Slashdot Mirror


Why You Should Choose MS Office Over OO.org

sander writes "As noted on linxfr.org, Microsoft has published a competitive guide on OpenOffice.org 1.1 vs Microsoft Office. Some of the weirder things they claim in it is that by choosing MS Office over OpenOffice.org one is protected from the threat of viruses. But the giant seems to be sweating -- and with a good reason."

15 of 1,393 comments (clear)

  1. good logic by pvt_medic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Some of the weirder things they claim in it is that by choosing MS Office over OpenOffice.org one is protected from the threat of viruses

    yes because i get all sort of virus alerts about new security threats for open office.

    --
    30% Troll, 50% Underrated, 10% Interesting
    Score:5, Troll
  2. Re:Fallacies by SoTuA · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I would have expected them to say MSOffice has lower TCO or higher ROI than OOo, at least trumpet "Office is better". But no, all we get is "Don't you DARE switch from MSOffice or ALL THIS will happen to you!".

    Ah, Microsoft is feeling the heat the free software community is lighting under their asses.

    Got any of that "Ronson Fast Lite" left?

  3. Open Office is "good enough" by L-Train8 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This quote made me stop:
    I only need basic features. OpenOffice is good enough."
    In today's networked, highly collaborative world, businesses do not operate in a vacuum; basic feature functionality that enables content authoring is only one small aspect of what a small business needs.


    It reminded me of an incident that happened several years ago. I was working at a company with close ties to Microsoft when the "I Love You" virus struck. Both Microsoft and our company were hit hard by it. A couple days after the messy cleanup, I sent a Word doc to a Microsoft employee. It was a form we used often and it had a macro that allowed the recipient to fill in some check boxes.

    I got a nasty reply from the microsoft employee about how it was irresponsible to send word docs with macros in this time of virus vulnerability. Since then, I have used as few of the gimmicky features that MS Office supplies. They don't add much to your documents, and they set you up for virus and incompatibility problems. Only using basic features isn't something you should settle for, it is a good rule to follow to avoid lots of nasty problems.

    --

    Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
  4. Re:Time to check out Open Office by Golias · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was just thinking the same thing. Last time I tried OO, I concluded it was "not ready yet" and went back to Word & Excel. The fact that MS thinks it's worth attacking makes me think the newest version must be worth another look.

    --

    Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

  5. My experience with OO.o by jfengel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I just bought a new computer and chose to skip getting MS Office on it, so I have been experimenting with OO.

    My results so far: in general, I prefer MS Office. Perhaps it's just because I'm more familiar with its eccentricities, but I find many things about OO annoying.

    I can't map functions to ALT keys, and the relatively simply "switch to style X" involves setting up a macro before I can bind it to a key.

    It took me a long time to get section numbering right. Eventually it did work, but the vast array of options confused me and tweaking them introduced subtle problems of their own.

    OO doesn't have book-style figure layout. (Neither does MSO.) Drawing is not easy, and not well integrated.

    This is not an evaluation; this is just the list of things I wanted to do on day one that pissed me off. MS Office has its own problems, and many of those persist for version after version. But the devil I know is better than the devil I don't when all I want to do is get some work done.

    I assume OO.o will get better, and I'm going to keep using OO.o to see what happens as I get more familiar with it. I sure can't beat the price.

  6. Re: unresolved bugs? by hafree · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Back in 1995, Microsoft Word had a problem with auto-page numbering in the footer of documents that affected the page numbers as well as the font used if changed from the default 12pt Times Roman. 9 years later, this exact same bug remains.

  7. Little anecdote... by Dimensio · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work in a US spinoff of a Japanese chemical company. As such, there are times when users here have to deal with documents from Japan, complete with Japanese fonts.

    A rather nice lady reported a problem with an Excel document that contained Japanese fonts. The characters in the spreadsheet were appearing as squares rather than the proper Japanese characters. Naturally, this appeared to be a fonts problem, so my first attempt at a fix was to install the Japanese language set. Unfortunately, this didn't work, as the document STILL had nothing but squares where the Japanese characters should have been.

    It looked as though it was a versioning issue. It looked like a document created with Japanese character with Excel 95 (the document seemed to have been created with that) could NOT display the characters properly in Excel 2000. I couldn't find any method of getting the document to show up properly in Excel 2000, and the solution seemed to be to install Excel 95, because that was the only application that would show the characters properly.

    Then I remembered OpenOffice.

    I didn't know if it would work, but I downloaded and installed OO 1.1. I opened the Japanese document, and to my surprise, I was greeted with the spreadsheet just as it should have appeared, complete with the Japanese characters. Not content to leave it at just that, I re-saved the document from within OpenOffice, then I opened it with Excel 2000. Lo and behold, the document appeared correctly! The only way that I could get a document created in Excel 95 to show up properly in Excel 2000 was with Open Office.

    Needless to say, I related the solution to the network admin who had assigned me the task, recommending that OpenOffice be considered as an alternative or replacement to MS Office.

  8. Re: unresolved bugs? by eofpi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That bug was so difficult to deal with most of the time that a lot of my papers wound up being numbered by hand either on the computer or with a pen once I printed it.

    --
    Y'know, you blow up one sun and suddenly everyone expects you to walk on water.
  9. Re:Fallacies by dasunt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    OO.o doesn't provide basic functionality.

    It fails to write Word-compatible .doc format documents.

    You are correct -- in a heterogenous environment, MS Office is better then Open Office.

    However, how many environments are running the same word processor, nevermind the same version?

    This is more anecdotal then hard evidence, but have you tried to read a complex document written in an older version of word into a newer version? OO.o seems to get it more correct then the latest release of MS Office.

    Have you ever tried to import a non-word format into word?

    Now, consider this rebuttle:

    By using Open Office.org, you have several benefits to promote a heterogenous environment. Due to the fact that its free, everyone can run the latest version. Since it runs on a variety of platforms, you are not locked into a single vendor of OS or hardware. Your employees can run the same version at home without additional cost, and transfer those files to the office without any compatibility issues.

    Also, being a large commercial open source project backed by several large businesses, you recieve the quick bug and security fixes of OS, yet have the security of a fortune-500 company.

  10. Re:There's only one really good reason to use Offi by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Although you shouldn't lower yourself to doing business with such people in the first place, here's a trick:
    • Save as .RTF from your favorite libre word processor
    • Rename the file from .RTF to .DOC
    Microsoft Word will see that the .doc is actually an .rtf, and handle it properly, while your clueless MS Word user will never know what you really did.
    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
  11. No, really, it was created on a Mac by macdaddy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From the Document Properties for OpenOffice.pdf:
    Description
    Title: competitive OpenOffice.qxd
    Author: Gravity
    Subject:
    Keywords:
    Created: 9/11/2003 10:05:53 AM
    Modified: 9/11/2003 5:06:03 PM
    Application: QuarkExpress(tm) 4.11
    PDF Information
    PDF Producer: Acrobat Distiller 4.05 for Macintosh
    PDF Version: 1.2 (Acrobat 3.x)
    Path:
    File Size: 53.96 KB (55,259 Bytes)
    Page Size: 11 x 8.5 in
    Tagged PDF: No
    Number of Pages: 2
    Fast Web View: Yes
  12. Re:Unresolved bugs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I live on a university campus... And ALL of the presentations I've seen were done via OO.o or StarOffice (before OO.o was around), mainly because the professors chose it.

    In the labs they have both Word and OO.org.

    Y'know... If you want OO.org on the labs computers, maybe you could ask one of the CS assistants around. They usually serve pretty good intermediaries between the students and the Admins. Chances are that if you want it, that the admins would also prefer to have it (especially if there exists any sort of unix-department at your univ.), and unless there is some sort problem the higher ups have with OSS, you're likely to get it.

    Just speak up and stop being a pussy.

  13. undocumented unresolved bugs by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I've told this story many times:

    A friend of mine worked for a rather large company and his users were having problems with excel corrupting files in a wierd, almost viral, way.

    His Microsoft account rep kept on telling him that the problem must be with something that he was doing, because nobody else seemed to be having that problem.

    Then my friend found out that someone at another company was having the same problem, and my friend had the following conversation with his MS account rep:

    friend: I was talking to Mr. X at Ycorp the other day and, ...
    MS: Oh yeah, Mr. X. I talk to him all the time.. YCorp is one of my accounts, you know...
    friend: Ah, then you'll know that, for the last couple of months, he's having the same problem with excel that I've been having!.
    MS: <guilty silence>.
    One thing that you rarely get in the Open Source world is people lying about the existence of a bug.
    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  14. Re:some stuff by cheesybagel · · Score: 5, Interesting
    They didn't publish it in .doc because the PDF was done in Quark XPress:

    Title: competitive OpenOffice.qxd
    Author: Gravity
    Application: QuarkXPress(tm) 4.11
    PDF Producer: Acrobat Distiller 4.05 for Macintosh

    How about eating your own dogfood before complaining against other brands Microsoft?

  15. Re:Unresolved bugs. by winse · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Interestingly it does OO is great in a homogenous environment. I work at a large size corporation (5000+) that has just switched EVERYONE to OO. there have been some glitches moving things over, but most of them had to do with excel file macros etc. Now that it is very uncommon to recieve a .doc,ppt, etc file from anyone inside the company, I just don't think about the MS software anymore. All it takes is for someone higher up to have a little vision and a reason to control expenses, and this could be your company soon.

    --
    this sig is deprecated