Where Do I Go Now That Oracle Owns OpenOffice.org?

eldavojohn writes "So I noted that there was better support for my processor in the latest BIOS for my mainboard. After downloading the update, there was a .doc file containing flashing instructions. No matter, I have OpenOffice.org installed on this machine and just opened it up. And, as should be no surprise, there was an Oracle logo splash screen while OpenOffice.org 3.2 started up. At my job, I've had a less than favorable history with Oracle that I'm not going to get into — rather let's just say I never want anything to do with them again. Including installing any of their software on my machine. So I'm facing a dilemma. I've looked into the forked LIbreOffice but that's still in beta and I'm a little wary of depending on that. Has anyone used LibreOffice (it's installing as I type this) extensively? Does it handle complex Powerpoint files okay? Is there some alternative out there that I'm completely overlooking for open source? Can anyone convince me that there's no reason to fear the Oracle OpenOffice.org? Will it remain the de facto standard? Will it eventually lock me into a commitment with Oracle? If you get by without one of these heavyweight monster editors, what do you use and how do you handle doc, ppt, (etc.) extensions?"

Comments

Write to the manufacturer

[gilesjuk]

Ask them to stop using Word documents for instructions.

Ask them to use PDF or HTML.

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[neumayr]

Hehe, yeah.
Meanwhile, at some water cooler in some province of China:
Exec1: Some random guy who at some point bought _one_ of our mainboards, making us around 0.1 cents of profit, who may or may not buy more of our products, asks us to change our process.
Exec2: *rotfl*

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[Yvan256]

If it's a document that will need to be edited by someone else, then I can understand using Word.

But for a document intended for end-users, it's surprising they didn't use PDF.

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[The Mighty Buzzard]

I'd agree if a) PDFs were easily convertible to other formats, b) they rendered at something a bit snappier than "as slow as they possibly can and still have anyone read them," c) were easily editable, d) weren't the current favorite attack vector for malware writers.

Seriously though, there's no valid reason that manuals must be displayed exactly as they would in printed form. All I need is the information. Put it in a .txt file if there aren't any images or complex formatting required, or put it in HTML if there are. Fuck a bunch of pretty and uniform, I want useful.

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I don't think PDF was ever intended to be an editable format, that's trying to pound a square peg in a round hole. It's supposed to be a distribution format. The fact that the format offers script execution is pretty baffling.

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[neumayr]

Enter Stockholder1
SH1: Schooling our barely educated, almost unpaid throwaway workers, who are thusly void of any intrinsic motivations to do any good at their job, will cost money. Given our employee turnover rate, a lot of money. We will need to keep the processes simple, any change will only be approved if it simplifies the process. You should know all this. Exec3, GM, you're out.

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[PopeRatzo]

CEO:

"We don't make our money from selling profits, we make it from buying companies, stripping the assets, laying off the workers, borrowing to the hilt, going bankrupt and doing it all over again. So fuck you guys and your "worrying about customers, employees, docs, pdfs, etc".. Don't you know we are living in a post-productivity world? It's all about the churn now, and by the way, I've just churned your asses, and security is going to be escorting you all to the front door".

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[Anonymous Coward]

I feel sorry for those who are more concerned with removing "evil" software than getting any useful work done. To those who refuse to run effective software on the theory that dire consequences will happen in the future I merely note that we're all dead in the future anyway.

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[Dogtanian]

The fact that [PDF] offers script execution is pretty baffling.

No, it's not. Adobe need to keep adding new features to the format (whether they're a good idea or not) in order to give them an excuse to sell people newer versions of Acrobat and the like.

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[n9hmg]

Let me translate: pull your panties out of your slit and use what works. Sure, Oracle's going to start making nonsensical tie-ins with their main products. They haven't done it yet, and even when they do, it'll just be irrelevant wasted efforts, not harming the functionality you need. My old boss had a hissy fit and decided there would be no more IBM products in the company, ever. The existing products got starved (TSM shall have no more tapes when we're keeping everything forever and doubling the data under management every 6 month) and their failure under that pressure was used to justify the irrational personal decision. Are you that guy?

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[Mongoose Disciple]

it will increase our market target by 10% which is the penetration for Linux on our products

Wait, what has a 10% penetration for Linux?

And nothing in the server world counts, because no one's hooking a monitor to those machines and trying to read a PDF or a .doc.

Can we at least pick semi-realistic examples?

Re:Write to the manufacturer

[turbidostato]

"Can we at least pick semi-realistic examples?"

They *are* more than semi-realistic examples on two hands:
1) The general idea is that execs shouldn't laugh at a proposition of changing their procedures; they should make the numbers and see if the change holds water. Does it seem semi-realistic enough?
2) Increased sellings of SIL-based server-class motheboards coupled to the time when they released their drivers sources to the main kernel line.

And then, for an anecdote, I buy preferentially both computers and components weigthing high their known commitment to Linux support (and that means tens of thousand dollars).

Be Patient

[WrongSizeGlass]

Wait for LibreOffice to be released a stable build and then leave OpenOffice behind. Until then you'll just have to use it and keep in mind that the only thing Oracle did for OO was buy Sun, they didn't write any of the code.

Re:Be Patient

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the point? If Oracle is so evil you don't want to use Oracle's OpenOffice, how is using the re-branded LibreOffice any better?

The LibreOffice fork tests negative for Oracle. It is not "re-branded".

Re:Be Patient

[Noughmad]

But I like using O's OO.o

Re:Be Patient

[icebike]

LibreOffice is stable. It was a fork of a stable OOo, and I've seen no problems at all.

I cut over to it from OO and everything I need it for (documents and spreadsheets) work just fine. Even those that are sent to me from Word users.

Why fret about the Beta designation when it is just a stable as the version it was forked from?

Re:Be Patient

[magus_melchior]

Yes, and if Oracle turns its sights on LibreOffice, LO will just toss the Java-dependent bindings and rework them from another platform (and most of the core binaries will still work-- the wizards and such will have to be rewritten, though).

Meanwhile, such a horribly ill-motivated act will prompt other large-scale projects to come up with plans to migrate away from Java, because if Oracle squeezes LO, they'll squeeze anyone else using Java for free or for profit.

The point of Open Source is...

[Lord Byron II]

...that you can use whatever software you like. If you were happy with the last Sun release of OpenOffice, then download and use that instead. It should be fine for a couple of years* and by then it should be clear which OSS office software is appropriate for you.

*It's not uncommon for Microsoft to go several years between releases of MS Office, so two years with Sun's last OpenOffice release isn't unreasonable.

LibreOffice relies heavily on Java,

[countertrolling]

and as such it remains vulnerable to potential legal attacks from Oracle which now owns the Java technology...

Disaster awaits if something isn't done about this...

Re:LibreOffice relies heavily on Java,

[Lehk228]

if oracle takes legal action against distributors of software written in java, they may as well close down java.com and close up their database business while they are at it, nobody would trust working with oracle owned properties for anything of any consequence

Ratonale?

[Stan Vassilev]

At my job, I've had a less than favorable history with Oracle that I'm not going to get into — rather let's just say I never want anything to do with them again.

I'd like to think people who deal with technology are rational, so if in your dealings with Oracle you have learned of some objective reason why people should avoid OpenOffice.org now, I believe you should share it, if your contract allows.

If there's no objective reason, then quite simply keep using OpenOffice.org and keep an eye on the situation between Oracle and LibreOffice.org.

In our daily lives we use the services of companies that have wronged us by means of poor policy, or unprofessional employees, but if we took a hard stance every single time and dropped everything, even at no clear alternative, society would not last for long.

If you live in US, did you stop using oil fuel and oil based products (i.e. basically almost everything around you) when the BP oil spill happened? I guess not.

The MrBabyMan of Slashdot?

[harlows_monkeys]

If you weren't a Slashdot celebrity, that ridiculous submission would have been rejected as whining over a complete non-issue. Grab the OOo source, and build your own copy that doesn't display the Oracle logo. Problem solved. (Or just look away when the splash screen appears).

Re:Go buy Microsoft Office

[Anonymous Coward]

They have an MS-Office for linux now?

Don't worry about it

[steveha]

All Oracle did was buy Sun. There isn't some sort of magical evil contagion that instantly infected OpenOffice.org; the software is no different than it was before the sale.

Now, Oracle could potentially direct OpenOffice.org development to go down the path of evil. They could change the license under which OO.o is distributed to an unacceptable one. They could do all sorts of things! But they haven't had time to do it yet, and by the time they get their evil ducks in a row, LibreOffice will be up and running.

Little-known fact: many (most?) Linux distros are already shipping a non-pure OO.o. There is a collection of patches that were never part of the official OO.o, called Go-oo, and distros have been shipping Go-oo instead of the pure Oo.o.

I fully expect LibreOffice to merge all the Go-oo patches, leaving us with two office suites: Oracle OO.o, and LibreOffice. And I think it is very possible that the community will line up behind LibreOffice and leave Oracle OO.o completely irrelevant and unloved. (Consider the situation with Xfree86 and X.org. In that case, the switchover happened in a stunningly short period of time.)

The worst-case scenario is that Oracle adopts some license that keeps LibreOffice from merging Oracle patches, and then Oracle funds a development team to make giant improvements to Oracle OO.o; then the community might have to choose between the free LibreOffice and the Oracle offering. But even there, I am not actually worried. The current state of OpenOffice is usable. Even if Oracle poured huge resources into OO.o development, what could they really offer to tempt us away from LibreOffice? A toolbar with giant icons? A dancing paperclip? Meanwhile, if all that LibreOffice does is simply to fix bugs, improve speed, and rewrite to end Java dependencies, I for one would be completely happy.

If you use OO.o on Windows, just don't take any updates until LibreOffice is ready, and you will be fine. Or better yet, simply start getting your installers from the Go-oo web site. If you use Linux, you almost certainly can simply trust your distro to do a good job of keeping your office suite relatively evil-free.

Oracle may be evil, but they aren't magically evil. Don't worry about this.

P.S. After writing this post, my 'o' key on my keyboard is overheating. I'd better not use it for a while or it might stp wrking.

steveha

Re:Microsoft Office

[coerciblegerm]

If I had points I'd mod you insightful. While the OP doesn't state it, I would assume that MS would be off the table, given that Larry Ellison is trying to be Bill Gates. But, if it's solely an Oracle problem, Office has nothing to do with that.

OP does state it, quite clearly in fact: " Is there some alternative out there that I'm completely overlooking for open source?"

Unless Microsoft recently released the source code to their office suite this option has been pretty clearly disqualified. RTFA.

No Oracle at all?

[nurb432]

I guess that means no java for you either :)

Re:Microsoft Office

[AnonymousClown]

Have you ever heard of LaTeX and subversion? Just checking...

He probably has....but everyone else he works with probably hasn't nor are they willing to spend all the time on the learning curve to use it.

Re:Open Office a de facto standard?

[Alex Belits]

OOXML is a documented standard, ISO/IEC 29500.

lol

Re:Should be fine...

[Kjella]

Considering one of the things they did was pull in the go-oo patches that include better docx support, I doubt that is the big fear. It's mostly only RMS that think closed source lock-out is a way to promote freedom.

Re:Should be fine...

[rwven]

Not intended != Not suitable.

Re:Should be fine...

[Mongoose Disciple]

He's not just some guy, he's David Arlie. He's done work on Xorg stuff, including the nouveau driver. You should be honoured that he called you an idiot, especially since it's his second comment on Slashdot, after the first posted in 2005.

So what you're saying is... he's not just any pompous windbag going off on some random guy on a messageboard with the kind of insult most of us outgrew in the 7th grade, but a specific pompous windbag with some kind of claim to nerd street cred in a particular nerd subculture going off on some random guy on a messageboard with the kind of insult most of us outgrew in the 7th grade?

That's informative, but I still don't think the aforementioned random guy should feel honored. You've got somewhat odd criteria for choosing your objects of worship.

Don't forget the user "education" factor

[LostMyBeaver]

Every Linux user will typically bitch about how now they have to open a Word doc... then... whether using OpenOffice, AbiWord, KWord, Google Docs, Office in VMWare, Office in Remote Desktop, office in Citrix application sharing, Office in Wine, doc2pdf etc... will simply open it.

If you're a Linux guy that's bought a motherboard and IS UPGRADING THE BIOS... then let's assume for the moment that you can figure out how to open up a Word document.

If you can't, then please pack the motherboard, return it to the store and go to Brookstones and buy a new toy to play with instead, like a 100Mhz, 64meg Android device.

Re:Should be fine...

[arashi no garou]

You know, I'm not taking sides here but I feel the need to point out something too. It doesn't matter how high in the geek celebrity circle someone is, calling another person an idiot because they aren't aware of the facts, in itself indicates a juvenile mentality. Calling someone ignorant, on the other hand, would not only be more correct, it would be less childish and offensive to boot, and would allow for a reasonable request to become educated on the matter.

Yes, Mr. Arlie is an Xorg driver genius, but he has yet to do more than call names and pick a fight here on the Slashdot grade school playground.

Grow up, guys.

Don't just use software; use common sense...

[Lewah]

If what you have now works for what you're doing, use it.

If something better comes out that tickles your fancy, install the shiny.

If you're not contributing to the project and directly involved in the squabble between Oracle and The Document Foundation, then why in the hell do you care? It's not /that/ hard to install new software on your OS is it?

Let Oracle screw it up (like they always do), and then jump ship like everyone else; otherwise, get in the mix and start helping make the alternative better.

In my opinion, this thread is moot.

Just instructions? Could be worse

[GameboyRMH]

A lot of mainboards can only have their BIOS updated through a Windows utility, and so far I've never seen one of these utilities that works in WINE. Some mainboards can only be configured with a Windows utility (most Toshiba laptops for instance, but if you bought a Toshiba laptop that's just the beginning of your problems...)

So don't use that version, then?

[neminem]

I hate the look of Skype 4. I hate the look of Skype 5. So I'm still using Skype 3. I just got a new computer; apparently Win7 x64 doesn't get along with the final release of Skype 3, so I went back to oldversion.com and grabbed the penultimate version instead, which worked.

I liked AIM back in the day, but they kept adding more ugly bloat and more ads everywhere, so at a certain point I just stopped letting it upgrade. I'm still running an AIM install from about 2004, and guess what? It still works great. I still have Office 2003 installed, too (with the compatibility pack to view 2007/2010 docs). Boom, no more ugly screen-realestate-eating ribbon. You can run XP's no-ribbon paint and wordpad in Win7, too - just copy the executables over from a different computer.

My point is, companies try to convince you that the only proper way to use their software is to upgrade every time they release a new version, but sometimes "upgrades"... aren't. So why not just use the pre-Oracle version you liked, until LibreOffice is up to your standards?