Slashdot Mirror
Word 2007 Vs. Open Office 2.3 Writer
hairyfeet writes "Bruce Byfield of Linux.com has just posted his third Office shootout between Microsoft Office and Open Office. This is the first version comparing the new Microsoft Word 2007 with Writer from the latest version of Open Office. The verdict: while Microsoft Office beats Open Office in a few categories, overall Open Office wins — but by not as large a margin as in the past." Linux.com and Slashdot share a corporate overlord.
3. It runs on linux.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Now, if it were say, a "Windows User Magazine" and the results were the opposite, you'd guys would be screaming about bias.
Is it surprising that Linux.com does this?Does MS Office 2007 work on Linux?
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
4. It exports directly to PDF without having to buy (or even install) an extra plug-in.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
I'm a technical writer, and for doing long documents, I would not use either of these products. Open Office, while prized by some of my colleagues, seems to have too many mission critical failures or half-baked features. Microsoft Office, while good for both the home and small business market, becomes a hindrance when you use it for larger projects with more diverse requirements. I can make either one do what it must, but I would prefer Adobe FrameMaker or its open source clone, Lyx.
technical writing / development
It hasn't yet. It's at RC2, so almost there.
http://download.openoffice.org/680/
and changes What's new
Indeed. What tipped me off was this:
The ironic part is, Word needs master documents, since it cannot reliably handle documents longer than about 40 pages.
Sheesh. I've used Word with docs hundreds of pages long dozens of times. I can only remember one document that I had trouble with, and that had a huge number of embedded files all over the place.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
I have to say, it took me a while to warm up to Office 2007, but now that I'm used to it I quite like it. I have a few caveats.. I don't like the need to right click to bring up text-formatting options within floating objects, nor do I like how the selected menu reverts to "Home" after you do certain things, but in general I find that I can work as fast as I can in Office 2003.
:) So in general, if you have the cash to spare or you have access to 2007 for free through a school or company (and you don't mind a few days getting used to the reorganization of things) it's an improvement over 2003.
:)
:)
With that in mind, there are some very nice features in 2007 that previous versions didn't have. The equation thingy is improved, using masters/templates is a lot more natural and easy, color selections have been changed to some very pretty gradients (rather than the typical 128 standard colors or whatever) so that for style-blind people like myself, making pretty presentations and whatnot is a breeze. Styles feel more natural in Word, so that you can set up the style and then just concentrate on the content (kind of in the direction of Latex, though obviously not the same). I could list more, but I don't want to be accused of being a shill
Now, Open Office. Style support has always been better than Word, and still is better than 2007's support. Equations used to be *much* better than Word, but with the changes in 2007 I'd say they're about on par now. Open Office's PowerPoint equivalent (can't remember the name) doesn't have all the bells and whistles of 2007 (not even close), and it's object-drawing (like for flow-charts) isn't as easy to use, but it certainly gets the job done without any major flaws. The whole application is a LOT slower than 2007 (or 2003) Office... and this is a big drawback to me, as my computers aren't exactly state of the art. On the other hand it's free, I can install it on as many computers as I want, it has better file type support (with the exception of 2007's ???x files), and I don't feel a chill go down my spine every time I use it like I do when I see that Microsoft logo
After using 2007 for a couple weeks, however, (and this is a big thing when it comes to Mr. and Mrs. Sixpack) Open Office just feels clunky. I'm not sure if it's the slower response of the application, or the bland UI, or just in my head, but Open Office just feels like it's a step behind Office. However, when it comes down to it, I'm going to run Open Office at home because I don't intend on paying for Microsoft Office.
So, to conclude this long winded post, if two identical machines are running next to each other - one has Open Office installed, the other has Office 2007 installed - I'm going to use Office 2007. It's faster, slicker, and just plain prettier. Granted it takes some time to get used to, and not all of the changes have been for the better - but in my opinion most of them were. As they say, "you don't sell the steak, you sell the sizzle" - anybody can develop a word processor; it's not difficult. When it comes down to these two options though, Office 2007 has the sizzle. Is the sizzle worth my money? Nope - but that doesn't mean it's not still better than the competition.
Ok, Bill Gates, I've backed a Microsoft product for once in my life... where's my 30 pieces of silver?
I'm sure we can trust Linux.com for a good, balanced review.
That's especially true when you remember that Slashdot.org and Linux.com are the same company.
I don't respond to AC's.
The reviewer says, "Word needs master documents, since it cannot reliably handle documents longer than about 40 pages." I have routinely used Word for 800-page documents, and found no difficulties. I have found no difficulty with OO for these same size documents as well, except that the deficiencies with respect to cross references become unworkable when the document is large and one needs to have many cross references.
The only reason MS Office can't do that is because Adobe had a hissy fit when they tried. Threatened antitrust action because it cuts into sales of Acrobat Professional. (It was possible in Office 2007 betas, removed from Final)
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
I'll admit that whether or not you like the ribbon is going to be a matter of personal preference. My wife and I are long time Office 97/XP/2003 users, but in pretty casual use of Office 2007 we felt that the ribbon was an improvement. Things were where we were looking for them, and most often the items we wanted were right there, not buried in a menu. But again, that is mostly going to hinge on personal preference.
But how in the hell does he manage a casual assertion that Word is unusable for documents over 40 pages? Most book manuscripts are submitted in Word these days, and they will normally be in the hundreds of pages. I have produced/edited far more 200+ page documents than I like to think about, and can't recall ever having an instance of crashing or corruption. I've never used master documents in Word mostly because I've never felt the need.
That depends on the version and the kind of license; the price tags in, IIRC, the $150 range for the 5-seat non-commercial license; $400 is, IIRC, about the price tag of the Professional license bought one a time, though volume licensing I believe is cheaper.
I've got two desktops and a laptop, two of the three have both Office 2007 and OpenOffice.org 2.2 installed (the desktop that is dual-boot Windows/Linux has OOo on both partitions, and the other desktop just has Office 2007.) I have no problem using either "right away". I am more productive with Office 2007, despite the fact that OOo is closer to the interface I've been using for over a decade.
Now, I prefer Free Software, and not just because of the price (though that's a factor), but I even more strongly prefer software that does what I want, and does it well; the advantage to Office 2007 in those terms outweigh the price and other advantages of OOo. For now, at least.
I hold out high hopes for OOo and other Free alternatives, though.
Mail Merge is one of the coolest things you can do with an office suite to save some time. It shouldn't be too far beyond any Slashdotter.
Basically, with Mail Merge, you create a document and you also create a data table in a DB or spreadsheet program. For instance, a form letter. You might write a form letter that says, "Dear $DONOR, Thank you for your $AMOUNT contribution to our campaign. We are $EMOTION at your generosity. With your donation, we will be able to feed $NUMCHILDREN children in the fiscal year 2008, build $NUMHOMES homes for third world families, and provide basic medical care and education to an entire village of $POPVILLAGE." Then, in your data table, you have the donor's name in one column, the amount they contributed in the next, a word like "glad", "overjoyed", etc. in the third, and so forth. Mail merge automatically takes the data table and letter template and churns out potentially millions of personalized form letters by taking each row and substituting each entry in its designated place. You might have wondered how form letters were made? You can also use it to manufacture printed envelopes and such.
Of course, for dadaist fun you can write a madlib in mail merge format and randomly generate the data table from a dictionary--it's not only for form letters, although I imagine that's the primary application.
In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
I agree.
Latex is very good for long and complex documents, especially ones with lots of figures, references, equations and bibliographic references. LaTeX keeps these things nicely in order and self consistent with minimum of stress and allows you to focus on the actual content rather than how things looks on the screen.
In contrast, I know a few people who decided to write their Physics thesis using Word and it almost cost them their sanity.
You can migrate your settings for Office using the "Save My Settings Wizard" which is located in the "Microsoft Office Tools" folder on the start menu. I have been able to migrate between different and same versions using this tool.
OOo keeps a directory either A) in your home directory (Linux/UNIX), or B) in a directory under your user profile (Windows) called .openoffice.org2. It stores all your settings. If you want to migrate them to another computer, just copy that folder.
My blog
Styles are usually just format related, ie font face, size, indent and tab settings, etc. all wrapped up into a "Style" which you can apply to content all at once instead of making the same dozen changes to every place you want to update. Also, once the style is set, you can change the style in one place, and it gets updated everywhere. This is nice if you want to revamp the look of a document.
A template has styled elements to it, but is more like a partially pre-populated bunch of content, like a form letter. You open the template, and it generates a stub of the document you're creating. You fill in the unique bits, and save it under a unique filename. Ideally as much of the work should be done for you by merely opening the template as possible.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Word 2007 is horrible. I got a new computer on my desk at graduate school recently and put Word 2007 on it. I used it exclusively at school (Word 2003 at home) for about 2 months. For the things I was trying to do, it was consistently slower and more difficult to use.
1) Styles: I'm typing my dissertation and have a set of required styles I need to use. In 2k3, I use the nice panel on the right side of the screen with a list of all the relevant ones. When I need to switch between two styles, it's a single mouse movement and one click. In 2k7, they replace that panel with a drop-down list box. Now I have to go up, click the drop-down arrow, scroll down the list, and pick the new style. Result: More than 3x the amount of time using the mouse as opposed to the keyboard.
2) Equations and symbols: In addition to switching styles semi-frequently, I make rampant use of greek symbols and equations. In 2k3, I've place buttons for these in the toolbar and can access either one with a single mouse movement and click. Then, since the style panel is already open, I can easily select the new style for the equation caption. And one more click to return to normal style face. In 2k7, I move the mouse up to the ribbon, switch to a different tab, add in my equation, go back to the ribbon, switch to the font menu, then click on the style drop-down arrow, scroll down, and click on my equation caption style, insert the caption, back up to the style drop-down icon, scroll down, and choose the standard font style. Result: 2k7 is starting to drive me insane!
3) References: I use EndNote to keep track of my citations. It works just fine with 2k7 (after discovering that the installer doesn't play nice with it and I had to manually copy several files to specific locations in the office file structure). However, in 2k3, EndNote places a new toolbar right beneath the the main ones. In 2k7, it has a separate menu on the ribbon. So to insert a reference, I again have to switch ribbon menus, choose the insert option, then switch back to the primary ribbon menus. Result: 3x the number of mouse movements/clicks.
I could go on with the additional work required to insert bookmarks and reference them in the text, but the last straw was when I had to submit a pdf version of my file. Most of my equations were written with 2k3, which uses a different format. The 2k7 built-in pdf export function screwed them all up and made them virtually unreadable in the pdf file. I had been using an older version of Adobe Acrobat with 2k3, but it wouldn't install with 2k7. That was the day I eliminated 2k7 from my harddrive forever. If I have to switch to something else eventually, it will almost certainly be oo.org or the like.
I got Err:503
I used the equation: =100/0
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
I'm rather amused to hear that most of your complaints involve being forced to use "the mouse as opposed to the keyboard" in order to access functions on the ribbon. Were you not aware that you can press "alt" in Office 2007 to bring up the ribbon keyboard accelerators, just like it did for menus in Office 2003?
Also, all the fuss about how in Office 2003, "I... place buttons for these in the toolbar", which you can't in Offcie 2007 -- well, actually, you can. Right click on them and click "Add to quick access toolbar". Puts them right at the top of the screen, which makes them easier to click, too -- Fitt's law. And you get dedicated keyboard accelerators too.
But then, I suppose complaining is easier than thinking, right?
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
Almost everyone I know that uses Microsoft Office at home, whether 2003 or 2007, uses the Student and Teacher (2003) or Home and Student (2007) non-commercial 5-seat version.
Just a correction but the Student and Teacher edition and the Home and Student editoin are 3 seat licenses, not 5.
Time makes more converts than reason
LaTex is a beautiful system to create documents in but it is a BITCH and a half to setup properly
Most Linux distributions include LaTeX, and it installs pretty much automatically.
As far as generating PDFs goes, you could install PDF Creator, and just "print" your documents to PDF. Would probably provide better compatibility than creating Adobe 4.0 pdfs.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
"Who would've guessed that a bunch of hobbyist programmers could give a billion dollar corporation a shiver. That's quite an accomplishment."
It was not "hobbyist programmers". Sun paid $88,000,000 for the software that became Open Office.
This was the first link on the first Google page, a Wikipedia link about Star Office:
"The company, copyright and trademark of StarOffice were acquired by Sun Microsystems in 1999 for US $73.5 million. Sun was seeking to compete with Microsoft Office, and also wanted to save money on licenses for Microsoft Office and Windows:
"The number one reason why Sun bought StarDivision in 1999 was because, at the time, Sun had something approaching forty-two thousand employees. Pretty much every one of them had to have both a Unix workstation and a Windows laptop. And it was cheaper to go buy a company that could make a Solaris and Linux desktop productivity suite than it was to buy forty-two thousand licenses from Microsoft. (Simon Phipps, Sun, LUGradio podcast)"
However, the figure of $88 million was reported at the time, and, for some reason, which I don't remember, the $88 million seemed authoritative. Of course, the exact figure doesn't matter.
CNet News reported $73.5 million at the time: Sun shelled out $73.5 million for Star Division.