The return of OpenOffice?

[Linux_junkie]

Whilst surfing I came across the following website / blog regarding OpenOffice. It appears that development has already again for this suite of apps.

http://blogs.apache.org/OOo/

What do you think?

Is it a case of bye bye Libre Office, welcome back Open Office?

[haqking]

Whilst surfing I came across the following website / blog regarding OpenOffice. It appears that development has already again for this suite of apps.

http://blogs.apache.org/OOo/

What do you think?

Is it a case of bye bye Libre Office, welcome back Open Office?

Didnt know it had really stopped for any real time, Apache took over it from Oracle almost a year ago now.

[sffvba[e0rt]

Is it a case of bye bye Libre Office, welcome back Open Office?

Not sure how you come to this conclusion (or question)?!


404

[tadcan]

The work is mostly on the admin side, not in development. LibreOffice was up and running in a shorter time and has gained contributors since then. Now that the change has happened it will be the real test if the Apache team can get any momentum behind them. I wonder how many downloads LibreOffice get compared to their 10 million per month.

[SemiExpert]

Intel went with LibreOffice, as did most developers. OpenOffice hasn't seen an update since January 2011, so it looks like it's dormant from the standpoint of development.

[MisterGaribaldi]

Ever since there was the whole LibreOffice fork thingy, it's become more muddled than it should be.

LibreOffice is good for those who don't want to pay money for office productivity software and are not concerned with inter-application compatibility.

The rest of us will just continue using MS Office and/or iLife instead.

[KiwiNZ]

Ever since there was the whole LibreOffice fork thingy, it's become more muddled than it should be.

LibreOffice is good for those who don't want to pay money for office productivity software and are not concerned with inter-application compatibility.

The rest of us will just continue using MS Office and/or iLife instead.

+1

Both Open Office and Libre Office miss the mark.

[lukeiamyourfather]

Ever since there was the whole LibreOffice fork thingy, it's become more muddled than it should be.

LibreOffice is good for those who don't want to pay money for office productivity software and are not concerned with inter-application compatibility.

The rest of us will just continue using MS Office and/or iLife instead.

Speak for yourself, I've been using OpenOffice (now LibreOffice) for a decade and will continue to for another decade or more. To clear up any confusion about OpenOffice and LibreOffice one should know that LibreOffice was a fork of OpenOffice. They can go in their own directions and they can coexist, that's the whole point of a fork.

[sffvba[e0rt]

And I guess it is Libre/OOo fault that they struggle with the document formats from certain other companies... Oh wait, now we are going of at a tangent and just re-flogging a dead horse...


404

[Hagar Delest]

The work is mostly on the admin side, not in development.
That's a bit quick!
There has been a lot of work done. First to set up the project management, then the intellectual property cleaning because of the switch to ALv2 license. RC have been under progress for some time now but still some release blockers have to be fixed.

A new release should be available soon. No very big changes but it will initiate another cycle of the development. The future will say if the license model will attract enough resources to make it a thriving project.

As for inter-application compatibility, of course the only way is ODF. Supporting OOXML is a dead end. The ISO format is not even supported by MS Office, they use another flavor of the format that includes parts still covered by proprietary and non released specification. Of course, some will argue that OOXML is a de facto standard. As long as users/customers don't rebel, it may continue indeed. But it doesn't mean that it's the best choice.
If you need to work with OOXML, then indeed, buy MS Office and that's all.

[SemiExpert]

That's a bit quick!
There has been a lot of work done. First to set up the project management, then the intellectual property cleaning because of the switch to ALv2 license. RC have been under progress for some time now but still some release blockers have to be fixed.

A new release should be available soon. No very big changes but it will initiate another cycle of the development. The future will say if the license model will attract enough resources to make it a thriving project.



I think that the only value left in the moribund OpenOffice project is in the name itself. I really do wish that Oracle had simply handed the name over to the Document Foundation. As it is, I don't see any benefit or attraction to Apache Licensing? What's the point? I don't think there is one to beating the dead horse that continues to be known as OpenOffice. The world moved on, and moved on to LibreOffice.

[haqking]

I think that the only value left in the moribund OpenOffice project is in the name itself. I really do wish that Oracle had simply handed the name over to the Document Foundation. As it is, I don't see any benefit or attraction to Apache Licensing? What's the point? I don't think there is one to beating the dead horse that continues to be known as OpenOffice. The world moved on, and moved on to LibreOffice.

apart from the people who still use openoffice of course ;-)

nothing wrong with having more than one office suite out there.

It would be a shame if there was only one version of everything out there in the software world.

Peace

[KiwiNZ]

I think that the only value left in the moribund OpenOffice project is in the name itself. I really do wish that Oracle had simply handed the name over to the Document Foundation. As it is, I don't see any benefit or attraction to Apache Licensing? What's the point? I don't think there is one to beating the dead horse that continues to be known as OpenOffice. The world moved on, and moved on to LibreOffice.

It was not the world, it was a very small percentage that moved to LibreOffice.

[BrokenKingpin]

Even if OpenOffice did start back into active development (maybe it still is), there is nothing stopping the LibreOffice group from pulling in those features (and vice versa). It was a good move to fork, they retain control for the direction, but can still pull from OpenOffice if they wish. They only thing they lost was the name recognition.

[Roasted]

Speak for yourself, I've been using OpenOffice (now LibreOffice) for a decade and will continue to for another decade or more. To clear up any confusion about OpenOffice and LibreOffice one should know that LibreOffice was a fork of OpenOffice. They can go in their own directions and they can coexist, that's the whole point of a fork.

Amen. We've deployed Libre Office here at work (school district) and it's worked remarkably well. I've also used Open/LibreOffice for anything and everything for a few years now for 100% of my office productivity needs.

Misses the mark? Naw. Not quite. ;) I know some people may need very specific MS Office features, but I haven't ran into that need for any of my work or personal office needs.

[tadcan]

That's a bit quick!
There has been a lot of work done. First to set up the project management, then the intellectual property cleaning because of the switch to ALv2 license. RC have been under progress for some time now but still some release blockers have to be fixed.

That proves my point, as does the graphic in the press release. There may have been more to do since the project was inherited over a fresh start. However with the tons of dead code that the LO team have been cleaning up before they can add new features it shows how much work still has to be done by OOo.

[SemiExpert]

That proves my point, as does the graphic in the press release. There may have been more to do since the project was inherited over a fresh start. However with the tons of dead code that the LO team have been cleaning up before they can add new features it shows how much work still has to be done by OOo.

I have to wonder if LibreOffice 3.5 might be the starting point for any revived OpenOffice? Not sure how the licensing change ramifications? Considering that OpenOffice has been dormant since the developer exodus in late 2010, a lot of time has been lost and 3.3 is no longer a viable starting point. LibreOffice is really the de facto successor to OpenOffice.

[Paqman]

LibreOffice is good for those who don't want to pay money for office productivity software and are not concerned with inter-application compatibility.

The rest of us will just continue using MS Office and/or iLife instead.

Tbh, I'm finding Google Docs to be the best for compatibility these days. It's identical on any machine with a browser, and can export to all the useful formats.

I have LibreOffice at home and MS Office at work. Using Google just sidesteps the whole issue. For 99% of stuff it's completely capable.

[Dragonbite]

Whilst surfing I came across the following website / blog regarding OpenOffice. It appears that development has already again for this suite of apps.

http://blogs.apache.org/OOo/

What do you think?

Is it a case of bye bye Libre Office, welcome back Open Office?

Considering the amount of work already put into LibreOffice and it's more community (anti-corp) attitude and dedication to FOSS I don't see OpenOffice.org overcoming that easily.

Even if OpenOffice.org is completely FOSS (even more open than LibreOffice) its reputation is tarnished by the fallout and corporate puppet strings and that will take time and marketing to move people past it.

[*^kyfds(]

Tbh, I'm finding Google Docs to be the best for compatibility these days. It's identical on any machine with a browser, and can export to all the useful formats.

I have LibreOffice at home and MS Office at work. Using Google just sidesteps the whole issue. For 99% of stuff it's completely capable.

Google docs really doesn't work for me.
the entire flash interface just feels a little bit to clunky and slow for me to work comfortably with.

For the L.O. vs O.O. issue - iId personally choose libre office, because it looks way more professional, but mainly because it is produced by people who want to develop freely, rather than being confined to a large corporation

but then again that's just my opinion.

[Hagar Delest]

Licensing is a key point here to attract new contributors. LibO is restrictive, it may prevent companies to invest because they won't be able to sell or keep features they develop.
On the other side, AOO (Apache OpenOffice) may attracts other big players because they will be able to sell or keep those features.

I also find the LibO too ideological (it's only MY POV) and not enough professional (too much emphasizing new features instead of quality/stability) and too much MS like oriented.

The competition between AOO and LibO will be a very big test for 2 development models, let's see what happens after AOO 3.4 is released.

[SemiExpert]

Licensing is a key point here to attract new contributors. LibO is restrictive, it may prevent companies to invest because they won't be able to sell or keep features they develop.
On the other side, AOO (Apache OpenOffice) may attracts other big players because they will be able to sell or keep those features.

I also find the LibO too ideological (it's only MY POV) and not enough professional (too much emphasizing new features instead of quality/stability) and too much MS like oriented.

The competition between AOO and LibO will be a very big test for 2 development models, let's see what happens after AOO 3.4 is released.

If Apache Licensing does allow corporations to sell or keep pieces of OpenOffice, as you've stated, it amounts to a huge setback for FOSS. I'm personally very concerned about the licensing change.

[lykwydchykyn]

Licensing is a key point here to attract new contributors. LibO is restrictive, it may prevent companies to invest because they won't be able to sell or keep features they develop.
On the other side, AOO (Apache OpenOffice) may attracts other big players because they will be able to sell or keep those features.


I believe Michael Meeks (LibreOffice developer) put it something like "Linux vs BSD all over again".

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see too many companies going into the document suite business at this point (web-based suites notwithstanding), at least not with a proprietary value-added version of OpenOffice. IBM has Lotus Symphony, but it's free-as-in-beer and supposedly also going to be released under an Apache license at some point.

[Hagar Delest]

If Apache Licensing does allow corporations to sell or keep pieces of OpenOffice, as you've stated, it amounts to a huge setback for FOSS.
It has always been allowed, for OOo and also for LibO. The GPL doesn't prevent code from being sold.

IBM Symphony code will be given to ASF because IBM will put the resources on AOO now IIRC.