Re:Bloated? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Stormwatch ( 703920 )
        Both are very bloated. Truth be told, most software nowadays is much bigger than whatever was their equivalent back in the 1990s. That's why I like Write and Calc, by Mariner Software [marinersoftware.com] for Macintosh.

        They are fast, lean, powerful, ellegant, and really damn rock-solid alternatives to those, uh, slightly overweight programs of debatable reliability. And much cheaper than Microsoft's stuff too. Not as cheap as OpenOffice, sure, but this much quality deserves a reward. So, say to to bloatware, try Mariner's
    • Re:Nice review (Score:4, Insightful)

      by RzUpAnmsCwrds ( 262647 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @04:58PM (#12456805)
      "MS Office is bloated, awkward and confusing."

      Office is not bloated. On my system, Word takes 9MB. Hell, that's less than half of what Firefox takes. That's less than AbiWord.

      OOo takes over 100M. That's nearly ten times more memory than Word. It also takes about 15 seconds to start - 3 times more than Word.

      The installation directory is 95MB, considerably less than OpenOffice. The entire core suite (Word, PowerPoint, Excel, Outlook) installs from a 200MB CD - and that's with the dependencies, clipart, templates, and extras.

      As for awkward, what exactly do you mean? For myself and nearly 400 million others, Office is perfectly normal. Style handling is considerably better in 2003, and the overall suite feels polished and clean.

      After 6 versions for Windows, Office looks, feels, and behaves like a mature office suite. It hasn't crashed on me in months, it doesn't have any wierd quirks, it's feature-rich, and everything generally works pretty well.

      Don't impugn Office unless you *really* use it. You'll find that OpenOffice.org is clumsy, buggy, and bloated.
      • Re:Nice review (Score:3, Insightful)

        by LadyLucky ( 546115 )
        As for awkward, what exactly do you mean? For myself and nearly 400 million others, Office is perfectly normal. Style handling is considerably better in 2003, and the overall suite feels polished and clean.

        Having spent about a week working with a Document in Word 2003, I call bullshit.

        Word screws with the styles something chronic. It creates styles on the fly, it has all sorts of styles 'select all 2 instances' which does nothing, and the style can't be deleted. My favourite feature is to randomly rem

        • Re:Nice review (Score:3, Insightful)

          "Word screws with the styles something chronic. It creates styles on the fly, it has all sorts of styles 'select all 2 instances' which does nothing, and the style can't be deleted. My favourite feature is to randomly remove the numbering from my Heading 1..n styles, with no apparent way to get it back"

          You, like many others, have no idea how to use styles in Word.

          Yes, it creates styles as you apply formatting.

          Yes, they are easy to delete. Format > Styles and Formatting > Click on arrow beside style
    • I still have my doubts if it'll ever come out for OS X (and yes, I know it'll run in X11, and no, that doesn't count).

      I beg your pardon:

      NeoOffice/J [neooffice.org]

      for OS X is rock solid. No X11 needed. Two grad papers I recently turned in were written using this, with advanced charts and tables, headers, footers, etc. Works fine in 10.4 Tiger also.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:42PM (#12455671)
    Geez, Zonk, bother reading the article before putting up the misleading summary? Here's what the author said:

    "My colleagues and I encountered some other problems with OpenOffice. Installation was difficult on some machines because OpenOffice relies on Sun's Java software, which does not come pre-installed on all Windows PCs....

    "Write crashed a few times while saving documents, but we were able to recover the files. Hopefully, this is an issue that will be solved in the final version.

    "OpenOffice was also slower in opening and saving documents. For example, a large spreadsheet took 4 seconds to open in Calc but only 2 seconds in Excel. That's not much, but the difference can be magnified if your computer is old.

    "Base, the database program, has a confusing interface but Access isn't much better in this regard. The "help" files for the entire suite are not as thorough as those for Office."

    Yup, sounds like an Office killer.

    Honestly, how does tripe like this summary get published?
    • by Just Some Guy ( 3352 ) <kirk+slashdot@strauser.com> on Friday May 06, 2005 @04:16PM (#12456208) Homepage Journal
      Yup, sounds like an Office killer.

      In other words, the prerelease beta has a few rough edges but costs $334.95 [newegg.com] less.

      Yeah, that actually does sound like an Office killer for 99% of potential users. Basically, if you still fork over serious money for an only slightly better office suite without any substantial reasons (like you require VBA support for legacy reasons), you're an idiot and deserve what you get. OpenOffice.org is what pretty much every home or small office should be using, and it looks like people are starting to realize that.

    • Well, I haven't tried the beta yet, but the article said something that differs from my experience, namely that there is a dependance on Java being installed. I remember the early versions of OO used to search far and wide for your Java installation, but even then, gave you the chance to specify where it was or just do without it. Most of the systems I've installed OO on since then definitely do not have Java, and I don't even remember being asked about it. Is that a Windows/Linux difference?

      Meantime,
  • Killer, indeed. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Seumas ( 6865 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:45PM (#12455724)
    I'm a plain old text editor guy. VIM when I'm feeling fancy. However, OpenOffice really is a no-brainer when compared to MSOffice. Especially when you compare the price (free, versus $500). I use it for spreadsheet work all the time and love it.

    The only problem I've really had with previous versions (other than a less pleasant interface than it now has) is the somewhat poor format conversion ability. Importing MSOffice files of various types were a pain to an impossibility. So far, I've had no problems importing them with the new beta.

    I was talking to someone who operates a small office the other day and he was complaining about the thousands of dollars it was going to cost to equip a handful of users with Office on their machines - when all he needed to do was some spreadsheeting and office memo/document type stuff.

    I pointed him at OpenOffice.org and he was blown away. Everyone in the office had it installed, operating and using it productively by the end of the week. It was difficult convincing them, however, that there was no catch. That it was really free. After all, you have people like some random guys on G4TV and radio-based "computer shows" and some websites spouting idiotic bullshit like "If a program is free, you can be sure it has adware, spyware and maybe viruses". Talk about hyperbole.

  • by forsythe450 ( 571527 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:46PM (#12455729)
    I've been using OpenOffice for several years now and I love it. I can't imagine why most people are willing to pay several hundred dollars for MS Office when OO is free.

    The issue I run into though when recommending it to people is that they instinctively believe it will be crap because it's not from MS. I'll reply with something like "But it converts most Word documents perfectly," but they just aren't interested.

    For OO to succeed it needs to have a marketing campaign similar to FireFox. It needs to be a product that people get recommended to them from non-geeks.

    I've got to hand it to MS. They've done a top notch job scaring people into using their products.

  • When the word gets out that you can pilot a penguin down the hill like a mad man...watch out Bill Gates!
  • So, aside from the difficulty of supporting .doc in the first place, there's the obvious problem that MS likes to change the .doc format with every Word release. This makes it effectively impossible for OpenOffice to guarantee compatability with Word at any given point in time.

    However, every time MS releases a Word update, not everyone upgrades. The same format pressure that keeps OO out of the running in many places also forces upgrades, but not everyone does.

    I suppose my open-ended question is: At wh
  • Not quite there yet (Score:5, Informative)

    by Mori Chu ( 737710 ) on Friday May 06, 2005 @03:47PM (#12455764)
    I say this as a person who desperately wants to ditch MS Office:

    OpenOffice isn't quite good enough yet.

    The look and feel of the program is a bit too rough. For example, they inexplicably have a huge "Styles" pane on by default that covers 1/4 of the document.

    Also, the compatibility is not what it should be. I create Word docs in oowriter, but then when I open them in real Word, the page breaks are all wrong! What used to fit on one page wraps to a second, or vice versa. It's quite frustrating when I prepare a lot of Word docs for printing by others, when I know that essentially all the others are using real Word. I have to reboot and examine the document to make sure of what it really looks like.

    Ditto for ooimpress, the PowerPoint clone. It is hard to use it for lots of small reasons; death by a thousand cuts. It isn't easy to pull up a Slide Sorter view and move the slides around, cut and paste them, select ones from one file and put them in another file, and so on. When I create a new slide, it ignores my Master Slide template and the dimensions of the text areas come out all wrong. It also again doesn't look the same as a real PowerPoint file, and when I view the same slides in real PowerPoint, the text falls off the edge or bottom of the slide. Argh!

    I realize the challenge OOo is up against, and I applaud their efforts. But OOo is no Office killer, not yet. More work needs to be done.
    • I'm in the same spot you are. Would love to ditch MSO -- and have on a couple of machines, but I am frustrated by the imperfect .doc translations as well as other things:
      1. No good templates
      2. Outlines -- even bullet lists -- don't translate properly to/from Word
      3. Buggy handling of jpegs
      4. Interface (icons, toolbars, etc.) looks amateur.
      5. Illogical menu placements -- try to find how to adjust margins. Nope. Try another menu. Nope try another menu. Thanks for playing.
    • In my experience, moving files between OO.o and Office is about the same experience as moving between different versions of Office. Even in Office 97, sending a document created in Word 97 did not appear the same on another computer with Word 97 if the same print driver was not installed. There's a lot to be desired (i.e., there a lot of buggy things) in Office. But perhaps b/c so many people are familiar with them and accept them they are hardly noticed. And I think that is the biggest problem with moving
    • If you prepare a lot of Word docs for printing by others and are not 100% sure what version of Word or open office they are using, perhaps you should try getting open office to export them to pdf.
    • by Arkaein ( 264614 )
      The look and feel of the program is a bit too rough. For example, they inexplicably have a huge "Styles" pane on by default that covers 1/4 of the document.

      This is something I really like, because it helps show users the correct way to format their documents.

      I haven't used MS Word for years, and I never really have done serious word processing with it, but I never knew about styles, or stylesheets or whatever they're called in Word. I always formatted each paragraph that needed to conform to some style o
  • and when the kinks get worked out, step back!

    Every FOSS project seems to have this hope.

    OpenOffice has bene saying this for years, IIRC.

    I don't think I'm going to hold my breath waiting for this. This is one area where cathedral development seems to be far superior to bazar development...
  • I can't format page/paragraph/font without using the TAB key a zillion times. There need to be ALT key combos for every field in those dialog boxes so a user can switch to any one of them instantly without mousing or tabbing.

    Word does this. OO.o does not. Get with the freakin' program, OpenOffice. It's the simplest feature of all and I keep telling myself the next version will have it. But it never does. It is very frustrating.
  • Why don't people see that it's a bad idea for Open source to have a monopoly? People can beat Microsoft because they make poor software, OSS (generally) doesn't.. but 1 or 2 features doesn't make it "better" then "being free". So if OSS gets a monopoly like Microsoft has it could very well mean the end of the IT industry got a good decade..
  • Wow. (Score:3, Funny)

    by M.C. Hampster ( 541262 ) <M...C...TheHampster@@@gmail...com> on Friday May 06, 2005 @04:05PM (#12456045) Journal

    Slashdot declares imminent demise of Microsoft or one of their products. I don't know if I've ever seen such a thing.

  • MS Office is a monopoly because it is a monopoly -- its not the best set of applications, but it's prevalence forces anyone who is a supplier to conform to the IT choices of key clients. A two-person shop can't convince a $1 billion organization to change its IT infrastructure.

    Sadly, we have enough minor glitches between our Mac Office documents and our PC-using clients to scare us away from Open Office for documents to/from clients (i.e., 95% of our office application work). The only consolation is th

  • i'd like to be able to use openoffice, but i'm not willing to give up my favorite OS for it. can anybody offer some enlightenment on why openoffice doesn't run on openbsd? i'm genuinely curious. is it something to do with the portability of the code? some aspect of openbsd which makes it somehow hostile to openoffice? whatever the case, i really hope it's something than can be addressed in the future; just this past week i've had MS word 2000 mangle my résumé for no good reason...
  • by Tsu Dho Nimh ( 663417 ) <abacaxi.hotmail@com> on Friday May 06, 2005 @04:19PM (#12456251)

    To get me to completely stop using MSFT Office, FrameMaker, and a few other programs, here's what OO has to add.

    1. Import SVG and edit it ... at least a simple subset of the language. It can export its drawings as SVG, so what's the problem with importing and editing?
    2. Have the ability to put an overbar on text, which is the common way to indicate a negative signal on chip pins.
    3. Have an outlining mode that works like MSFT Word's outline, where you can selectively see or hide levels, drag levels into position, etc. Right now, OO has an "outline", but you can't do much with it. I use outlines as an editing tool, to reorganize material in a document.
    4. Stop mucking with my HTML: I would like it to be able to open, edit, and save an HTML file without changing the existing code. OK, Word is far worse in this regard, but OO still messes up HTML.
  • I have friends for whom I've set up their Office Suite on their home computers.... I have given (installed for them) the various generations of Open Office and watched in disappointment as they repeatedly gravitated to the "free" Microsoft Works (ironic name) to create documents.

    But last night, a breakthrough! My friend's daughter had written an assignment with WordPad and was having problems with it, especially wanting to spellcheck, have tighter formatting, etc. Her mom immediately imported the document into Open Office and showed her how to use THAT and told her to use Open Office as a first choice! (And this was without my "influence". In the past, to get anyone in that household to use Open Office I'd have to be there pointing it out and asking them to use it.) Reaching a tipping point, perhaps.

  • I keep hearing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NixLuver ( 693391 ) <stwhite&kcheretic,com> on Friday May 06, 2005 @05:02PM (#12456851) Homepage Journal
    ... people complain about the alleged 'incompatibilities' between OOo and Word, but I'd just like to make it absolutely clear that Microsoft Word's single biggest competitor is LAST YEAR's version of *word*, not OOo or WordPerfect. That's why LAST YEAR's version of Word (or other past versions) will exhibit some of the same kinds of formatting errors that OOo does when opening a word document. That's if it doesn't outright refuse to open it ("You need a newer version of Word, or ask your source to save it in an old format").

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz

Working...