Slashdot Mirror


Compared and Contrasted: OpenOffice V. LibreOffice

GMGruman writes "Oracle's imposition of fees for some OpenOffice capabilities caused some of the venerable open source office suite's creators to head out on their own and create LibreOffice as a truly free OSS tool. InfoWorld's Neil McAllister reviews the two OSS productivity tools side by side to figure out where they differ, and whether you can jettison Oracle's OpenOffice safely for the fully free LibreOffice."

18 of 294 comments (clear)

  1. Printable version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here's the print version (all one one page instead of four). There's still ads, but it's better.
    Also, frist psto?

    1. Re:Printable version by Sparks23 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Safari comes with a Reader mode built-in, and there's the Readability add-on for Firefox and a similar one for Chrome. For general browser-agnostic solutions, often with mobile variants, there is the web version of Readability, or the Instapaper service.

      To the best of my knowledge, all of those will slurp in multiple pages of an article when producing the clean/readable version of the article.

      --
      --Rachel
  2. All about features, not stability by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    (Read the print version of the article on one page. It's one of those "short article spread across many ad-heavy pages" crap sites.)

    The article just compares the feature lists. It's not clear if either is better from a bug standpoint. A big problem with OpenOffice is that it tends to crash too much. (Especially, for some reason, when exiting.) Also, OpenOffice had some features written in Java, but they were optional. Did LibreOffice get rid of the Oracle Java parts, replace them with something, or what?

    It's encouraging that LibreOffice is around. I've been using OpenOffice since 1.0, and haven't used a version of Microsoft Word later than Word 97. OpenOffice in its later incarnations isn't bad, although it still, after ten years, has an amateurish feel to it.

    1. Re:All about features, not stability by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 3, Informative

      The article just compares the feature lists.

      This isn't true at all. While their testing was very limited they notes several bugs where the specs claimed a feature would work, but did not actually function or was inaccessible.

      Also, OpenOffice had some features written in Java, but they were optional. Did LibreOffice get rid of the Oracle Java parts, replace them with something, or what?

      If you had RTFA you'd note the discussion of needing to download the JRE if you used LibreOffice in order to get some features to work. So, no, there is still a dependency. You'd also note the JRE comes bundled with OpenOffice, but is an out of date version.

      OpenOffice in its later incarnations isn't bad, although it still, after ten years, has an amateurish feel to it.

      Agreed. It really needs some good paid developers from Canonical or Redhat or someone to do proper usability assessment and testing, and then rework the UI and other relevant parts of the code.

    2. Re:All about features, not stability by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Don't kid yourself about OSX. You may like it, but it has it's own share of UI disasters. Some like having the Trash and Eject be the same UI target were a dumb idea from day one. Some, like having all of the menus at the top of the screen made sense when we were on low resolution single screen systems, but are detriments in multi-monitor high resolutions systems, and some of them are brand new bonehead decisions like choose to use a green plus for a button that will shrink the screen.

    3. Re:All about features, not stability by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative

      LibreOffice incorporates all of Novell's patches. A lot of these were related to improving startup time, mostly by turning static initialisers into lazy initialisation, but also by tweaking the linkage so the dynamic loader doesn't have to spend so much time resolving symbols. Most of the others are related to improving MS compatibility, and depending on who you listen to are either vital to adoption or are a MS-spawned patent trap.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  3. Re:so who won? by jbolden · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well 6 words: Not different enough yet to matter.

  4. Tl, dr by Noughmad · · Score: 2, Informative

    To summarize the summary of the summary: They're the same.

    --
    PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
  5. Re:Summary so you don't need to RTFA by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Informative

    I wonder how GO-oo and LibreOffice compare?

    Go-OO does not exist as a standalone project anymore. The only reason why it was there in the first place is the difficulty to get the patches accepted into mainstream by Sun/Oracle. This problem doesn't exist with LibreOffice, and, indeed, one of the first things they did after forking was to merge Go-OO in.

  6. Not looking back by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

    At work we (and some of our customers) switched to OOO about 3 years ago, and for the types of documents (including some rather large manuals) it works just fine, and imported all of our old documents, from multiple different versions of MSOffice and Word.

    When the devs jumped ship, we jumped with them to LibreOffice, retaining just a few seats of OOO in our customers shop, because they already paid for support contracts. But reports are that they have not been happy with what little help they got. The phone techs knew less than our people.

    There are some missing functions that MS-Office users wish were available, and maddeningly well hidden features as well as stuff that just does not work. But these were not mainstream functionality that we needed in our shop.

    LibreOffice is currently every bit as good as OOO, and in some ways better. Going forward, all the wet-ware is in their corner, and Oracle will probably take a year bringing replacements up to speed before any serious bugs can be addressed, let alone new features. (Although nothing will stop them from feeding off of the efforts of LibreOffice).

      LibreOffice probably needs to think about a revenue stream for the future. I'm fine with that. Let those who absolutely have to have support contracts in place (for what ever reason) foot the bill.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    1. Re:Not looking back by NortySpock · · Score: 3, Informative

      LibreOffice probably needs to think about a revenue stream for the future.

      They have a funding drive going on right now.

      They have a lot of people on their side, but the real issue will be paying down the technical debt in the codebase. It really needs an overhaul.

  7. Re:Outlook by kabloom · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nobody's integrated an Outlook substitute into OpenOffice because Outlook is very different from the other office applications (which are all centered around creating documents of various types). Outlook is focused on connectivity, mainly email, address books, and calendars and the open source world has had a full stack for these capabilities for a long time. The recommended way to replace Outlook is with open protocols (IMAP, LDAP, CalDAV), but if you need Microsoft Exchange support, that's available too. One can use Evolution as a substitute for Outlook.

  8. Re:Outlook by 0racle · · Score: 3, Informative

    Outlook is more then just a e-mail reader. Corporate support for Outlook and nothing else is from running Exchange as their collaboration suite. Nothing works better with Exchange than Outlook and replacing all the functionality of Exchange/Outlook is not easy.

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
  9. Isn't LibreOffice, for now, Go-oo? by blind+biker · · Score: 3, Informative

    As far as I know, Libre Office is based mostly (entirely?) on Novell's Go-oo. So this review compares OpenOffice with the much extended and improved Go-oo, which has better multilanguage support, a larger clip-art collection and better MS Office filters. Yes, this kind of article should have been written a long time ago, way before Libre Office appeared, because Go-oo deserved more exposure.

    Better late than never.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  10. Re:so who won? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Informative

    LibreOffice

    --tl;dr friendly section ends here--

    LibreOffice has everything that OO.org has, plus the Go-OO patches, minus an evil megacorporation at the reigns.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  11. Re:Outlook by BitZtream · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is if you want to replace Outlook.

    My company makes sells a service which can be used from within Outlook via an COM addon. A couple things I can tell you about Outlook users.

    They aren't using it for email only. Those people quickly go switch to something that doesn't suck at reading email.

    Sales people LIVE in Outlook. Contacts, notes, scheduling, reminders, workflow, document management, CRM and sales process are just the first and obvious things that come to mind. Every one of our customers that uses Outlook in a corporate environment has multiple plugins installed before we even get to them. These plugins make Outlook a client for some other system in their company and typically roll it all into one client reasonable well for the more well established plugins.

    To put it bluntly, as much as Outlook sucks for Email, it is in a class all by itself when it comes to being a PIM for someone in a large company.

    Nor even remotely necessary.

    What you utterly fail to understand is while you think Outlook is an email client, you have absolutely no clue how people actually use it in the real world. You're just spouting off random crap because you think you understand what Outlook is used for, when in reality you don't. Its not a email client, its a PIM with a large feature set that you actually DO need to mimic if you expect people to use something else.

    There isn't a Outlook/Exchange replacement, I've been looking for years. If it wasn't needed or people didn't want the features of Outlook, people would use something else in large companies ... but look around, it doesn't happen unless.

    I haven't even touched on server side features.

    With all that said, I freaking hate Outlook and Exchange, they are big over complicated piles of crap that need to be replaced by an open alternative, but thats not going to happen until the OSS world stops trying to change the way people use software like Outlook into their model and instead tries to make software that fits what those users want. That won't happen until someone can make money off it as its a very big project to take on.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  12. Re:What fees! by udoschuermann · · Score: 4, Informative

    the reasoning to fork it was phenomenally stupid

    No, forking LO from OO.o was primarily a matter of getting development to move forward again at a better than glacial pace: The OO.o license requires submitted code to become Sun's (and now Oracle's) property. This kept many from donating their code, depositing it at Go-OO, instead. These changes are now moving into LO, which is starting to show faster improvement than OO.o.

    If you think that is stupid, then ... well, ... you're entitled to your opinion. :)

    --
    --Udo.
  13. LaTeX by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've never really seen much of a need for an "office suite". LaTeX is much better at producing documents, spreadsheets may be of use for some minor calculations occasionally but for the things many companies use it for, a database would be better suited for the job. For presentations I recently discovered the powerdot package for LaTeX, it really works great and it's very easy to produce presentations that actually look good unlike the ones I've tried making in OO Impress...