Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1 [Archive]

Turtle.net

January 22nd, 2010, 09:11 PM

Hey with the announcements of the authorization from EU to the Oracle-Sun deal and the annoucement of Symphony3.0 (http://www.edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/lotusphere-2010-symphony-3.0-and-project-concord?opendocument&comments) do you think that it would be safer for an enterprise to switch to Symphony instead of openoffice, as suggested by the Software Improvement Group (http://planetlotus.org/profiles/stuart-mcintyre_64836) :

Kuipers said a move to OpenOffice.org would be riskiest for large organizations, because the cost of switching would be high. Individuals and small businesses are less vulnerable, he said. He also noted that the risks do not apply to companies adopting Lotus Symphony, an IBM-led fork of OpenOffice.org, because it comes with IBM's backing.

What do you think ?
*Use Symphony
*Use OpenOffice
*Other ?

Ric_NYC

January 22nd, 2010, 09:17 PM

foldingstock

January 22nd, 2010, 09:34 PM

I like both. OpenOffice has a little better support for proprietary .doc(x) formats than Symphony, but they are both about equal with open formats.

Since the growing trend in computer screens is "widescreen," I am rather fond of the way Symphony makes use of horizontal screenspace (http://www.enterprise-collaboration.de/ibm-lotus-software/ibm-lotus-symphony/IBM%20Lotus%20Symphony%20Spreadsheets%20spreadshee ts_data_02_new.gif) rather than cluttering vertical screen space.

That said, for enterprise use, I honestly think Microsoft Office is the best choice. OpenOffice and Lotus Symphony are both very nice products, but there are some key features in Microsoft Office that are not present or are not fully supported in these open source projects. Hopefully this will change, but at present Microsoft Office is very deeply rooted in the business world.

lykwydchykyn

January 22nd, 2010, 09:57 PM

Symphony is proprietary, first of all, unless they've changed the license. That means when IBM gets bored with it and decides it no longer serves their interests to have a free office suite, it's gone.

OpenOffice.org was predominantly driven by Sun, but it's still FOSS and can be forked if it really comes down to it. There are certainly no shortage of companies that would be ready and willing to carry on a fork if circumstances necessitated it -- Novell and the go-oo community springs to mind.

Nobody knows what Oracle intends to do with OpenOffice.org. I just can't see them canning it. Selling it -- maybe. Canning it, no.

Ric_NYC

January 22nd, 2010, 10:27 PM

OpenOffice.

Just Installed Symphony... Tested it... Disliked it.

See the differences. I used the same fonts, the same size.

Bad spacing and kerning.

http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/8623/comparisoni.jpg

This is 2010, enough with things that don't look good on the desktop.

koleoptero

January 23rd, 2010, 04:24 AM

scouser73

January 23rd, 2010, 05:23 AM

The last time I used Lotus Symphony to see what it was like, I didn't like it one bit and it was a nightmare to uninstall.

lykwydchykyn

January 23rd, 2010, 07:05 AM

Has noone noticed that the current symphony is based on openoffice 1.4 (reeeeally really old) while symphony 3 which will be released in February and is the topic here will be based on openoffice 3? Do you truly think it will have that many things in common with the old version? Come on ppl, do your research first, think, then speculate.

I haven't seen anything that indicates the license will change, so I stand by that comment.

What is interesting to me is that they are tracking the OpenOffice.org code base, indicating symphony is not a full-on fork of OOo. That means that IBM has a stake in developing at least the core of OOo if they intend to keep pulling from its codebase.

And if they're still distributing this as a proprietary product, it means they're custom licensing the code from Sun. Which means that if Oracle flushes OOo, IBM is left in a sticky spot. I don't think that will happen, though.

koleoptero

January 23rd, 2010, 04:27 PM

I haven't seen anything that indicates the license will change, so I stand by that comment.

What is interesting to me is that they are tracking the OpenOffice.org code base, indicating symphony is not a full-on fork of OOo. That means that IBM has a stake in developing at least the core of OOo if they intend to keep pulling from its codebase.

And if they're still distributing this as a proprietary product, it means they're custom licensing the code from Sun. Which means that if Oracle flushes OOo, IBM is left in a sticky spot. I don't think that will happen, though.

Yeah I don't think they'll change the licence, my comment wasn't directed at that. And as for the full on fork, I think it is, since they hadn't followed any of the OOo developments the past 3-4 years since release 2.0. But I guess they saw wisdom in taking from it now that they've fixed almost all problems (font rendering, shape antialiasing, etc) besides a not eye-plucking UI.

Xbehave

January 23rd, 2010, 04:34 PM

This is 2010, enough with things that don't look good on the desktop.
So why attach a jpg instead of a png? There are errors which could just be a result of jpg use (the r in kerning runs on into the n in the openoffice version)

Yeti can't ski

February 9th, 2010, 03:50 PM

For me a choice between FOSS and proprietary programs with similar perfomance is non-choice. FOSS all the way.

And if they're still distributing this as a proprietary product, it means they're custom licensing the code from Sun.

This exactly what I thought. I don't see how Symphony could not be a derivative work of OOO, so if IBM is not open-sourcing Symphony it means that they got a different licence directly from Sun and are not distributing/developing it under the LGPL. Right?

I googled around a lot but, to my surprise, found very little material on Symphony's licensing policy. I may be paranoid, but I don't like so much the fact that Canonical is supporting a (another) proprietary project.

The fact is that inertia around OOO must be broken soon. Everyone's is waiting for clear signs about its future. I hope that with EU's antitrust greenlight Oracle will start to move and either foster the project or transfer it to someone who cares.

Sorry for the long post. In the meantime, I am trying to learn Lyx! :-)

forrestcupp

February 9th, 2010, 04:38 PM

Has noone noticed that the current symphony is based on openoffice 1.4 (reeeeally really old) while symphony 3 which will be released in February and is the topic here will be based on openoffice 3? Do you truly think it will have that many things in common with the old version? Come on ppl, do your research first, think, then speculate.

The reason they used openoffice v1.4 was because the old license allowed them to release their derivative in a proprietary format. So how could they possibly base their new version on openoffice 3 and still be proprietary? Do you have a reliable link that shows that they are using openoffice 3?

Also, Lotus Symphony 3 beta 2 is available for download, so people may not be basing their opinions on the old version.

lykwydchykyn

February 9th, 2010, 05:47 PM

The reason they used openoffice v1.4 was because the old license allowed them to release their derivative in a proprietary format. So how could they possibly base their new version on openoffice 3 and still be proprietary?

They would have to make licensing arrangements with Sun (now Oracle, naturally). Since Sun always required copyright assignment for contributions to OOo, they can dual license the code under any licenses they wish.

Do you have a reliable link that shows that they are using openoffice 3?

from http://symphony.lotus.com/software/lotus/symphony/SymphonyBetaHome.nsf/home

Lotus Symphony 3 Beta 2 represents a major new advancement for our Lotus Symphony users. Based on current OpenOffice.org 3 code stream. Lotus Symphony 3 Beta 2 offers loads of new features and capabilities and improved file fidelity. The Lotus Symphony team is excited to get it out to you and get your feedback.

forrestcupp

February 9th, 2010, 06:42 PM

Thanks for the link. That might make Symphony worth using. I loved some of the features in the old version, but its bad points made it not worth it for me to use.

gatorbrit

November 12th, 2010, 08:11 PM

Symphony crashed too often for me. I was running the latest version on a brand new PC with a fresh install of 10.04 and it just didn't seem stable (I was running 64 OS). I'm going to uninstall it.

Yeti can't ski

November 13th, 2010, 04:26 PM

Well, it is amazing how the scenario changed since the thread was started. Oracle did acquire Sun, but in the end it abandonded Openoffice.org (at least as a true community project) and now the name of the game is LibreOffice.

http://www.documentfoundation.org/

Canonical has already indicated that it will replace OO with LibreOffice.

It is still beta, but I am using it regularly in my computer.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1585017

devondashla

November 13th, 2010, 06:25 PM

Abiword!!!

sandwormblues

November 23rd, 2010, 06:59 AM

Outlaws rule the west. and Larry Ellison collects samurai swords. He's got an awful lot of them; i wonder if he is compensating for something?

what the heck are the university computer science departments doing? sitting on their thumbs? you'd think it would add to the prestige of any university to maintain an open source office software distribution. but instead the universities push corporate-run dog-and-pony shows.

the institutions of higher learning could make software companies obsolete if they just utilized a little free labor from people wanting diplomas. That, however, would require universities to become something more than institutions of mass brainwashing. Today, education is simply mass brainwashing. .

do you think the n00b world order wants an open office? outlaws rule the west my friends. and even in Britain and Mother Russia. yeah. even the b

Oracle headuarters is tall and made of glass i tell you. i say they are all vulnerable to ninja stars. but watch out for larry ellison. he's got swords.