View Poll Results: Which Office suite would you suggest for the future ?

Voters
62. You may not vote on this poll
  • Symphony

    19 30.65%
  • OpenOffice

    32 51.61%
  • Other

    11 17.74%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Beans
    245
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

    Hey with the announcements of the authorization from EU to the Oracle-Sun deal and the annoucement of Symphony3.0 do you think that it would be safer for an enterprise to switch to Symphony instead of openoffice, as suggested by the Software Improvement Group :
    Kuipers said a move to OpenOffice.org would be riskiest for large organizations, because the cost of switching would be high. Individuals and small businesses are less vulnerable, he said. He also noted that the risks do not apply to companies adopting Lotus Symphony, an IBM-led fork of OpenOffice.org, because it comes with IBM's backing.
    What do you think ?
    *Use Symphony
    *Use OpenOffice
    *Other ?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Beans
    145
    Distro
    Kubuntu 11.04 Natty Narwhal

    Re: Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

    Quote Originally Posted by Turtle.net View Post
    Hey with the announcements of the authorization from EU to the Oracle-Sun deal and the annoucement of Symphony3.0 do you think that it would be safer for an enterprise to switch to Symphony instead of openoffice, as suggested by the Software Improvement Group :


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

    I'm downloading Symphony now.
    I'will answer the poll after I test it.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Beans
    19

    Re: Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

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

    Since the growing trend in computer screens is "widescreen," I am rather fond of the way Symphony makes use of horizontal screenspace rather than cluttering vertical screen space.


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

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Tennessee
    Beans
    3,421

    Re: Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

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

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

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

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Beans
    145
    Distro
    Kubuntu 11.04 Natty Narwhal

    Re: Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

    OpenOffice.

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


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

    Bad spacing and kerning.






    This is 2010, enough with things that don't look good on the desktop.
    Last edited by Ric_NYC; January 22nd, 2010 at 10:41 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Greece.
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Xubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    Re: Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

    Has noone noticed that the current symphony is based on openoffice 1.4 (reeeeally really old) while symphony 3 which will be released in February and is the topic here will be based on openoffice 3? Do you truly think it will have that many things in common with the old version? Come on ppl, do your research first, think, then speculate.
    Ubuntu user #20092 || I can't sing.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Beans
    1,664
    Distro
    Ubuntu 18.04 Bionic Beaver

    Wink Re: Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

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

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Tennessee
    Beans
    3,421

    Re: Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

    Quote Originally Posted by koleoptero View Post
    Has noone noticed that the current symphony is based on openoffice 1.4 (reeeeally really old) while symphony 3 which will be released in February and is the topic here will be based on openoffice 3? Do you truly think it will have that many things in common with the old version? Come on ppl, do your research first, think, then speculate.
    I haven't seen anything that indicates the license will change, so I stand by that comment.

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

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

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Greece.
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Xubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    Re: Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

    Quote Originally Posted by lykwydchykyn View Post
    I haven't seen anything that indicates the license will change, so I stand by that comment.

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

    And if they're still distributing this as a proprietary product, it means they're custom licensing the code from Sun. Which means that if Oracle flushes OOo, IBM is left in a sticky spot. I don't think that will happen, though.
    Yeah I don't think they'll change the licence, my comment wasn't directed at that. And as for the full on fork, I think it is, since they hadn't followed any of the OOo developments the past 3-4 years since release 2.0. But I guess they saw wisdom in taking from it now that they've fixed almost all problems (font rendering, shape antialiasing, etc) besides a not eye-plucking UI.
    Ubuntu user #20092 || I can't sing.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Beans
    217

    Re: Symphony 3.0 vs OpenOffice 3.1

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

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •