A video advocating opposing open office

[tapas_mishra]

Hi,
I came on internet the following link
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/10/microsoft-posts-video-of-customers-criticizing-openoffice.ars
there is a video which I am not sure if correct.
Can some one give some facts or links which can help me convince some one that Open Office is not as what is presented in the video above.
Or is it correct thing.

[Oxwivi]

No, it's a direct rival's advertisement, how much truth do you expect in that?

And while it's true, there's no real support for, but that's the reason it's free.

[Spice Weasel]

Why the hell would you need support for a word processor anyway?

[Artemis3]

And thats not even Libreoffice (http://www.documentfoundation.org/download/), which has lots of speed and bug improvements. Microsoft is getting desperate :)

In the past, they wouldn't even acknowledge Linux and Free Software, then the infamous Halloween memos (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Halloween_documents) got leaked...

Formating problems are easy to fix: Don't export into Microsoft formats, instead, give copies of the whole suite to anyone receiving your documents so they can open them properly using the native format in its native application, just like they expect you to do with Microsoft Documents.

Microsoft is the one who didn't disclose their older Microsoft Office formats, which is why importing/exporting isn't "perfect" in the first place. And the newer ones failed to deliver their alleged "openness" intent.

It is perfectly legal (and encouraged) to give copies of OOo/Libreoffice for anyone to install, but Microsoft Office costs 400$, How do you expect everyone to have it installed? (Not to mention it requires Windows, at least a 100$ more).

Even Windows users often find themselves unable to open Microsoft Office newer formats because they have an older suite. Libreoffice costs ZERO and can be fixed by yourself, the community, or by people you hire. If Microsoft Office breaks, no one but Microsoft can fix it, and they often won't, instead make you purchase a newer edition with new "annoyances", but only when they see fit.

This is a video designed for FUD (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt).

[tapas_mishra]

Why the hell would you need support for a word processor anyway?
My question is


Can some one give some facts or links which can help me convince some one that Open Office is not as what is presented in the video above.

[Spice Weasel]

My question is

I was merely making a point that Microsoft's campaign makes no sense. You don't buy support for a word processor, you buy support for an operating system.

[Oxwivi]

Why the hell would you need support for a word processor anyway?
The video was addressing support for compatibility and any other issues, but Microsoft is the root of the fault itself.

[czr114]

This video is mostly FUD. It's not so much the claims are false, but that they've used a clever mix of atypical usage patterns, opinion, testimonials, and stubborn/ignorant/untrained users to cast doubt over the majority of OpenOffice users.

OO still needs some work, but this isn't on the mark.

A number of these seemed like problems with picky users who throw fits any time they're asked to learn a new skill, no matter how intuitive it might be.

[madjr]

microsoft is just giving open office free advertising with this.

many will try ooo thx to this video.

its free, so they will see if it meets their needs or not

[madjr]

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

[Quadunit404]

The question is though, why would this make an impact on OOo/LibO's market share? It only has about 17 quotes from 15 people, those 15 people in which represent less than 1% of the total market share of OpenOffice.org.

[misfitpierce]

Its so false. I've converted several ppl to linux one of which is a good friend that uses OpenOffice for school and she has no problems converting files to Word style documents etc with no problems from the school. Everything works as it should and is easy to use. Microsoft attacked linux awhile ago on a BestBuy AD that had far fetched claims as well so honestly I wouldn't take any of these seriously. It's their way of trying to combat opensource because at one point they didn't see it as a threat but now with it growing so rapidly its a major threat to them.

[zekopeko]

And thats not even Libreoffice (http://www.documentfoundation.org/download/), which has lots of speed and bug improvements. Microsoft is getting desperate :)

I doubt it. MS Office is far better then OO.org/LibreOffice in the space they are targeting, enterprise.


Formating problems are easy to fix: Don't export into Microsoft formats, instead, give copies of the whole suite to anyone receiving your documents so they can open them properly using the native format in its native application, just like they expect you to do with Microsoft Documents.

So every time I send a 0.5MB file I have to bundle it with a 150MB download and hope that the user on the other end can install applications? Brilliant plan.


Microsoft is the one who didn't disclose their older Microsoft Office formats, which is why importing/exporting isn't "perfect" in the first place. And the newer ones failed to deliver their alleged "openness" intent.

This is pure FUD. Every single MS Office format is fully documented and that documentation is available online.


It is perfectly legal (and encouraged) to give copies of OOo/Libreoffice for anyone to install, but Microsoft Office costs 400$, How do you expect everyone to have it installed? (Not to mention it requires Windows, at least a 100$ more).

Considering that the majority of people get their computers pre-installed with Windows and that MS Office can be bought relatively cheaply it is a far lesser problem than you think.


Even Windows users often find themselves unable to open Microsoft Office newer formats because they have an older suite. Libreoffice costs ZERO and can be fixed by yourself, the community, or by people you hire. If Microsoft Office breaks, no one but Microsoft can fix it, and they often won't, instead make you purchase a newer edition with new "annoyances", but only when they see fit.

Again FUD. MS releases compatibility packs for their older office suits.


This is a video designed for FUD (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt).

And your post was also FUD. Looks like you have something in common with MS.

[czr114]

Its so false. I've converted several ppl to linux one of which is a good friend that uses OpenOffice for school and she has no problems converting files to Word style documents etc with no problems from the school. Everything works as it should and is easy to use. Microsoft attacked linux awhile ago on a BestBuy AD that had far fetched claims as well so honestly I wouldn't take any of these seriously. It's their way of trying to combat opensource because at one point they didn't see it as a threat but now with it growing so rapidly its a major threat to them.

That's where the FUD comes in. OO does have many known formatting issues, but the key here is the limitation of their scope. Most users won't run into these, and in many cases, blaming OO for certain formatting issues is like blaming any WYSIWYG for choking on a site authored in Frontpage.

Most users aren't going to be crippled by the formatting problems which do exist.

[czr114]

I doubt it. MS Office is far better then OO.org/LibreOffice in the space they are targeting, enterprise.

That only applies to a very select enterprise role in which the groupware is far more important than the word processor.




So every time I send a 0.5MB file I have to bundle it with a 150MB download and hope that the user on the other end can install applications? Brilliant plan.

FUD.

ODF is an open standard and well supported.



This is pure FUD. Every single MS Office format is fully documented and that documentation is available online.

That wasn't the case for the majority of its existence. Only recently has there been any goodwill and openness in only certain MSO formats.



Considering that the majority of people get their computers pre-installed with Windows and that MS Office can be bought relatively cheaply it is a far lesser problem than you think.


OO can download and install faster than someone can go out and buy MSO. There is no cost in doing so, no catch, and no lock-in.



Again FUD. MS releases compatibility packs for their older office suits.


Those packs are quite limited, and exist primarily to soothe newer users sending out those formats, rather than legacy users creating them.

[Naiki Muliaina]

Why the hell would you need support for a word processor anyway?

Because not everyones good with computers on any level. I work for a couple of companies that have all 46 years old + staff. Most over 50. They only got their first PC's a couple of years ago. They still ask 'How do i copy paste again?'.

I hope we can all keep with the technological times as we grow older. But there will always be them that are left behind for whatever reason.

[zekopeko]

That only applies to a very select enterprise role in which the groupware is far more important than the word processor.

Where did I talk about only MS Word? I talked about the entire MS Office which has more then a word processor. Either way MS Office is a big player in enterprise.



FUD.
ODF is an open standard and well supported.

Please read what I was replying to. Here is a hint: "...using the native format in its native application...".


That wasn't the case for the majority of its existence. Only recently has there been any goodwill and openness in only certain MSO formats.

It's irrelevant since we aren't debating the past but the present. You can't cry lock-in when the format is open.


OO can download and install faster than someone can go out and buy MSO. There is no cost in doing so, no catch, and no lock-in.

What lock-in? The one created by fully documented office file formats?


Those packs are quite limited, and exist primarily to soothe newer users sending out those formats, rather than legacy users creating them.

Either way they can read them. To which I was replying to.

[inobe]

office costs a small fortune and anything that prevents microsoft from capitalizing on their product usually results in video's like that.

if they decided to stoop so low' why stop them, why bother and get your undies in a bunch, typical salesman tactics, our product is better and theirs suck ;)

[Dustin2128]

@zekopeko
I think what he's saying is that most people do not need MSO, only niche jobs. The LO suite works very well for most purposes, and the saved files can be read on any windows machine without the need for installing extra software; the basic style can be interpreted by wordpad (crippleware though it is), and it's fairly well supported in office '07 if you've got it. If not, LO is a recommended download anyway.

[phrostbyte]

This is pure FUD. Every single MS Office format is fully documented and that documentation is available online.



It's irrelevant since we aren't debating the past but the present. You can't cry lock-in when the format is open.


Please stop defending Microsoft. The company only recently opened these formats after a protracted and hard fought legal battle involving billions of dollars in fines.

[drawkcab]

I use office 2007 because I prefer Powerpoint to OO's Presentation or whatever.

On the other hand, I didn't pay a dime for Office and, if I had, I'd probably learn to make do with Powerpoint.

[zekopeko]

Please stop defending Microsoft. The company only recently opened these formats after a protracted and hard fought legal battle involving billions of dollars in fines.

The point isn't to defend Microsoft. They can do that themselves. My objection is that people use FUD to combat (selective) Microsoft FUD.

A person can't go chastising Microsoft FUD with their own FUD and then pretend they aren't a hypocrite. Using arguments that are no longer valid is deceptive.

[rich52x]

Let's all thank the creator of this video... Joseph Goebbels

[tapas_mishra]

On the other hand, I didn't pay a dime for Office
Is that what we are proud of?What happens to the time and energy that the developer invested in its development?
As some one said in a post users of 46+ years of age.
This sort of situation exists many a places.I still meet people who do not understand difference between a dial up and broadband.
Explaining them various document formats or what a font is too technical for them to understand.They would not mind paying for getting some thing which is easier for them to work.

[MasterNetra]

This isn't a new ad. I seen this a while back.

[v1ad]

currently using OO on my windows machine even though i got Microsoft Office... OO opens up way faster and runs smoothly. the interface seems even easier than microsofts..

[drawkcab]

Is that what we are proud of?What happens to the time and energy that the developer invested in its development?
As some one said in a post users of 46+ years of age.
This sort of situation exists many a places.I still meet people who do not understand difference between a dial up and broadband.
Explaining them various document formats or what a font is too technical for them to understand.They would not mind paying for getting some thing which is easier for them to work.

I think I get what you are saying!

Oh, wait. I have no idea what your point is.

[dmizer]

Can some one give some facts or links which can help me convince some one that Open Office is not as what is presented in the video above.
Or is it correct thing.

The video is an advertisement. As such, it shouldn't be taken too seriously since it's salted heavily with unabashed bias. As with any advertisement, all the points the video makes can be picked apart by logic. It's not necessary to carefully research each point or provide links to refute the video.

Simply reading the "testimonials" (for example) carefully will show you that the Microsoft advertisement is merely attempting to bolster popular misconceptions regarding Linux in general rather than Open Office specifically.

Furthermore, since the arguments made in the video are not logically sound, it's easy (as shown in this thread) to fall into the trap of refuting them by using similar logically unsound examples to support Open Office.

[tgm4883]

The video is an advertisement. As such, it shouldn't be taken too seriously since it's salted heavily with unabashed bias. As with any advertisement, all the points the video makes can be picked apart by logic. It's not necessary to carefully research each point or provide links to refute the video.

Simply reading the "testimonials" (for example) carefully will show you that the Microsoft advertisement is merely attempting to bolster popular misconceptions regarding Linux in general rather than Open Office specifically.

Furthermore, since the arguments made in the video are not logically sound, it's easy (as shown in this thread) to fall into the trap of refuting them by using similar logically unsound examples to support Open Office.

I've tried using open office for things. I use it for most things I do. But I ran into some strange issues I couldn't resolve. Strangly enough, saving the file in .doc format in OO resolved the issue, but then I ran into other issues with things not saving properly. In the end, for this work document I opened the doc file in office 2007, saved in in docx format and haven't been having issues since.

I'd really like to stay with OO or some other equivelent, but sometimes it just doesn't work/isn't intuitive. The document I was creating was a simple text document with a table of contents, different headings, had pictures, etc. Nothing too out of the ordinary.

[dmizer]

I've tried using open office for things. I use it for most things I do. But I ran into some strange issues I couldn't resolve. Strangly enough, saving the file in .doc format in OO resolved the issue, but then I ran into other issues with things not saving properly. In the end, for this work document I opened the doc file in office 2007, saved in in docx format and haven't been having issues since.

I'd really like to stay with OO or some other equivelent, but sometimes it just doesn't work/isn't intuitive. The document I was creating was a simple text document with a table of contents, different headings, had pictures, etc. Nothing too out of the ordinary.

My point was not to address your specific concerns with OO, but to address the points made in the video. Since the points made in the video are biased and logically unsound, they should not be taken seriously.

That's not to say that the points do not have some foundation in fact. If they didn't, then they would have no power. It's simply how the points are presented and how the points appeal to subjective reasoning.

I'm sure you've had problems with Open Office. I have also had problems with Open Office. But I've also had problems with Microsoft Office that Open Office was able to solve. If Microsoft Office was perfect, they wouldn't find it necessary to produce the video in the first place.

[tgm4883]

My point was not to address your specific concerns with OO, but to address the points made in the video. Since the points made in the video are biased and logically unsound, they should not be taken seriously.

That's not to say that the points do not have some foundation in fact. If they didn't, then they would have no power. It's simply how the points are presented and how the points appeal to subjective reasoning.

I'm sure you've had problems with Open Office. I have also had problems with Open Office. But I've also had problems with Microsoft Office that Open Office was able to solve. If Microsoft Office was perfect, they wouldn't find it necessary to produce the video in the first place.

Sorry didn't mean to quote you on that last post of mine, I must be more tired than I thought. My point was just that taking 2 equal products one being open source and one not, that the open source one is better (simply because it is open source). Take two products like OO and MS Office, and OO isn't better simply because it is open source. It has the potential to be better, but right now I believe Office is a better product.

People who think open source products are superior to closed source counterparts and overlook all the shortcomings of the open source product make me crazy.

[Khakilang]

I believe why Microsoft come out with the video is because OpenOffice is eating up their market share and are reacting to their competitor. That means OpenOffice is better.

[tgm4883]

I believe why Microsoft come out with the video is because OpenOffice is eating up their market share and are reacting to their competitor. That means OpenOffice is better.

No, it means that they don't want to lose market share. Better is in the eye of the beholder. For me, OO isn't better than MS Office, although I wish it was.

[Khakilang]

No, it means that they don't want to lose market share. Better is in the eye of the beholder. For me, OO isn't better than MS Office, although I wish it was.

They lose their market share to who? . Is it OpenOffice, LibreOffice, GoOffice? And why are they losing market share? There is a reason why Microsoft are doing this.

[tgm4883]

They lose their market share to who? . Is it OpenOffice, LibreOffice, GoOffice? And why are they losing market share? There is a reason why Microsoft are doing this.

I see what you did there. OpenOffice, LibreOffice, and GoOffice are the same thing. You are assuming people are moving to Openoffice because it is better. I disagree that OO is better than MS Office. Further, one product being better than another isn't the only reason someone might switch.

Microsoft has a history of squashing bugs before they become an issue for them. (bugs being competition) If history is any indication as to what is happening here, they didn't make the video because OO was taking market share (or rather, OO isn't taking significant market share). They made the video to preempt OO from becoming a threat. After all, it is probably the largest competitor to MS Office.

[JustinR]

Formating problems are easy to fix: Don't export into Microsoft formats, instead, give copies of the whole suite to anyone receiving your documents so they can open them properly using the native format in its native application, just like they expect you to do with Microsoft Documents.

Microsoft Office 2007+ has great support for OpenOffice files - better than OpenOffice's support for Microsoft Office files. So just save in your native format - the biggest enterprise companies like HP have already switched to 2007+.

[madjr]

I see what you did there. OpenOffice, LibreOffice, and GoOffice are the same thing. You are assuming people are moving to Openoffice because it is better. I disagree that OO is better than MS Office. Further, one product being better than another isn't the only reason someone might switch.

Microsoft has a history of squashing bugs before they become an issue for them. (bugs being competition) If history is any indication as to what is happening here, they didn't make the video because OO was taking market share (or rather, OO isn't taking significant market share). They made the video to preempt OO from becoming a threat. After all, it is probably the largest competitor to MS Office.

they tried to do the same to linux on the server and looked what happened: not only they failed miserably, they also made them stronger / easier to use and the LAMP combo was born. :)

[lancest]

OO being multi platform is an important reason I think it's better.

OO performs admirably and it's only going to get better in the future.
Learn to use it well, and you're set.

Last I used MS Office it was total dog in paging long documents.

If you see MS bagging on Open Office- it only means they are afraid of it.

Ballmer admits Open Office is a competitor.

[alaukikyo]

snip

[Ric_NYC]

So.. that's part of the " interoperability" Microsoft was working so hard with some Linux vendors?