PDA

View Full Version : If Microsoft released Office for Linux



mr john
July 20th, 2012, 06:22 AM
Would you be willing to pay for it, and if so how much? I'd probably be willing to pay between £5 and £10 for the ability to use Outlook, Word, Access and Publisher.

viperdvman
July 20th, 2012, 06:28 AM
With MS Office being pretty much the standard when it comes to documents, I wouldn't mind buying it if one was made for Linux. I'm not sure how much I would pay... probably similar to what it runs for Mac and Windows.

The only problem with making it for Linux is the many different packaging types and packaging managers used by different distros, some with different dependencies. It'd be nice if they did make Office for Linux, though :)

jonnyboysmithy
July 20th, 2012, 06:46 AM
If Microsoft released Office for Linux then:

If Microsoft ever does applications for Linux it means I've won.
Linus Torvalds (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/l/linustorva381582.html)


Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/l/linus_torvalds.html#ekJ5segw4wZ6HtfE.99

:)

bobsan
July 20th, 2012, 06:46 AM
No. The reason why it is "the standard" is that people keep using it. It will not be the standard if people stop paying for(and more likely, pirating) it. Closed formats should never become the standard because it is not reproducible by third parties, hence is not universal.

Sand & Mercury
July 20th, 2012, 06:58 AM
If it were done a few years ago, I'd happily shell out the same asking price as the Windows version for Word, Excel, Outlook and Access -- these days though, Google Drive does most everything I need so I'm not swayed on Office for Windows or otherwise.

I must say though that the 2013 version is looking mighty fine and I think they're heading in a good direction with it.

richpri
July 20th, 2012, 08:19 AM
If Microsoft published the file standards for it's products I would be much happier!

Imagine totally compatibility between Office and Libreoffice!!

cecilpierce
July 20th, 2012, 09:17 AM
I have already gave Microsoft enough of my money and time.
:P

AllRadioisDead
July 20th, 2012, 09:28 AM
No. The reason why it is "the standard" is that people keep using it. It will not be the standard if people stop paying for(and more likely, pirating) it. Closed formats should never become the standard because it is not reproducible by third parties, hence is not universal.

No, it's 'standard' because it's the best. By far.

mastablasta
July 20th, 2012, 09:58 AM
The only problem with making it for Linux is the many different packaging types and packaging managers used by different distros, some with different dependencies. It'd be nice if they did make Office for Linux, though :)

not really a problem. they just put a script and add all dependencies together with their install bundle (same as they do it in windows). problem sovled.

kellemes
July 20th, 2012, 09:59 AM
No. The reason why it is "the standard" is that people keep using it. It will not be the standard if people stop paying for(and more likely, pirating) it. Closed formats should never become the standard because it is not reproducible by third parties, hence is not universal.

+1


No, it's 'standard' because it's the best. By far.

It may be the best for you.. most people use it because they don't even know there are alternatives, or are afraid to use something else.. because everybody around them has MS-Office.

vasa1
July 20th, 2012, 10:08 AM
I don't need it.

Gone fishing
July 20th, 2012, 10:41 AM
If Microsoft released Office for Linux:

Linus Torvalds would be delighted and Richard Stallman would be outraged.

szymon_g
July 20th, 2012, 01:12 PM
You can use it's Online office software as long as you have an skydrive account. Although SD doesn't go on linux, MS office 2k13 works pretty well (but you loose some of it's features related to SD/); i'd say- works better than google docs.
But talking about native application: since LibreOffice is a standard in most desktop-oriented distributions, they would have to set a lower price for MS Office to convince people to buy it.

Grenage
July 20th, 2012, 01:26 PM
As a home user, no; as a business user, Hell yes.

Dragonbite
July 20th, 2012, 02:08 PM
I would in a heartbeat and there is no reason to suspect the price would be any different than it is for OS X.

Office is one of the primary reasons I had to move my wife off of using only the Linux desktop to mixing it with a Windows laptop.

If this was available, I would immediately look at the option of replacing her Windows OS with Linux and honestly, chances are she would be happier!



You can use it's Online office software as long as you have an skydrive account.
If you have tried it, you'll know it is nowhere nearly as functional. Best use of it is for quick edits and viewing it. It is fully compatible in presenting a file, even if the online editor cannot handle it, but a lot of editing options (and simple ones) are missing.

The other feature that I do like, but still wouldn't work with a Linux version of Office, is being able to open the SkyDrive stored Office file in the local version of Office (2007 or 2010). It does not copy the file into a local location, instead when you hit "save" it saves the online (SkyDrive) version.

Very handy at work where I can work on my files using full-blown Office 2010, but not have to worry about download-save-upload process.

Docaltmed
July 20th, 2012, 03:20 PM
Librre Office works great for my company and myself. No need to change.

pqwoerituytrueiwoq
July 20th, 2012, 05:45 PM
and compromise my systems security no thank, you know they would just make it require every 32bit library because it would use use wine the way team viewer does

qamelian
July 20th, 2012, 06:01 PM
No, it's 'standard' because it's the best. By far.
In your opinion. I think it's a terrible suite and the ribbon interface makes it painful to use. I'll take LibreOffice over it any day of the week. I would not buy a Linux version. Now, if IBM resurrected Lotus SmartSuite, I would be more than happy to shell out some coin for that. :)

QIII
July 20th, 2012, 06:13 PM
One problem with Office is Microsoft's tendency to break backwards compatibility and arbitrarily deprecate functionality in new versions, breaking some applications developed by end users. This means that applications need to be updated and that others who use those applications must then also purchase the new version. I hardly think this is by accident.

This is particularly true for Excel and Access.

Primefalcon
July 20th, 2012, 06:50 PM
One problem with Office is Microsoft's tendency to break backwards compatibility and arbitrarily deprecate functionality in new versions, breaking some applications developed by end users. This means that applications need to be updated and that others who use those applications must then also purchase the new version. I hardly think this is by accident.

This is particularly true for Excel and Access.
of curse its not.......

Ballmer: damm if I had made the company 3M more this year... I could of got that nice bonus and bought that yaht.... oh well... in the next version of office I'll just have the geeks break backwards compat somewhere and make everyone buy new licences...... here I come mr yaht!and I'll also make sure that Office 2013 will only support windows 8 and later... and brea backwards compat there as well which will make everyone buy both the office suite and windows 8.... I can smell 2 yahts!!!

bobsan
July 20th, 2012, 06:52 PM
No, it's 'standard' because it's the best. By far.

How are closed formats which are mutually incompatible even among different versions of MSO "the best"?? I don't think there will be even a debate if someone suggests that flash should be web standard, that would be simply dismissed as absurd.

I don't know how many man-hours LibreOffice spends on reverse engineering MS formats just to stay compatible, I guess it would be substantial. The resources would be much better allocated to create new, cool features and consolidating existing ones if the world has not been so locked into MSO.

So, even if MSO is available in Lunux for free (as in free beer) I still wouldn't use it because I don't want to be locked into it, and in the process contributing to MS's vendor locked in.(If you absolutely must need feature x in MSO which is not available in LibreOffice and other alternatives that is a different story, I can't tell you to use something that doesn't work in YOUR use case)

As for the Office Suit itself, there is no denying that MSO has some advanced features, but probably only a very small number of corporate users actually use and need them. The vast majority use it only because of brand recognition and the fear of incompatibility. Incompatibility will not be an issue if most people who don't really need it just stop using MSO

BrokenKingpin
July 20th, 2012, 07:51 PM
I still would not pay for it. LibreOffice is free and does what I need (and what most people need from an office suite).

morgan141
July 20th, 2012, 09:15 PM
Considering most of my documents are written in latex, probably not.

codingman
July 20th, 2012, 09:21 PM
Considering most of my documents are written in latex, probably not.

same here, if they did make it, my friends would be switching over to Linux in a heartbeat. I also use LibreOffice.

Primefalcon
July 20th, 2012, 11:17 PM
same here, if they did make it, my friends would be switching over to Linux in a heartbeat. I also use LibreOffice.
hmm native msoffice is te one tin that stopping my wife from switching over completely, she duel boots..

unfortunately even with the 2007 format libreoffice dosn't have 100% compat, it seems to have a habit of double spacing the lines

Lightstar
July 21st, 2012, 12:14 AM
I don't need it.
I use Open Office.
if it's a document I share with people, I use google docs.

I think not being a requirement is microsoft's biggest fear.

smellyman
July 21st, 2012, 02:02 AM
One problem with Office is Microsoft's tendency to break backwards compatibility and arbitrarily deprecate functionality in new versions, breaking some applications developed by end users. This means that applications need to be updated and that others who use those applications must then also purchase the new version. I hardly think this is by accident.

This is particularly true for Excel and Access.

Not only backwards compatiblity, but same version compatibility. Sharing and editing documents between companies causes document corruption. Contanstanty having to fix issues. This happens a lot at law firms.

drawkcab
July 21st, 2012, 04:52 PM
I use power point and, yeah, the advanced features are necessary for what I do. Since I work for a university, I get it for next to nothing. So yeah, I would love to see office in Linux. With MS Office and Steam coming soon, I could happily dump my last remaining windows partition. I certainly want nothing to do with windows 8.

bobsan
July 21st, 2012, 05:13 PM
I use power point and, yeah, the advanced features are necessary for what I do. Since I work for a university, I get it for next to nothing. So yeah, I would love to see office in Linux. With MS Office and Steam coming soon, I could happily dump my last remaining windows partition. I certainly want nothing to do with windows 8.

I don't know if power point counts as an advanced feature. I work in uni too and many people use powerpoint to do presentations (especially in the humanities) but mostly they are very straight foward presentations with only text and maybe a few static charts, graphs or diagrams. All of that can be handled without problem with Libreoffice (and there are a few brave souls who do exactly that and you wouldn't know the difference)

The cost is not an issue for me (I get discount), but MS locked in is a big issue,--and to my mind the discount is a Trojan horse to get people hooked and undermine competitors. That's why I said I wouldn't use it even if there is a Linux version that costs $0.

forrestcupp
July 21st, 2012, 06:57 PM
I probably wouldn't buy it because I already have a Windows copy that works almost perfectly with Wine. If I ever upgraded, I probably still wouldn't buy it because you're allowed to install it on one work and one home computer, and my work computer will always have Windows on it. But if a license could make the Linux version and Windows version both available, I'd be pretty happy.


No. The reason why it is "the standard" is that people keep using it. It will not be the standard if people stop paying for(and more likely, pirating) it. Closed formats should never become the standard because it is not reproducible by third parties, hence is not universal.The reason it is "the standard" is because people keep using it, and the reason people keep using it is because it is by far the best option available. People who think LibreOffice or even Google Docs is better are just deceiving themselves. They're about on par with Office 2000 or earlier.



It may be the best for you.. most people use it because they don't even know there are alternatives, or are afraid to use something else.. because everybody around them has MS-Office.Most people who don't even know there are alternatives don't even know that they are already using the best option out there. ;)

Edit: but if you can't afford MS Office, LibreOffice is a pretty darned good alternative.

PaulW2U
July 21st, 2012, 07:16 PM
Would you be willing to pay for it, and if so how much? I'd probably be willing to pay between £5 and £10 for the ability to use Outlook, Word, Access and Publisher.

That's exactly what I paid for MS Office 2010 through Microsoft's Home Use Program and I've yet to produce a document with it. :)

My use of such software at present is just to maintain documents for my own use and I have the Linux version of LibreOffice installed on my PC and netbook and the Windows version on my laptops for that. For me, LibreOffice is fine as was MS Office 2003 but the redesign of the GUI in later versions has left me so confused I go straight back to LibreOffice after just a few minutes.

I may be getting old but I would stick to what I have become used to over the past few years.

bobsan
July 21st, 2012, 07:23 PM
The reason it is "the standard" is because people keep using it, and the reason people keep using it is because it is by far the best option available. People who think LibreOffice or even Google Docs is better are just deceiving themselves. They're about on par with Office 2000 or earlier

Well Office 2000 or earlier cannot open or export to pdf, in fact even Office 2007(?) cannot import Pdf. Recently we have a big csv file, it took a bit longer for Cacl to open than EXCEL but calc got the dates correct while they are all messed up in EXCEL 2010. So there you go.

What is "best" depending on your use case. Why would I need all the bloat and bell and whistles when I don't use them? The Mercedes may be "the best" but what do I care if I just want an affordable an efficient way to go from point A to point B?

But that is not even the point. Standard is about the format, not the features in the Office Suit. If MSO only works with closed formats which are not even backward compatible or cross platform compatible(I was told there are glitches in Office for Mac, but I can't confirm it cos I use neither Office nor Mac) then it disqualifies itself as a standard application, no matter how many bells and whistles it has (and most of them not necessary for most use case)

A standard has to be universal and easily reproduced by definition. Formats that supports only MS approved platforms and change subjected to the whim of one corporation in order to lock in users and maximize profit cannot be a standard. Is it so hard to grasp?

kurt18947
July 21st, 2012, 08:09 PM
I don't know if power point counts as an advanced feature. I work in uni too and many people use powerpoint to do presentations (especially in the humanities) but mostly they are very straight foward presentations with only text and maybe a few static charts, graphs or diagrams. All of that can be handled without problem with Libreoffice (and there are a few brave souls who do exactly that and you wouldn't know the difference)

The cost is not an issue for me (I get discount), but MS locked in is a big issue,--and to my mind the discount is a Trojan horse to get people hooked and undermine competitors. That's why I said I wouldn't use it even if there is a Linux version that costs $0.

Yup. Remember in the mid 90's when Microsoft Office came FREE on many or most new P.C.s? Once they got a de facto monopoly it's no longer free, or even inexpensive when bought at retail.

irv
July 21st, 2012, 08:10 PM
After reading all the post on this thread, I see some pros and cons.

First I don't see MS doing this for this reason. Do you think MS will spend man hours and money doing this just to see a small user base (only some Linux users would purchase it). The Linux user base is small and then you are only taking a slice of them to begin with. Not a wise move for MS.

With that said, I am one that has no real need for it. I am totally Windows free. I don't have any walls so why would I need windows. I am wide open (open source only that is). I am outside as I type this.:P

All this talk about standards. Do you know why we need standards? So everyone in the world can use what they want and be upward compatible with one another. MS don't play that game only open docs does. One standard fits all. What is your file extension? DOC, PPS, XLS if so you are not open docs. You need to be creating ODT, ODP, ODS or any open doc format. And might I add open docs and open source formats are much better. Just look at MP3 and OGG files.

OK, with that out of the way I would say that if MS were to come out with MS Office for Linux it would be good only for this reason. It would get more people using Linux and then things would start to change. And that might be another reason why MS wouldn't do it.

Learning Linux 2011
July 21st, 2012, 08:15 PM
I probably would. I doubt you would get it for much less than $100 dollars though.

Office exists for the Mac, and since the Mac is basically Linux/Unix underneath, they probably already have alot of the code.

AutoDesk released AutoCAD for the Mac, which I never thought would happen. They might even release a Linux version.

I think licensing would be a big problem for big proprietary companies like that though.
Linux license agreements are causing vendors to avoid porting their products to Linux.
And there really isn't much incentive for good programmers to spend time writing complex programs only to give them away later.

epikvision
July 21st, 2012, 08:19 PM
Google drive is enough for me. Otherwise, it's just libreoffice.

kurt18947
July 21st, 2012, 08:21 PM
I think the newest Office suites do kinda sorta half-ashed support open doc formats, don't they? I'd be pleasantly surprised if MSO users were able to save .odt or .ods files and have them open correctly in LibreOffice, Abiword, gnumeric etc. No, I wouldn't be surprised, I'd be astounded.

irv
July 21st, 2012, 08:22 PM
I think licensing would be a big problem for big proprietary companies like that though.


Another good point I missed in my post. Thanks for adding it.

bobsan
July 21st, 2012, 08:22 PM
I think licensing would be a big problem for big proprietary companies like that though.
Linux license agreements are causing vendors to avoid porting their products to Linux.
And there really isn't much incentive for good programmers to spend time writing complex programs only to give them away later.

Totally disagree with your last point. What about Linux itself? Best work is motivated by love, not money.

Also, programmers don't make commercial decisions in "big proprietary companies". They only work there so whether they have the incentive is irrelevant.

Finally, it is a fallacy that you starve yourself by producing free software. Last I check RedHat is a very profitable company.

irv
July 21st, 2012, 08:28 PM
Totally disagree with your last point. What about Linux itself? Best work is motivated by love, not money.

Also, programmers don't make commercial decisions in "big proprietary companies". They only work there so whether they have the incentive is irrelevant.

Finally, it is a fallacy that you starve yourself by producing free software. Last I check RedHat is a very profitable company.
I think the point being proprietary licensing will not agree with open source licensing.

forrestcupp
July 21st, 2012, 09:04 PM
Well Office 2000 or earlier cannot open or export to pdf, in fact even Office 2007(?) cannot import Pdf. Recently we have a big csv file, it took a bit longer for Cacl to open than EXCEL but calc got the dates correct while they are all messed up in EXCEL 2010. So there you go.

What is "best" depending on your use case. Why would I need all the bloat and bell and whistles when I don't use them? The Mercedes may be "the best" but what do I care if I just want an affordable an efficient way to go from point A to point B?

But that is not even the point. Standard is about the format, not the features in the Office Suit. If MSO only works with closed formats which are not even backward compatible or cross platform compatible(I was told there are glitches in Office for Mac, but I can't confirm it cos I use neither Office nor Mac) then it disqualifies itself as a standard application, no matter how many bells and whistles it has (and most of them not necessary for most use case)

A standard has to be universal and easily reproduced by definition. Formats that supports only MS approved platforms and change subjected to the whim of one corporation in order to lock in users and maximize profit cannot be a standard. Is it so hard to grasp?
Well, you have a point about importing PDF files, but LibreOffice's PDF import tool isn't really any better than not having one at all. Most PDFs aren't editable, and a lot of times when you import even an editable one, you get a bunch of unreadable code. The best way to import a PDF to either Office or LibreOffice is to use an online PDF to Word doc converter. On the other hand, Office 2007 does have an excellent pdf exporter.

But as far as what is better for what you need? Just because LibreOffice is adequate for someone who doesn't need all the bells and whistles doesn't mean that it is better. I actually prefer MS Office even for the simple things.

But like I've said a lot before, if you can't afford MS Office, LibreOffice is an excellent alternative.

Lucradia
July 21st, 2012, 09:13 PM
I wouldn't be willing to pay for it because OpenOffice and Libre office exist already.

KiwiNZ
July 21st, 2012, 09:19 PM
I would buy it, MS Office is the type of application suite Linux needs if market share is to move beyond +/- 1%

kestrel1
July 21st, 2012, 09:28 PM
Schools are to blame for MS Office to be the standard in my opinion.
I work in a school & tried to get them to use OpenOffice years ago, basically to save money on licences. I used to get complaints from the teachers that would say "but it's not Microsoft"
In the end I had to purchase MS Office licences Very annoying to be honest, but teachers are using this software & the students are being taught on it.
Office 2010 is OK though & I also use CloudOn for the iPad, which gives you Word Excel & PP. Great for editing documents stored on dropbox.
LibreOffice works well on Linux, so why pay for the "standard". Stand out from the crowd.

Lucradia
July 21st, 2012, 09:29 PM
I would buy it, MS Office is the type of application suite Linux needs if market share is to move beyond +/- 1%

We all know Microsoft would make Canonical pay THEM to have MS Office on ubuntu, and not give any royalties or anything. See the issue with the Fez (Xbox 360) developer against their ~40,000 USD patch fee they got from Microsoft for my reasons. (You actually have to pay Microsoft to be on 360, even if it's to retain exclusivity, as well as, on top of that, pay patch fees for each patch you push out.)

KiwiNZ
July 21st, 2012, 09:34 PM
We all know Microsoft would make Canonical pay THEM to have MS Office on ubuntu, and not give any royalties or anything. See the issue with the Fez (Xbox 360) developer against their ~40,000 USD patch fee they got from Microsoft for my reasons. (You actually have to pay Microsoft to be on 360, even if it's to retain exclusivity, as well as, on top of that, pay patch fees for each patch you push out.)

Nothing wrong with developing Applications and making a profit from the investment.

Welly Wu
July 21st, 2012, 09:50 PM
This is not going to happen. Ever.

KiwiNZ
July 21st, 2012, 09:51 PM
This is not going to happen. Ever.

"ever" that's a bold statement, "ever" is a very long time and impossible to predict.

NateSchulz
July 21st, 2012, 09:54 PM
I wouldn't. My Office needs are more than taken care of by LibreOffice.

ojdon
July 21st, 2012, 10:40 PM
If I came across this question several years ago, I would of said yes. But with the improvement with Libre Office and me doing all my documents in Google Drive then exporting it to PDF, I would now say nope!

Simply because I have found alternatives that suit my needs. :)

Giant Speck
July 21st, 2012, 11:35 PM
I probably would. Microsoft Office, Adobe Lightroom, and Internet Explorer 9 (for viewing CAC-enabled websites) seem to be the only three things I use Windows for these days.

kurt18947
July 22nd, 2012, 12:00 AM
<snip>
People who think LibreOffice or even Google Docs is better are just deceiving themselves. They're about on par with Office 2000 or earlier.

Most people who don't even know there are alternatives don't even know that they are already using the best option out there. ;)

Edit: but if you can't afford MS Office, LibreOffice is a pretty darned good alternative.

But except for the ability to work with .docx, .xlsx etc. files, Office 2000 level functionality is perfectly adequate for a great many people. Not everyone, obviously but I'd say a majority.

alexfish
July 22nd, 2012, 01:14 AM
Well, you have a point about importing PDF files, but LibreOffice's PDF import tool isn't really any better than not having one at all. Most PDFs aren't editable, and a lot of times when you import even an editable one, you get a bunch of unreadable code. The best way to import a PDF to either Office or LibreOffice is to use an online PDF to Word doc converter. On the other hand, Office 2007 does have an excellent pdf exporter.

But as far as what is better for what you need? Just because LibreOffice is adequate for someone who doesn't need all the bells and whistles doesn't mean that it is better. I actually prefer MS Office even for the simple things.

But like I've said a lot before, if you can't afford MS Office, LibreOffice is an excellent alternative.

easy answer , down load html . open in libre writer , export pdf , from there , pick options.

so easy .

regards

alexfish

Docaltmed
July 22nd, 2012, 02:28 AM
The reason it is "the standard" is because people keep using it, and the reason people keep using it is because it is by far the best option available. People who think LibreOffice or even Google Docs is better are just deceiving themselves. They're about on par with Office 2000 or earlier.

Most people who don't even know there are alternatives don't even know that they are already using the best option out there. ;)

Edit: but if you can't afford MS Office, LibreOffice is a pretty darned good alternative.

I disagree. I'm pretty much an office applications power user (dear lord I hate that term, is there something not quite as, youknow, 90s?), as I write books, blogs, research articles, give presentations frequently and design my own spreadsheet templates for medical office uses.

Looking over my work, I can't find a single example of when I would need MS Office, or even want it over what Libre Office provides. People send me .doc files, I import, work on them, return them as same. Impress handily employs PowerPoint templates, a function I've used before, and audiences of hundreds of people haven't given their great aunt's fanny that I'm using Impress.

With the HUD, the interface far exceeds anything MS offers. And as others have said, updates don't break my homebrew templates.

For me, MS Office isn't the best. It's an also-ran.

mr john
July 22nd, 2012, 05:35 AM
Interesting conversation. It seems that for alot of people Libre/Open Office is enough. The reason I asked this question is because Open Office didn't meet the needs of my staff at work. We needed an alternative to Microsoft Access and also a replacement for Outlook that needed to be compatible with our existing Exchange server. OO couldn't deal with the Access thing and the Exchange plugin for Evolution was too buggy. As I said, the server had to stay with Exchange Server. Also, alot of our clients use Microsoft Office so there were some compatibility issues there when it comes to transferring files back and forward between our staff and our clients. While Open Office was good at what it can do, there were too many things missing that made the move impossible.

Jay MC
July 22nd, 2012, 11:19 AM
I disagree. I'm pretty much an office applications power user (dear lord I hate that term, is there something not quite as, youknow, 90s?), as I write books, blogs, research articles, give presentations frequently and design my own spreadsheet templates for medical office uses.

Seconded. I do a lot document formatting - I also reckon I'm pretty good at it - and LibreOffice gives me everything I need to do that properly (mirror margins, full spacing options including between characters, different styles for different sections, insertion of illustrations, pdf export, etc., etc.). I've been able to move all my work to Ubuntu, precisely because of free apps like LibreOffice (also Inkscape, which has always been my app of choice to make graphics for covers and in-text illustrations).

I'd genuinely be interested to hear what people do in Microsoft Word that they can't do in free equivalents. I'm not saying use cases don't exist, but I don't know what they are and haven't been missing them myself.

I'd like to see more sophisticated pdf export, because I don't want to buy software to do full pre-flighting - but I'm not sure Microsoft Word is any better in that space...?

I do doff my cap to Microsoft Office when it comes to PowerPoint. It has some really powerful features to make extremely attractive presentations, and I think the free alternatives lag quite far behind.

The only reason I go in Windows nowadays is to use some propriety music software.

Jay MC
July 22nd, 2012, 11:23 AM
Interesting conversation. It seems that for alot of people Libre/Open Office is enough. The reason I asked this question is because Open Office didn't meet the needs of my staff at work. We needed an alternative to Microsoft Access and also a replacement for Outlook that needed to be compatible with our existing Exchange server. OO couldn't deal with the Access thing and the Exchange plugin for Evolution was too buggy.

Aha. Interesting.

I use LibreOffice Writer as a standalone app - rather than as part of an integrated office solution.

As a word processor for making docs, it does everything I need and more. But I accept that LibreOffice might not match Microsoft as a complete solution for integrated office work.

forrestcupp
July 22nd, 2012, 12:30 PM
But except for the ability to work with .docx, .xlsx etc. files, Office 2000 level functionality is perfectly adequate for a great many people. Not everyone, obviously but I'd say a majority.I'm not disagreeing that it's adequate for anyone. I'm just disagreeing that it's better.


easy answer , down load html . open in libre writer , export pdf , from there , pick options.
Well, you can do the same thing with Word. But the problem is that you can't download an html version of every pdf out there.


I disagree. I'm pretty much an office applications power user (dear lord I hate that term, is there something not quite as, youknow, 90s?), as I write books, blogs, research articles, give presentations frequently and design my own spreadsheet templates for medical office uses.

Looking over my work, I can't find a single example of when I would need MS Office, or even want it over what Libre Office provides. People send me .doc files, I import, work on them, return them as same. Impress handily employs PowerPoint templates, a function I've used before, and audiences of hundreds of people haven't given their great aunt's fanny that I'm using Impress.

With the HUD, the interface far exceeds anything MS offers. And as others have said, updates don't break my homebrew templates.

For me, MS Office isn't the best. It's an also-ran.Two things. First, if they sent you a docx file, you might have more trouble. Docx files that were created in Word open perfectly in Writer. But docx files that were created or altered in Writer are very far from perfect in Word, and sometimes even opening them back up in Writer. Like it or not, a lot of people use docx format now, since it's the default in Word. I've also experienced some corruption when opening xlsx files in Calc.

Secondly, you must have gotten very lucky with Impress. That's the worst of the lot, in my opinion. I had too many times of someone creating a big presentation in PowerPoint and trying to display it on Impress, and the formatting is so bad that it's unusable without having to deal with reformatting everything last minute. That's the main reason I ended up buying MS Office.

If you're using LibreOffice, and you don't ever need MS Office formats, it's more than adequate for even complex things, unless you need VB macros. I wouldn't say better, but adequate. But if you ever need to deal with MS Office formats, especially the newer Xml ones, LibreOffice is a nightmare.

Dragonbite
July 22nd, 2012, 01:44 PM
Interesting conversation. It seems that for alot of people Libre/Open Office is enough. The reason I asked this question is because Open Office didn't meet the needs of my staff at work. We needed an alternative to Microsoft Access and also a replacement for Outlook that needed to be compatible with our existing Exchange server. OO couldn't deal with the Access thing and the Exchange plugin for Evolution was too buggy. As I said, the server had to stay with Exchange Server. Also, alot of our clients use Microsoft Office so there were some compatibility issues there when it comes to transferring files back and forward between our staff and our clients. While Open Office was good at what it can do, there were too many things missing that made the move impossible.

Unfortunately it sounds like Windows is your best option at this point.

Exchange and Active Directory makes moving to a Linux desktop office difficult without better support.

I would not have as much difficulty in migrating to Linux at work, but then again I am not the "norm" ;) For some of my work I would greatly prefer using Linux as it deals with working with our public web server running on FreeBSD.

But doing the ASP.NET work, which theoretically can be done with Mono, would be a little trickier.

bobsan
July 22nd, 2012, 03:22 PM
I'm not disagreeing that it's adequate for anyone. I'm just disagreeing that it's better.

Two things. First, if they sent you a docx file, you might have more trouble. Docx files that were created in Word open perfectly in Writer. But docx files that were created or altered in Writer are very far from perfect in Word, and sometimes even opening them back up in Writer. Like it or not, a lot of people use docx format now, since it's the default in Word. I've also experienced some corruption when opening xlsx files in Calc.

Secondly, you must have gotten very lucky with Impress. That's the worst of the lot, in my opinion. I had too many times of someone creating a big presentation in PowerPoint and trying to display it on Impress, and the formatting is so bad that it's unusable without having to deal with reformatting everything last minute. That's the main reason I ended up buying MS Office.

If you're using LibreOffice, and you don't ever need MS Office formats, it's more than adequate for even complex things, unless you need VB macros. I wouldn't say better, but adequate. But if you ever need to deal with MS Office formats, especially the newer Xml ones, LibreOffice is a nightmare.

So the problem is MS's closed formats, not LibreOffice. The problem will not be a problem any more if everyone just stops being so addicted to MS. That is exactly my point., you can't use proprietary formats as the standard, and MS has especially poor cross platform and cross version compatibility by design.

The only way to break the cycle of compatibility nightmare is for people who don't necessarily need MSO to ditch it first (that would at least apply to most current MSO home users) then eventually it will be less needed and migration will be easier for others as well. On the other hand, if you are creating documents and spreadsheets in docx, xlsx formats you are contributing to MS vendor locked in and there is no reason to do so as you can save to doc and xls with Office easily. (BTW, I have no problem opening the "x" formats with LO, but then I don't deal with strangely formatted documents)

A common advice on UF is "use what works for you". That is obvious as I can't tell you to use something that doesn't work. However, often time "works" is actually just a subjective preference formed by habit and brand recognition rather than an objective evaluation. In those instances perhaps a little consumer awareness will put things into better perspective.

bobsan
July 22nd, 2012, 03:42 PM
Interesting conversation. It seems that for alot of people Libre/Open Office is enough. The reason I asked this question is because Open Office didn't meet the needs of my staff at work. We needed an alternative to Microsoft Access and also a replacement for Outlook that needed to be compatible with our existing Exchange server. OO couldn't deal with the Access thing and the Exchange plugin for Evolution was too buggy. As I said, the server had to stay with Exchange Server. Also, alot of our clients use Microsoft Office so there were some compatibility issues there when it comes to transferring files back and forward between our staff and our clients. While Open Office was good at what it can do, there were too many things missing that made the move impossible.

It will be hard because you have a very MS centric workplace. The whole infrastructure is set up to use MS products, of course there will be compatibility issues.

Warpnow
July 22nd, 2012, 04:59 PM
I would use it, but wouldn't pay very much for it. I got the windows version for $8 through HUP, so maybe something comparable...

MS Excel is far, far superior to gnumeric and calc, as much as I'd prefer use an open source app.

alexfish
July 22nd, 2012, 05:34 PM
I'm not disagreeing that it's adequate for anyone. I'm just disagreeing that it's better.

Well, you can do the same thing with Word. But the problem is that you can't download an html version of every pdf out there.



Not sure what is features this Linux version is

if got same use via Visual Basic , then possibly OK

if can't implement VB then for me It has No Advantage over Libre Office.

forrestcupp
July 22nd, 2012, 05:44 PM
So the problem is MS's closed formats, not LibreOffice. The problem will not be a problem any more if everyone just stops being so addicted to MS. That is exactly my point., you can't use proprietary formats as the standard, and MS has especially poor cross platform and cross version compatibility by design.

The only way to break the cycle of compatibility nightmare is for people who don't necessarily need MSO to ditch it first (that would at least apply to most current MSO home users) then eventually it will be less needed and migration will be easier for others as well. On the other hand, if you are creating documents and spreadsheets in docx, xlsx formats you are contributing to MS vendor locked in and there is no reason to do so as you can save to doc and xls with Office easily.I know what you're saying, but it's not going to happen unless Microsoft ends up going with an open file format. Most people just don't care. Most Office users especially don't care to get into the settings and change the default file format. They already have Office, so why should they care? That, plus the fact that Office is generally a lot more polished and nicer software and a lot of people just like using it. I wish MS would open up their Xml specs because LibreOffice is a great alternative for those who don't have the money for MS Office. This cycle is never going to change until MS changes it, though.


(BTW, I have no problem opening the "x" formats with LO, but then I don't deal with strangely formatted documents)LO doesn't have any problem opening docx files correctly. The problem is in saving them correctly.

Here's a simple example using the very basics that everyone uses. Open a new document in writer. Create a simple bullet point list. Save it as a docx. Open that docx in Word. Notice that it's nothing at all like what you originally created. Sometimes it's not even right when you open the same docx in Writer. But like I said, if the docx was created in Word, it opens fine in Writer, until you edit it and save it from Writer.

That's an easy example using only the basics. Of course it's always possible that the LO devs have worked it out and I'm going to look like a dunce. :)

PhilGil
July 22nd, 2012, 06:43 PM
For personal use, LibreOffice suits me just fine. For business use I'd love to be able to discard Windows and use MS Office in Linux (and would pay full price for Office).

The same arguments come up in every LO vs Office thread. The pragmatists maintain that MS Office is the de facto standard (it is) and that it's necessary to use what most other businesses are using to avoid interoperability issues. The idealists argue that this will never change as long as the pragmatists continue to use Office (also true).

In my office (small company with five employees), 95% of our work is done using MS Office. And (unfortunately) we are quite locked in. I can't speak to Exchange Server integration with Outlook alternatives as I don't administer our email, but I can say that our business would not function without Access. We have have been using Access databases for record keeping and reporting since the late 1990's, and it suits our needs quite well. Over that period, I've built reasonably sophisticated applications in Access (with forms, reporting and a crapload of VBA code). Switching to open source alternatives would be a serious burden to our business, both financially and on my available time.

That's not to say there aren't good open source alternatives to Access, but, in the real business world, it isn't cost effective to switch.

bobsan
July 22nd, 2012, 07:31 PM
I know what you're saying, but it's not going to happen unless Microsoft ends up going with an open file format. Most people just don't care. Most Office users especially don't care to get into the settings and change the default file format. They already have Office, so why should they care? That, plus the fact that Office is generally a lot more polished and nicer software and a lot of people just like using it. I wish MS would open up their Xml specs because LibreOffice is a great alternative for those who don't have the money for MS Office. This cycle is never going to change until MS changes it, though.

I am sorry, that sounds very defeatist to me. You know as well as I that there is almost no chance that MS will ever open up its format (Edited :unless LO or other alternatives have achieved such a huge market share already that it is forced to, which is not impossible with the popularity of mobile and cloud computing). Why should they? Forced dependency on Office is serving their bottom line very well. Not only are they not going to open them up, they will keep on changing the format to frustrate attempt for better compatibility and retard open source development. Imagine how much resource it will free up if LO and other open source alternatives don't have to waste their time to play catch up by reverse engineering MS's format. Why do we want to reward such behaviour? And to add insult to injury, LO is being blamed for not having better compatibility!

The world will never change if we are always making excuses for inertia. Instead we should try to educate the apathetic, show them there are alternatives. You will be surprised how responsive people can be. I have switched a few friends to LO (some are heavy users of Office) and I have had heard no complaints. But I am honest about it, before I switch them over I always ask them what do they use Office for and make sure that their needs are met with LO.



LO doesn't have any problem opening docx files correctly. The problem is in saving them correctly.


Well there you go. Why would you want to save in docx? I always save in doc so that anyone can read them even when I am using MSO at work. We have contacts who are still using MSO2003 and for some reason never install the plugin (government agencies) so they actually cannot open docx at all.

irv
July 22nd, 2012, 07:40 PM
If I had a small to medium business and I was the boss, I would have everyone running Ubuntu Desktop. Have everyone with a gmail account with an email address personsname.companyname@gmail.com. Then I would everyone using google docs. Look at the money I would save from a business standpoint.

forrestcupp
July 22nd, 2012, 10:00 PM
I am sorry, that sounds very defeatist to me.

It's not defeatist; it's realist. Most people in the world don't give a rat's backside about the Free Software philosophy and they're not going to go out of their way to change for the small percentage of people who do. Besides, like I said, MS Office is nice software that a lot of people like to use and they're not happy with something that isn't as nice as the software they already have. You're not going to change anyone that already invested in MS Office. The best you're going to do is intercept people who don't have it yet.

mr john
July 23rd, 2012, 07:01 AM
I dont think we are microsoft-centric, it's more that our customers are. If our clients use Office then it's pretty simple, we need to have Office to open and save those files properly. We can't force banks, large companies and government institutions to change their IT setup. If we can't work with their documents then they will just do business with another company instead of us. There was also the issue of Exchange compatibility. If I can get good Exchange compatibility on an Android, Apple or Symbian phone when those are not Microsoft products, then why can't I get good compatibility on desktop Linux?

The next question is, why does OO not provide an alternative to Access?

At work I care about software being free as in cost, but really I'm not that fussed if it's open source or closed source. If I like a piece of software then I try to respect the wishes of the developer.

forrestcupp
July 23rd, 2012, 02:33 PM
The next question is, why does OO not provide an alternative to Access?
There's the question. And don't try to tell me that Base is a good alternative. It doesn't have any compatibility with Access at all.

Dragonbite
July 23rd, 2012, 02:33 PM
So the problem is MS's closed formats, not LibreOffice. The problem will not be a problem any more if everyone just stops being so addicted to MS. That is exactly my point., you can't use proprietary formats as the standard, and MS has especially poor cross platform and cross version compatibility by design.

The only way to break the cycle of compatibility nightmare is for people who don't necessarily need MSO to ditch it first (that would at least apply to most current MSO home users) then eventually it will be less needed and migration will be easier for others as well.

Microsoft is allowed to use their own format, that is not evil. MS Office 2010 can open and save files in the OpenDocucument format. Funny thing is that SkyDrive allows you the option to default to using OpenDocument format or their own. So Microsoft has fulfilled their obligation.

There are 2 factors that would reduce MS Office's omnipresence;
Greater adoption of OpenDocument format by businesses and individuals (Schools and Governments can influence this greatly)
Provide a tool that is as capable as MS Office in at least the OpenDocument format even if the capabilities in MS Office formatted files is less than perfect (but has to be very, very close!)

With Office I click a button, draw a box around part of the screen that I want and it instantly places that clip into whatever document I am working on. If I want to further crop or add a variety of border formats (faded border, curved corners, drop shadow, etc.) I just select from the list or go into a more detailed dialog box with granular controls.

As far as I have seen, this same process requires multiple programs and additional steps.

You might not use this, but I do.

Things are changing, though, and while Office is shored up at this point it WILL be facing increasing competition and it CAN be made less ubiquitous. Just look at what has happened with Browsers.

It is also their cash cow so one would have to be naive to think Microsoft isn't going to do everything possible to keep this cow alive.

Oh, and the idea of clicking on those little buttons in LibreOffice with a touch-screen tablet with my fat fingers is not a very happy thought. Just sayin'


If I had a small to medium business and I was the boss, I would have everyone running Ubuntu Desktop. Have everyone with a gmail account with an email address personsname.companyname@gmail.com. Then I would everyone using google docs. Look at the money I would save from a business standpoint.

I'm using the Google Apps at home for all family members to have an account, complete with Google Docs, usable on any of our systems (they use Ubuntu Linux). Handy, and gives me the power to "taketh away" if they start acting up ;)

irv
July 23rd, 2012, 03:24 PM
With everyone running around with handheld units wanting to interact with their office documents (spread sheets, power points, word docs, etc) MS office will be making it possible to do this. So yes, MS office is making some good changes. Since I am retired I don't really see myself using it, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world won't. If I don't need a horse I am not going to buy one.

forrestcupp
July 23rd, 2012, 05:24 PM
With everyone running around with handheld units wanting to interact with their office documents (spread sheets, power points, word docs, etc) MS office will be making it possible to do this. So yes, MS office is making some good changes. Since I am retired I don't really see myself using it, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world won't. If I don't need a horse I am not going to buy one.

Well, I'd be extremely happy if LibreOffice would get their Android version out that we've been waiting forever on. Seems like they'd give it a little more priority than they have.

JeffThePCGeek
July 23rd, 2012, 05:41 PM
I honestly wouldn't pay for it, I've never paid for an office product made by Microsoft. We're lucky enough to still have Skype being developed for Linux now that Microsoft bought Skype a few months back.

bobsan
July 23rd, 2012, 09:12 PM
Microsoft is allowed to use their own format, that is not evil.

It is evil if they do it with the purpose of locking in users and prevent compatibility.

They are free to do that, but we don't have to reward them by using their formats.

If they intend their formats to be the standard, then open them so that they can be implemented easily and universally, otherwise we should reject them.


MS Office 2010 can open and save files in the OpenDocucument format. Funny thing is that SkyDrive allows you the option to default to using OpenDocument format or their own. So Microsoft has fulfilled their obligation.
Well in that case we can just use .odt and forget about MS's format. Problem solved.


There are 2 factors that would reduce MS Office's omnipresence;

Greater adoption of OpenDocument format by businesses and individuals (Schools and Governments can influence this greatly)
Provide a tool that is as capable as MS Office in at least the OpenDocument format even if the capabilities in MS Office formatted files is less than perfect (but has to be very, very close!)

I agree especially regarding governments and education institutes. LibreOffice and open source in general have been making a lot of inroads in the government and education sectors in the EU countries and emergent economies like China and India. This is very encouraging. I can't imagine companies telling the Chinese government that they don't want to do business because the Chinese can't render MS formats properly with their office software.

Once there are big users more development will follow. LO has been picking up steam since breaking away from Oracle. I think future development looks bright, and the future may not be that far away.

KiwiNZ
July 23rd, 2012, 09:23 PM
It is evil if they do it with the purpose of locking in users and prevent compatibility.

They are free to do that, but we don't have to reward them by using their formats.

If they intend their formats to be the standard, then open them so that they can be implemented easily and universally, otherwise we should reject them.



Well in that case we can just use .odt and forget about MS's format. Problem solved.



I agree especially regarding governments and education institutes. LibreOffice and open source in general has been making a lot of inroads in the government and education sectors in Europe and emergent economies like China and India. This is very encouraging. I can't imagine companies telling the Chinese government that they don't want to do business because they can't render MS formats properly with their software.

Once there are big users more development will follow. LO has been picking up steam since breaking away from Oracle. I think future development looks bright, and the future may not be that far away.

I authorised and implemented a trial of Open Office in a large Corporate, the bottom line is, it was an abject failure. Until Open Office/ Libre Office and succeed in that environment it will not have widespread uptake. With the current versions it is never going happen, there needs to be a vast improvement.

bobsan
July 23rd, 2012, 09:33 PM
I authorised and implemented a trial of Open Office in a large Corporate, the bottom line is, it was an abject failure. Until Open Office/ Libre Office and succeed in that environment it will not have widespread uptake. With the current versions it is never going happen, there needs to be a vast improvement.

The French parliament, the Chinese government and quite a few large entities appear to disagree. SInce you appear to be experienced and have the corporate resource, why not contribute some codes or hire someone to if you find serious short comings in LO?

alexfish
July 23rd, 2012, 09:35 PM
I authorised and implemented a trial of Open Office in a large Corporate, the bottom line is, it was an abject failure. Until Open Office/ Libre Office and succeed in that environment it will not have widespread uptake. With the current versions it is never going happen, there needs to be a vast improvement.
Do you think they will listen
http://bloggingblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Ostrich-man-head-in-sand.gif
There again !

KiwiNZ
July 23rd, 2012, 09:39 PM
Do you think they will listen
http://bloggingblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Ostrich-man-head-in-sand.gif
There again !

No, but I don't have a vested interest in others listening.

KiwiNZ
July 23rd, 2012, 09:47 PM
The French parliament, the Chinese government and quite a few large entities appear to disagree. SInce you appear to be experienced and have the corporate resource, why not contribute some codes or hire someone to if you find serious short comings in LO?

To be brutally honest Ooo/LO need a major rewrite from the ground up and a complete redesign,mthey are both 10 years plus out of date.

They are fine for modest users but hopeless once sharing is needed and interoperability and compatibility with other software and systems is woeful.

Jackalyn
July 23rd, 2012, 09:50 PM
I think buying Office would be moving away from the free platform idea and sooner or later it would lead to the downfall of linux because people would be making a whole host of other things that were linux and for sale and then eventually you would land up where you are with Office and nobody will be paying any of us the big bucks that they make.

Personally I always did hate Office. I like Open Office and Libre a whole lot more anyway and most things are compatible as long as you change them to the right format.

alexfish
July 23rd, 2012, 09:52 PM
No, but I don't have a vested interest in others listening.

If this office version can work with VBA then it got to good for Linux users

my sons are studying IT , and part of the course is programming VB ,

Pleased I held on to all of the development suite , so it now have a new home.

unless LO , develop same type of framework as MO then LO have got no chance.

bobsan
July 23rd, 2012, 10:02 PM
To be brutally honest Ooo/LO need a major rewrite from the ground up and a complete redesign,mthey are both 10 years plus out of date.

They are fine for modest users but hopeless once sharing is needed and interoperability and compatibility with other software and systems is woeful.

Well firstly there are far more "modest users" than pros when it comes to Office, so if all the modest users switch to alternatives like LO or Google doc it is going to have a huge impact. By your definition the Chinese government, the French police force, Google etc are all "modest users", you get the picture.

Then in specialized areas serious power users are probably not using any office suite at all. Latex gives you much more control and flexibility in creating documents, no serious analyst will use excel for analytics , ditto Access for database (there are much better open source and proprietary solutions)

Secondly I think you mean compatibility and interoperability with other "MicroSoft solutions", that is to be expected.

Thirdly, LO is not meant to be an all encompassing package (as MSO), so for example, you don't need to use base, there are much better open source database solution anyway .

KiwiNZ
July 23rd, 2012, 10:10 PM
Well firstly there are far more "modest users" than pros when it comes to Office, so if all the modest users switch to alternatives like LO or Google doc that is going to have a huge impact. In fact, in certain areas serious power users are probably not using any office suite at all. Latex gives you much more control and flexibility in creating documents, no serious analyt will use excel for analytics , ditto Access for database (there are much better open source and proprietary solutions)

Secondly I think you mean compatibility and interoperability with other "MicroSoft solutions", that is to be expected.

Thirdly, LO is not meant to be an all encompassing package, so for example, you don't need to use base, there are much better open source database solution anyway .

I disagree with your numbers of modest users, as for compatibility etc, in a medium to large enterprise implimentation one has many systems, software, applications, MSFT, non MSFT in house etc to interact and to be compatible with, MS Office achieves this with much less issues. There is also the matter of external partners and businesses one has to be compatible with.

peryang
July 23rd, 2012, 10:17 PM
Microsoft uses Office as a life support system for Microsoft Windows. The reason people continue to use Windows is because of Office. Microsoft has the ability and they often do break compatibility so alternative software can never appear to render Office documents correctly. If it expand the profit margins, start anew

smellyman
July 23rd, 2012, 11:18 PM
Why on earth does a home user NEED office?

What can it do LO can't? I keep hearing in this thread that MSO is better.

Why is it?

KiwiNZ
July 24th, 2012, 12:23 AM
Why on earth does a home user NEED office?

What can it do LO can't? I keep hearing in this thread that MSO is better.

Why is it?

I can't speak for others but my home most certainly needs it, I share, send update spreadsheets, Documents etc ec with many individuals and Organisations that use MSFT Office, I definately do not want formatting etc changed and have no interest in uniting for work arounds in order to use an obsolete product.

SirWhy
July 24th, 2012, 12:56 AM
If Microsoft released Office for Linux:

Linus Torvalds would be delighted and Richard Stallman would be outraged.

Saw this and immediately went to Randall Munroe's interpretation, http://xkcd.com/225/

Fit's perfectly if no one else linked it (don't have much time to read). I wouldn't use it if Microsoft released it. I try to use free software and it does what I need

bobsan
July 24th, 2012, 01:10 AM
I can't speak for others but my home most certainly needs it, I share, send update spreadsheets, Documents etc ec with many individuals and Organisations that use MSFT Office, I definately do not want formatting etc changed and have no interest in uniting for work arounds in order to use an obsolete product.

For those purposes all our business contacts are using google docs. There is no compatibility issue. But we also work with government clients and there is a problem with "obsolete product", namely MSO2003 which cannot open docx (Libreoffice can) and it being the government, they can't install the plugin without red tapes.

Yeah, if you work in an old, big and technologically stagnant enterprise (like banks, some government agencies) that has been built around MS enterprise solutions (Exchange server etc) I can see the cost and hassle involved in changing over so you may as well continue paying MS. But there is no reason why a new, dynamic office has to be set up that way and get locked in. BTW, MS knows it, that's why it is desperate to get into the cloud game.

alphacrucis2
July 24th, 2012, 02:09 AM
For those purposes all our business contacts are using google docs. There is no compatibility issue. But we also work with government clients and there is a problem with "obsolete product", namely MSO2003 which cannot open docx (Libreoffice can) and it being the government, they can't install the plugin without red tapes.

Yeah, if you work in an old, big and technologically stagnant enterprise (like banks, some government agencies) that has been built around MS enterprise solutions (Exchange server etc) I can see the cost and hassle involved in changing over so you may as well continue paying MS. But there is no reason why a new, dynamic office has to be set up that way and get locked in. BTW, MS knows it, that's why it is desperate to get into the cloud game.

Exactly. MSO is becoming largely irrelevant for the co I work for.

KiwiNZ
July 24th, 2012, 02:25 AM
For those purposes all our business contacts are using google docs. There is no compatibility issue. But we also work with government clients and there is a problem with "obsolete product", namely MSO2003 which cannot open docx (Libreoffice can) and it being the government, they can't install the plugin without red tapes.

Yeah, if you work in an old, big and technologically stagnant enterprise (like banks, some government agencies) that has been built around MS enterprise solutions (Exchange server etc) I can see the cost and hassle involved in changing over so you may as well continue paying MS. But there is no reason why a new, dynamic office has to be set up that way and get locked in. BTW, MS knows it, that's why it is desperate to get into the cloud game.

I can assure you stagnant is orders of magnitude away from the situation I am referring to. As for Google Doc's, fine for home users, SOHO and maybe small enterprises but anything else, no, I would never approve such a move. There are better, more secure Cloud alternatives that don't require one to compromise on quality.

forrestcupp
July 24th, 2012, 02:38 AM
Not sure what is features this Linux version is

if got same use via Visual Basic , then possibly OK

if can't implement VB then for me It has No Advantage over Libre Office.


If this office version can work with VBA then it got to good for Linux users

my sons are studying IT , and part of the course is programming VB ,

Pleased I held on to all of the development suite , so it now have a new home.

unless LO , develop same type of framework as MO then LO have got no chance.
You do realize that this whole conversation about a Linux version of MS Office is hypothetical, don't you? There isn't really going to be a version for Linux.

Dragonbite
July 24th, 2012, 02:00 PM
Why on earth does a home user NEED office?

What can it do LO can't? I keep hearing in this thread that MSO is better.

Why is it?

I described it previously with the images. I also use that at work to quickly include screenshots into documentation for co-workers with ease and success.

So while LibreOffice is working on the front end, it doesn't include as powerful of a database (Base), no desktop publishing program, no note taking program, less features (unless there is something LibreOffice can do that MS Office cannot and I don't mean out of the box necessarily), no email/PIM program and no integration with cloud-based services.

On the other hand, with Linux you can add Kexi (database), Scribus (desktop publisher), Gimp (for added graphics manipulation) and Shutter (for screenshot capturing), Thunderbird & Lightning or Evolution for PIM and Linux is much better at connecting to a variety of web servers than Windows.

Of course, it isn't the MS Office can do things that Linux and open source cannot. It can do things all in one package, integrate with each other, includes a plethora of books and paid tech support options and is consistent from company to company and person to person.

If I wanted to go MS Office free, I can almost use the same tools Linux uses to accomplish the same thing!


For those purposes all our business contacts are using google docs. There is no compatibility issue. But we also work with government clients and there is a problem with "obsolete product", namely MSO2003 which cannot open docx (Libreoffice can) and it being the government, they can't install the plugin without red tapes.

Yeah, if you work in an old, big and technologically stagnant enterprise (like banks, some government agencies) that has been built around MS enterprise solutions (Exchange server etc) I can see the cost and hassle involved in changing over so you may as well continue paying MS. But there is no reason why a new, dynamic office has to be set up that way and get locked in. BTW, MS knows it, that's why it is desperate to get into the cloud game.

Microsoft is getting into the cloud game and with some false starts, they have a chance.

Companies also like using MS Exchange, which integrates with Outlook but not Exchange so well. So for Macs they built Enterouge (sp?).

Plus integration with Sharepoint and with their new Office 365.


I have been using Office 365 for a few months now and it isn't all that bad. I have access to it through the non-profit computer club I am a member of and it makes it pretty simple for us to manage things without relying on a "central office" and emailing things back-and-forth.

At the same time I have Google Apps for my family. That works pretty well too, though it would be cooler if there was more desktop integration (Gnome 3 has some online account integration but Unity doesn't include it as far as I can see.

So why is MS Office so ingrained with business? Because it fought Word Perfect and other suites for the position and nobody else has risen to the "challenge" though LibreOffice and Google Docs are making a go at it.

For home users, it depends on what you use it for. I don't use it much at all but my wife uses it for her business.

Oh, and as for VBA support, they have it but it isn't very good. Not unless they have really improved upon it lately.

rg4w
July 24th, 2012, 02:47 PM
I authorised and implemented a trial of Open Office in a large Corporate, the bottom line is, it was an abject failure.
What didn't work out?

Or more specifically, if you were given unlimited budget and mandate, what are the first three areas of LibreOffice you would revise, and how?

alexfish
July 25th, 2012, 06:39 AM
You do realize that this whole conversation about a Linux version of MS Office is hypothetical, don't you? There isn't really going to be a version for Linux.
Hypo typo;)

hughh
July 25th, 2012, 06:43 PM
Would you be willing to pay for it, and if so how much? I'd probably be willing to pay between £5 and £10 for the ability to use Outlook, Word, Access and Publisher.

No, and Microslough would have pay me before I'd use it. A lot more than £10 too.

kurt18947
July 26th, 2012, 03:25 PM
[QUOTE=Dragonbite;12126739
<snip>
Of course, it isn't the MS Office can do things that Linux and open source cannot. It can do things all in one package, integrate with each other, includes a plethora of books and paid tech support options and is consistent from company to company and person to person.
<snip>
[/QUOTE]
I think this is a huge part of it. How many people in the workforce under the age of 40 or so have ever used anything EXCEPT Windows and MS Office? There would need to be a compelling reason to incur the training costs and disruption. School kids today are using MS Office from early on. Of course being 'anti-establishment' might hold some attraction.

irv
July 26th, 2012, 03:42 PM
I think this is a huge part of it. How many people in the workforce under the age of 40 or so have ever used anything EXCEPT Windows and MS Office? There would need to be a compelling reason to incur the training costs and disruption. School kids today are using MS Office from early on. Of course being 'anti-establishment' might hold some attraction.

If I was under 40; I wish, and all I know was MS Office, I could start using L.O. or O.O. and function OK. Yes I many need to learn a few things, but I don't believe I would have to be retrained to do it.
I believe this about MS office, it has been around long enough and has been slowly improving on features which makes it attractive to many. Where the open source office packages have less years behind it. But give them time and they could become just a popular. Just my thought on it.

mike acker
July 26th, 2012, 04:58 PM
="If Microsoft released Office for Linux"

why would anyone care?

irv
July 26th, 2012, 05:27 PM
="If Microsoft released Office for Linux"

why would anyone care?
Because there are many Linux user who are force to use MS Office at work, and need it at home. Years ago I was one of them, but now I am retired and I don't really need it any more.
Years ago I found a way around this. I just used VNC to get into our system at work and did my work that way.

upjeeper
July 29th, 2012, 04:02 AM
excel, probably
powerpoint, maybe
word, no

then again i'm issued a windows7 laptop from work with ms office on it, so the likely-hood of it being worth it to me to pay for another software varient is low