Slashdot Mirror


Apache OpenOffice Downloaded 50 Million Times In a Year

An anonymous reader writes with this quick bite from the H: "Just a few days after the one year anniversary of the release of the first version of OpenOffice from the Apache Foundation (Apache OpenOffice 3.4) on 8 May 2012, the project can now boast 50 million downloads of the Open Source office suite. 10 million of those downloads happened since the beginning of March. In contrast, LibreOffice claimed it had 15 million unique downloads of its office suite in all of 2012."

102 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice name.. by duckgod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    and LibreOffice gets everything else. LibreOffice is such a better piece of software after all the hard work done since the fork. But sometimes even when talking to my techy friends I have to elaborate when I say I created the doc in "LibreOffice".

  2. unique vs total? by trybywrench · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you're going to make the comparison between the two download counts they need to be the same as in unique vs unique or total vs total but not total vs unique.

    --
    I came to the datacenter drunk with a fake ID, don't you want to be just like me?
    1. Re:unique vs total? by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      Yea seriously... TFA doesn't mention anything about OpenOffice being unique dowloads, while TFS mentions LibreOffice was download uniquely 15 million times. At least from what I'm seeing.

    2. Re:unique vs total? by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to mention that Ubuntu has LibreOffice pre-installed, so none of those users have a reason to download LibreOffice. That could skew the download counts.

    3. Re:unique vs total? by bhcompy · · Score: 1

      Not to the tune of 35million

    4. Re:unique vs total? by fatp · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that Ubuntu has LibreOffice pre-installed, so none of those users have a reason to download LibreOffice...

      Just the same for OpenOffice.org

  3. Bet that LibrOffice download count doesn't include by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    downloads of all the distributions that use it.

  4. Excellent Programs for free! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It serves the needs of most people.

  5. Marketing by MrEricSir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    LibreOffice is such a better piece of software after all the hard work done since the fork. But sometimes even when talking to my techy friends I have to elaborate when I say I created the doc in "LibreOffice".

    ^ So, so much this. Seems like only the geeks have figured out that LibreOffice exists, and these numbers only confirm my suspicions.

    LibreOffice needs some kind of marketing push to get people to switch.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    1. Re:Marketing by kimvette · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Better yet, merge projects. Use LibreOffice as the new base and port whatever optimizations and enhancements OOo has over. Now that Oracle has washed their hands of OOo there is no "philosophical" reason not to do it.

      I prefer LibreOffice over OOo myself, but I prefer either one over the user-hostile ribbon interface of Microsoft Office where it has been turned into a game of hide-and-seek.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    2. Re:Marketing by thewolfkin · · Score: 1

      it felt like that and that's how i ended up on LO. I remembered there being a major fork a while back and had to look it up

      --
      Just another second banana
    3. Re:Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      LibreOffice recently rebased onto Apache OO ( https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Re-Basing ), no idea whether or not new updates are being ported from Apache to LibreOffice though, but it seems that the intention is to port anything of use to LibreOffice.

    4. Re:Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
      It is up to the individual projects as they are separate. In the end it comes down to licensing constraints.

      My understanding is that the Apache OpenOffice has more stringent licensing constraints so that whatever is committed to OO could be ported to LibreOffice, but the reverse isn't necessarily true.

    5. Re:Marketing by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      Well, LO has better marketing. But OO exists and is going on strong.

    6. Re:Marketing by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "I prefer LibreOffice over OOo myself, but I prefer either one over the user-hostile ribbon interface of Microsoft Office where it has been turned into a game of hide-and-seek."

      It's kind of ironic. Microsoft took much of Xerox PARC's human-computer interface research, and continued it for decades. Resulting in some VERY effective UI.

      Then, inexplicably, they turned around and just threw most of it away, with the ribbon interface and then Windows 8.

      To be fair, Microsoft has not been the only one lately to do "new" things that are actually quite old (tried many years ago and discarded for good reasons). Apple's recent "dumbing down" of their desktop UI to make it more like iOS is another, though less drastic, example.

      You know the saying: those who do not remember their history are doomed to repeat it. I only wish THEY would also the only ones who suffer because of it.

    7. Re:Marketing by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Uhhh...why? What difference at the end of the day does it make if they use OO or LO, they are both FOSS correct? Frankly you shouldn't care one way or the other whether you get 65 million OO or LO or a combination of the two.

      Honestly I'd say in the grand scheme of things both OO and LO are irrelevant, as the ones that can most use it, home users, are increasingly not opting for any office software at all. Hell i stopped including an office suite in my default install ages ago unless they specifically ask for it because I found they just weren't being used, most users are too busy with FB and twitter and a thousand other sites to really care about office software one way or another. And some might bitch at me saying so but businesses can't really use either because Writer is pretty piss poor when it comes to handling complex office docs and don't even get me started on Calc which doesn't deserve to be in the same sentence as Excel.

      At the end of the day I'm finding fewer and fewer home users use this stuff anymore, its like stand alone email clients in that way, its just no longer relevant to the majority. But I don't see how its "bad" that OO gets downloaded more than LO, that seems like its just splitting hairs as its not like its gonna "hurt" LO one way or another, anymore than people say using Gnome over KDE is really gonna hurt anything, its a personal preference thing really.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    8. Re:Marketing by uigrad_2000 · · Score: 2

      Depends on how you download. In Fedora, I typed this, and got LibreOffice:

      >sudo yum install openoffice

      But, if you go to the openoffice website looking for a download, there's no mention of LibreOffice there at all.

      --
      Free unix account: freeshell.org
    9. Re:Marketing by uncqual · · Score: 1

      Sadly, it needs more than marketing - it needs quality 'help' as well. Unfortunately, the population of those who enjoy writing tech docs and will do it in a FOSS project seems to be much smaller than coders who enjoy writing software in FOSS projects.

      LO's online docs/help are a mere shadow of those in MS Office - even when comparing them to MS Office versions from over a decade ago. This makes LO less friendly to new users.

      --
      Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
    10. Re:Marketing by TrollstonButterbeans · · Score: 3, Insightful

      LibreOffice is absolutely excellent. Except I think of the "Nacho Libre" movie and I can't see myself saying "Libre" in casual conversation and it sounds exceptionally geeky and not mainstream. Not as bad as "The Gimp" in the name department, but yes the name absolutely falls in the "not helpful department". Versus, say, Firefox which always had a good name or MYSQL was always a good name.

      --
      Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
    11. Re:Marketing by caspy7 · · Score: 1

      Better yet, merge projects. ... Now that Oracle has washed their hands of OOo there is no "philosophical" reason not to do it.

      Sure there is. It's called the not-in-my-house philosophy.

    12. Re:Marketing by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      Indeed, for most home and SOHO users, Google Docs/Drive/Apps is Good Enough[tm].

      When you get to the point where you need Excel, you buy Excel. Oh, it comes with a word processor. How nice. If you're not mail merging, who cares?

      And frankly, I like Google's presentation software better than PowerPoint simply due to its simplicity and near universal access.

      It's not Open Source. That sucks. But it is free and easy to access and use. Just trade your data and your soul to Google Marketing Group and be done with it. :)

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    13. Re:Marketing by AbsGeekNZ · · Score: 1

      if you are going to do that get rid of the little "o" and stick with just "Open Office" as the name of the product. I always thought having the ".org" as part of the name of the product sounded terrible. I always just called it "Open Office" or OO.

    14. Re:Marketing by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      It's messy :(

      Sun released openoffice under the GPL (I don't remember the exact version offhand) and in the wake of the oracle takeover a number of developers decided to fork and produce libreoffice. While the oracle takeover was apparently the immediate trigger I get the impression that there were deep tensions within the project already.

      Normally when such a fork happens one of a few things results
      1: The two forks continue in paralell with code flowing from the original to the fork and possiblly back again (it would be difficult for it to flow back in this case though because of contributor agreement requirements).
      2: The operators of the forked project ignores the fork but is either abandoned or at least development slows to a cral
      3: The fork is blessed by the forked project to some greater or lesser extent.

      In this case though none of those things happened. Instead oracle decided to give the rights for openoffice to apache who proceeded to release it under the apache license (a non-copyleft license) and afaict the version given to apache was not the same as the one libreoffice was based on.

      Libreoffice in turn have decided that while they want copyleft they want one weaker than the GPL, so they are rebasing their work on top of apache openoffice. Afaict this means that code will be able to flow from apache openoffice to libreoffice but not vice-versa.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    15. Re:Marketing by Nutria · · Score: 2

      LibreOffice recently rebased onto Apache OO

      1) That was almost a year ago.
      2) If they just kept copying files over from Apache OO, then they'd lose all the code refactoring they've been doing.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    16. Re:Marketing by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      only the geeks have figured out that LibreOffice exists

      And only the French geeks... should have called it "FreeOffice"

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    17. Re:Marketing by stoploss · · Score: 1

      Then, inexplicably, they turned around and just threw most of it away, with the ribbon interface and then Windows 8.

      Blame Julie Larson-Green.

      Metro's mother to replace defenestrated Windows boss Sinofsky:
      "...the fact she was behind the Ribbon and the Windows 8 Metro interface will not fill some folk with confidence"

      O rly.

    18. Re:Marketing by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      While I'm glad that works for you my users? Aren't using those either, they are doing everything either real time with FB and twitter or they are using webmail and that is pretty much it. I don't have a single customer using any of those, in fact i had to go look up what drive was as i hadn't heard of it.

      When it comes to home users the future is instant or near instant, its here today gone later today and they really don't care because they'll just move on to something else. They have their pics backed up in their webmail and a USB drive, they use chat and FB and that really is pretty much it. I'm making decent money showing them the wonders of HTPCs but its being used more for casual gaming and movie collections than anything else and I could easily see the day that docs become like databases, something corps use that home users don't care about.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    19. Re:Marketing by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      "Open Office" is trademarked by another office suite.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    20. Re:Marketing by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      Google Docs--er--Drive (don't like the new brand) is convenient. Like, my wife and I can edit and watch the budget (spreadsheet) easily on different devices. I know a lot of people use Mint.com and whatnot, but it is insufficient for our needs (I use both. Mint has its place.). When we were preparing for adoption, it was convenient for editing various documents without having to email stuff around. Dropbox can work, but you can also easily overwrite someone else's changes. Live editing with history makes that less likely.

      It's also nice for making Christmas Wish Lists as you can share it with tech-savvy grandparents and they can claim items. As a blended family, we have a lot of people to manage when it comes to Christmas and birthdays.

      If you have a lot of young single dude friends or non-planning type families, yeah, what's the point? But, for planning-type people and microbusinesses, it's really useful until you outgrow it. Then there's Google Apps for Business and Quickbooks when you're ready to take the next step.

      $0.02USD, YMMV, offer not valid in California, Alaska, or the US Virgin Islands,
      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    21. Re:Marketing by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      I don't get it.

      I've been watching the LibreOffice posts on slashdot since it began in 2010. To me, it looks like a political move driven by dislike of Oracle (however well-deserved that dislike might be). Why does my mother-in-law care about that? OpenOffice is good enough for her, and it's the name everybody remembers.

      It seems to me that the only people who care about LibraOffice are motivated by ideology. The rest of us don't really care.

    22. Re:Marketing by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      It was not just ideology. Basically they had issues getting their patches accepted. There were also a lot of people in LibreOffice who wanted to ditch Java as a requirement because it makes the suite even slower than it needs to be.

    23. Re:Marketing by nobodie · · Score: 1

      OO is switching to the Apache license while LO is still GPLv2? did I get that right? but that is the problem, it was a conscious decision by Apache to change the license which will make it difficult to recombine. The longer the separation goes on the more difficult recombination will be I think.

      --
      Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
  6. Meanwhile... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    Meanwhile, LO comes with every Linux distro, so it's unlikely any of those will have been logged.

    I've switched over to LO by default. Does anyone here have any kind of opinion on the matter? It seems that LO has been undergoing a massive codebase cleanup and they're beginning to capitalise on it in that they seem to be adding features at quite a pace now.

    Then again I don't use it much.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  7. Meh... by ndtechnologies · · Score: 4, Funny

    Whoopdie doo. I honestly moved to LibreOffice as soon as it forked. True that OO.o has more mindshare, but LibreOffice is better. I simply tell people "they renamed it", lol.

    --
    I have nothing clever to put here...
    1. Re:Meh... by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      Why is it better?

    2. Re:Meh... by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      They went through and optimized the code, for one thing. I seem to recall they culled about 50% of deprecated code that was just hanging around like junk DNA, doing nothing but bloating up the program. After they cleaned up the code, they tightened up the rest of it. The result was a leaner piece of software in all modules, so it loads faster and runs faster.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
  8. Of course OO has a higher number of D/Ls... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 4, Informative

    LibreOffice comes pre-packed in most Linux distributions. If you want OpenOffice you have to download it from Apache.

    --
    These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    1. Re:Of course OO has a higher number of D/Ls... by Palestrina · · Score: 1

      Linux is what... 3%? 5%? of the desktop market? LibreOffice can have 100% of that market and it means very little.

    2. Re:Of course OO has a higher number of D/Ls... by westlake · · Score: 1

      LibreOffice comes pre-packed in most Linux distributions. If you want OpenOffice you have to download it from Apache.

      You aren't suggesting all those 50 million downloads were to the Windows PC and the Mac?

    3. Re:Of course OO has a higher number of D/Ls... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      True. However I believe that Linux users make up a large portion of LibreOffice's base.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    4. Re:Of course OO has a higher number of D/Ls... by Palestrina · · Score: 1

      Likely true. But suppose they have 100% of desktop Linux already? Where then is their growth going to come from? From the charts it looks like Apache OpenOffice downloads are 85% Windows. That gives them a lot more room for growth, IMHO. 50 million downloads shows they are a good-sized fish in a very large pond.

    5. Re:Of course OO has a higher number of D/Ls... by Anachragnome · · Score: 1

      "LibreOffice comes pre-packed in most Linux distributions. If you want OpenOffice you have to download it from Apache."

      And the rest of the world--read Microsoft users--have to download it. That would explain the numbers right there.

    6. Re:Of course OO has a higher number of D/Ls... by geek · · Score: 1

      What's 3 and 5% of 3-4 billion? Hint: it's a lot more than 50 million.

    7. Re:Of course OO has a higher number of D/Ls... by Palestrina · · Score: 2

      The fact that LibreOffice has never broken out their Windows download numbers (which would be trivial for them to do) speaks louder than any other argument. If the numbers were favorable we would have already seen their "infographics" on this.

    8. Re:Of course OO has a higher number of D/Ls... by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      /me raises hand

    9. Re:Of course OO has a higher number of D/Ls... by TrollstonButterbeans · · Score: 1

      I thought in some of the most hardcore countries that Linux use might be 10% --- I'm talking certain parts of Europe here --- but no in those countries it tops off around 4%. Your estimates of 3% to 5% worldwide are very, very high. If worldwide it is even near 2%, I'd be stunned. I do not know if those stats counted tablets and clearly did not include Linux servers.

      --
      Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
  9. Good Job by trifish · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OpenOffice is now proper open source as it is under Apache Foundation. There is absolutely no reason to maintain two branches of it now. It only dilutes the effort and weakens the well-known OpenOffice brand. You should end the fork before it does even more harm.

    1. Re:Good Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      OpenOffice is now proper open source as it is under Apache Foundation. There is absolutely no reason to maintain two branches of it now. It only dilutes the effort and weakens the well-known OpenOffice brand. You should end the fork before it does even more harm.

      Fine by me, end the OpenOffice fork and give LibreOffice the name. That is what Oracle should have done when they decided to hand OO over to someone else.

    2. Re:Good Job by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 2

      If the efforts actually merge back together, it is more likely that LibreOffice would join Apache/OpenOffice and not the other way around.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    3. Re:Good Job by wisesifu · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I disagree,

      OpenOffice brand was already damaged by Oracle and I believe by giving it to Apache they wanted to continue the damaging effect of the way they handled to community.

      Why not give it to LibreOffice? When they realized they where wrong and it was time to dump the code, why give it to Apache? Why not give it to the people already doing development, previous community members?

      I think OpenOffice while it may have been downloaded more times its LibreOffice with the uptrend, with the following.

    4. Re:Good Job by Palestrina · · Score: 2

      LO was able to get all of their developers to agree to change the license from LGPL to MPL3. If they asked politely maybe they could get a change to Apache?

      In other words it is a community/political challenge, not a legal problem.

    5. Re:Good Job by Palestrina · · Score: 1

      What is the basis for your claim that "the brand was already damaged"? Do you have any evidence for that? And if you did, how could you distinguish damage caused by Oracle from damage caused by the LibreOffice fork?

      I read this claim, and I'm sincerely interested in knowing whether this is just FUD, or whether there are any facts behind it.

    6. Re:Good Job by BadgerRush · · Score: 1

      This is not possible, LibreOffice code is licensed LGPL, it can't "join Apache/OpenOffice".

    7. Re:Good Job by Microlith · · Score: 1

      how could you distinguish damage caused by Oracle from damage caused by the LibreOffice fork?

      You can't. But it was Oracle's project to act on and they decided to be as uncooperative as possible, even more so than Sun. So LibreOffice was born and much progress was made in spite of Oracle. Then Oracle decided to dispense with it and carelessly tossed it aside to Apache.

    8. Re:Good Job by Microlith · · Score: 1

      You have a history of telling people what to do. How about you take the initiative and resolve the licensing conflicts between the two projects?

      You should end the fork before it does even more harm.

      Blame Oracle, they catalyzed the split.

    9. Re:Good Job by Microlith · · Score: 3, Informative

      I doubt they will be able to get them to go from the MPL3 to the Apache license. The transition from LGPL -> MPL3 maintained the copyleft nature of the license, going to Apache would eliminate it. I suspect it would be significantly more difficult to get people to agree to that.

    10. Re:Good Job by unrtst · · Score: 1

      While I think that the LibreOffice folks had some valid complaints, there has been an awful lot more stink made about it than was necessary. They could have stated their needs/complaints, proposed their forking plans should certain criteria not be met, and just went on their way when that didn't happen. Many of the members did just that, and didn't raise a big stink.

      However, it's not helping anything to say that "Oracle ... decided to be as uncooperative as possible". They just took over a very large and wide array of software and hardware. OOo didn't get the attention that some people wanted - fine. I'm not claiming Oracle did the best they could, but they weren't absolutely evil with it either.

      "Oracle decided to dispense with it and carelessly tossed it aside to Apache"... don't be such a drama queen. IMO, the Apache Foundation is an amazing place, and is just about the ideal place for OOo to end up (assuming Oracle didn't want to manage it anymore). The could have carelessly tossed it aside to Microsoft or to Novel or Miguel de Icaza etc. The Apache Foundation seems like a pretty well thought out solution. The LibreOffice guys are the ones that forked... if they want to join back in, then can work out their licensing issues and do so (or just rewrite what's needed).

      The good news for LibreOffice is that they can still pull in stuff from OOo (I think), so not all is lost.

    11. Re:Good Job by berarma · · Score: 1

      Now proper open source because it can be shipped to users as closed-source? That must be great, in your mind. A lot of developers might not want their code to end being a closed source product for the users by looking at the number of LibreOffice developers. And me, as a user, I don't want that a closed-source OpenOffice fork with propietary extensions ends killing the original open source effort by becoming the new standard suite ala MS Office. That reason alone is enough for giving all our support to LibreOffice.

    12. Re:Good Job by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 1

      Having two branches does not necessarily have to slow things down, it may actually speed things up by allowing an alternative possibility where new features can be tried if they are not accepted to the other project. As long as the two projects coordinate to make sure improvements can easily moved between the two projects, it can be a win.

    13. Re:Good Job by Palestrina · · Score: 1

      You might be right. After all, we all know how the use of the Apache License has entirely ruined Android...

      Not.

    14. Re:Good Job by Microlith · · Score: 1

      Mockery does not counter the point that the MPL3 was chosen explicitly because it preserved the copyleft nature. Said same contributors may be unwilling to shift to the Apache license for precisely that reason.

      Come back when you have a real response.

    15. Re:Good Job by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Nah. I think this is just a matter of $. The Apache license makes it easier for Oracle to monetize OoO in the future. Oracle runs a large consulting business besides their database core business. This is also true for companies such as IBM. Oracle has wanted to compete with Microsoft in the small to mid sized business applications segment for a long time. They just do not want to spend a lot of their own resources doing it.

  10. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    They should have called it OfficeLibre and used a syilized picture of Che for their logo.

  11. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Personally, I say "OpenOffice" anyway when I mean LibreOffice. It has more currency with less technical people and those who never update, and only occasionally does it prompt a concerned stare when someone actually knows the distinction. Maybe we could just go back to calling it StarOffice?

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  12. No it's not. by pavon · · Score: 1

    LibreOffice is licensed under LGPL, like Sun OpenOffice.org was before it. Apache OpenOffice is licensed under the Apache license, which is more permissive than the LGPL. There is no problem using Apache licensed code with LGPL code, however the Apache Foundation refuses to use any license that is less permissive than Apache license in any of it's projects. It is one of the core tenants of the foundation. So OpenOffice can choose to merge into LibreOffice, but the opposite cannot happen short of getting every developer who has worked on LibreOffice/Go-OO over the past decade to agree to re-license their code.

  13. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Qubit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Personally, I say "OpenOffice" anyway when I mean LibreOffice.

    *concerned stare* ...that's very interesting.

    It has more currency with less technical people and those who never update, and only occasionally does it prompt a concerned stare when someone actually knows the distinction.

    Speaking as a LibreOffice user and contributor, I am impressed that the OpenOffice name is so well known these days. I remember a number of years ago when *nobody* knew the name "OpenOffice" ("Is that some kind of template pack plugin thing for Word?"). It's very interesting to hear that now the name is well known enough that technically-minded users use the OpenOffice name to refer to both LO and AOO. Brand recognition is really quite strong!

    Questions for you:

    • What do you think LibreOffice should do to make its brand more recognizable?
    • How 'known' would the project need to be for you to start calling it "LibreOffice" ?

    Maybe we could just go back to calling it StarOffice?

    Well the binary is still called "soffice" :-)

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
  14. Rob Weir, is that you? by jensend · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Rather convenient Slashvertising, comparing total downloads for AOO with unique downloads for LO.

    AOO has been too busy removing functionality (my personal favorite: the wpd filter), having a license inquisition, and taking potshots at LO to get much done.

    Here it's now almost 2.5 years since OO 3.3, the last Oracle version, and the latest AOO version has no significant advances over OO 3.3-- instead it's got reduced functionality. In the meantime LibreOffice 4 has come a long way.

    Don't know why anybody bothers giving press to OO anymore.

    1. Re:Rob Weir, is that you? by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      The primary difference is that LO is locked into LGPL, while AOO is free software under the Apache license.

    2. Re:Rob Weir, is that you? by ras · · Score: 1

      Well that, and if you are measuring the health of an open source project the number of downloads is meaningless. The only thing that matters is the rate of change of the code base. LO has more developers, they are doing more work, and the gap is only growing larger.

      In the end, the users will follow the developers. They don't have much choice really.

    3. Re:Rob Weir, is that you? by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      For some it's a huge difference.

    4. Re:Rob Weir, is that you? by Common+Joe · · Score: 1

      Rather convenient Slashvertising, comparing total downloads for AOO with unique downloads for LO.

      This is why I stopped looking at news on television. This is why I stopped reading the local newspapers. Blatantly false information. Making this kind of error is not a mistake. It's an outright falsehood. It's also why for several years I've taken every article at Slashdot with a grain of salt because they link back to these kinds of articles and the submitter and editors for Slashdot don't catch it.

      I am thankful that a number of readers have sharp eyes and catch this sort of stuff because although I catch a lot, I sure as hell can't catch everything. To jensend (with a great post) and everyone else who pointed the problems with the information given: thank you.

    5. Re:Rob Weir, is that you? by Pav · · Score: 1

      Yes... which is why I use Libre Office.

    6. Re:Rob Weir, is that you? by Palestrina · · Score: 1

      And measuring an open source project by code churn is also meaningless. Results are what matters in the end. Users choosing to download OpenOffice is certainly one form of results. There may be others, of course. But if project A makes X code changes and gets Y downloads, and project B makes 10X code changes and gets Y/10 downloads, then I don't call project B more successful. I call them an inefficient failure.

  15. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well, *office would match both :)

  16. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

    And if it weren't for that binary name, I never would've known at all. :)

    I'll switch to calling it LibreOffice exclusively just for you if it makes you feel better. I do have a few... vague suggestions for things that could be done to promote LO's image, but most of them depend on understanding why Apache has bothered holding onto its fork instead of giving it back to the LO community, which is something I'm not privy to. I'm pretty sure that most people (who are aware of the distinction) see the existence of AOO as senseless and confusing.

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  17. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Palestrina · · Score: 1

    Uhh... Why wouldn't OpenOffice be called "OpenOffice"? It doesn't seem much of presumption to me, since it is actually OpenOffice.

  18. Re:Nacho Libre Office? by iceaxe · · Score: 1

    But they wear their stretchy pants!

    --
    WALSTIB!
  19. amid the bitching... by gbjbaanb · · Score: 2

    ... of the arguments over which FOSS office suite had got most users, people should recognise that there have been at least 65 million users of them not using Microsoft Office.

    This is a good thing.

    mind you, Microsoft says there are 750 million Office users worldwide, so we have a little way to go yet.

    1. Re:amid the bitching... by msobkow · · Score: 1

      Still, that's nearly a 10% hit to MicroSoft's wallet.

      Not a bad impact, all things considered.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    2. Re:amid the bitching... by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      I don't hate Office 2013 as much as some folks do. (I also got it for free from my school. Lucky me.) So I've got both 2013 for the people that insist I work in the Microsoft formats, and LibreOffice for everything else.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
  20. Meanwhile... by dywolf · · Score: 1

    Microsoft complains about Office being illegally downloaded a few hundred million times a year.

    --
    The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  21. Only AOO item of interest IBM Symphony donation by xenoc_1 · · Score: 1

    The only reason I'd want Apache Open Office to merge into / with / from LibreOffice is this: To get the overall better suite, LO, using some of the uniquely cool features in IBM's very different fork of OO.o into IBM Lotus Symphony. Which, for those who remember the end-of-CP/M-start-of-PC era, has nada to do with Lotus Symphony, Lotus Development's follow-on to Lotus 1-2-3, which never met with its predecessor's success. But, it was a very early attempt at an "office suite" (spreadsheet-centric, MS/PC-DOS-based). So IBM got the name/trademark when they bought Lotus.

    Around 2010-ish, they released IBM Lotus Symphony, a Win32, Linux, and I think MacOS, office suite based on OO.o core code - but with a lot of differences. Differences in 3 big areas:
    1) Only the 3 major apps - Word Processing, Spreadsheet, and Presentations. Nothing based on Draw, Math, Base.
    2) Very different and non-standard menu structure, that hearkens back to Lotus Windows products. For example, no Windows (and IBM SAA, and just normal)-standard "Insert" menu - most of what you expect there is in its "Create" menu.
    3) Everything is in a single window, tabbed interface, with multiple slide-out right sidebars: A wide, well-organized Properties panel, and some widget panels for add-ons. Based on the Lotus Expeditor framework for the devilspawn Lotus Notes. Yet sometimes the son of the devil can be a good guy (e.g. Hellboy).

    Number 3 has made it my absolute favorite office suite. For the same reasons we all love tabbed browsers and trashed browsers back in the day that didn't have it. Everything is right there, in context, without too much window-hopping. The Properties panel exposes all the major properties without having to dig through menus and open different dialog boxes depending on if you're formatting colors, number types, custom cell formatting, etc., and without having to crap up a giant multiline toolbar or frakking ribbon to make functions discoverable.

    I go back far enough to have been used to different word processors and different spreadsheet programs to have different interfaces and menu structures, even different keyboard shortcuts. Heck, I even remember some of the differences in that between WordStar (real WordStar, up through 3.3), its competitor NewWord that cloned it and then got HandSpringed into WordStar 4.0 (Yes, I still have WordStar 7.0 on my Windows 7 and Windows 8 PCs). Then some time with Ami Pro, on both OS/2 and Windows 3.x, that later became Lotus WordPro (that one I didn't use), with a short sidetrip into WordPerfect for Windows, before being funneled into the Corporate Tool MS-Word world, and then slightly out to OO.o/LO. So I can make the mental shift between different menu structures pretty easily.

    I love the property panel as well as the tabbed interface. Unfortunately, though IBM donated the entire codebase to Apache, they are not using the tabbed interface in AOO. They are starting to use, and announced they will fully implement, the Symphony-based property panels. That alone would make me likely go back to OpenOffice from LibreOffice, except that LibreOffice is so far ahead of AOO in functionality, stability, and killing off of Java.

    For now, I still use Symphony, on both Windows and Linux. It continues to get the occasional FixPack (IBMese for service pack) and continues to Just Work. Especially on creative writing where I may have reference docs, character backgrounds, outlines all open, or similarly for technical writing, the tabbed interface really helps to keep everything accessible and surfaced. Also for projects involving a combo of word processing documents and spreadsheets, and [$DEITY] help me sometimes even presentations - it's a lot easier to work everything up if I have that clear context, rather than a cluster of windows.

    I do keep LO installed, for when I want the other modules, and for dealing with editing documents in MS .docx, .xlsx, .pptx format. Symphony can open them, and

  22. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by UltraZelda64 · · Score: 1

    You seriously consider the name to be more important than the software itself and its functionality. I think you need to get your priorities straight, because they seem to be fucked.

  23. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would say the fact that e.g. IBM is making use of the code (and possibly/probably willing to contribute) and they probably don't like LibreOffice's license might be one of the main reasons for OO to still exist.

  24. Re:Bet that LibrOffice download count doesn't incl by Palestrina · · Score: 1

    Correct. So that means that the OpenOffice numbers include only those who actually *wanted* OpenOffice and intentionally downloaded it. It doesn't include those who mere *got* software as part of a larger bundle without asking for it, or even knowing it is there. For all we know some Linux users consider LO to be so much bloatware that came bundled with their operating system.

    I think it is fair to consider the quality of a user claimed as part of a metric. We make that distinction all the time. With Microsoft we count registrations over OEM installs, for example. So the number of users who actually downloaded OpenOffice is higher up the commitment scale and is more meaningful than claiming that all Linux users want and use LibreOffice. For all we know they are using the machine purely as a home media server or something else.

  25. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by FreeUser · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What do you think LibreOffice should do to make its brand more recognizable?

    I've been using LibreOffice for a number of years, and love it (having written two, and typeset three, books with it), but the name is a hindrence. When I speak to my wife and use the term LibreOffice her eyes glaze over, whereas Open Office has a natural name people understand.

    Free Office would have been better than LibreOffice, or any of a dozen other names I can think of (Community Office, OpenSource Office, New Office, World Office, even abbbreviating it to L-Office ...anything like that would lead to far better name recognition).

    That said, LibreOffice is great, and I wouldn't necessarily spend too much energy trying to get agreement to change the name at this late date (well, maybe the abbreviated "L-Office"). You've all done fine work...now the word needs to get out.

    I also find the stats suspicious...Gentoo folks like me are probably counted in the stat as downloads occur on an emerge, but how many copies of Fedora, Scientific, CentOS, RHEL, etc. have shipped with LibreOffice and aren't counted?

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  26. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by duckgod · · Score: 1

    Speaking as a LibreOffice user and contributor, I am impressed that the OpenOffice name is so well known these days. I remember a number of years ago when *nobody* knew the name "OpenOffice" ("Is that some kind of template pack plugin thing for Word?"). It's very interesting to hear that now the name is well known enough that technically-minded users use the OpenOffice name to refer to both LO and AOO. Brand recognition is really quite strong!

    Questions for you:

    • What do you think LibreOffice should do to make its brand more recognizable?
    • How 'known' would the project need to be for you to start calling it "LibreOffice" ?

    Honestly it is partially a problem with the word Libre. I understand the whole "Free as in Beer vs Free Speach" conversation. To a whole lot of people "Open Source" = "Free as in Beer". Most open source software leverages this as the main selling point. Open Office for example. So when I have to explain that

    Libre (pron.: /libr/) is a loan word in English borrowed from French. As it does in that language, "libre" in English denotes "the state of being free", as in "having freedom" or "liberty".

    (Wikipedia) ...How am I not supposed to sound confusing and pretentious?

    Maybe we could just go back to calling it StarOffice?

    ^^^Can we do that???

  27. Why does their user number need to grow? by amaurea · · Score: 1

    LibreOffice is being developed in the hopes that it will be useful to people, not for profit. Hence not having room to grow would not be a problem, even if it were true. For some programs, the popularity itself is a large part of their usefulness. This is mostly the case for protocols and networking services, such as ipv6, www, freenet and facebook. But LibreOffice does not fall into this category. It uses standard formats that can be read by many other programs, and would be useful even if you were the only person using it.

  28. Re:Windows 8 Sold 100 Million Copies by xeno · · Score: 1

    No. Microsoft reports that they have SHIPPED 100 million copies of Windows 8. Only if every single retail outlet and wholesale PC manufacturer sold 100% of all current stock, and zero inventory remained worldwide, THEN we would say "sold over 100 million copies" but not until then.

    Windows 8 has "sold over 100 million copies" as much as I have lived to my 100th birthday. Don't mistake potential for achievement.

    --
    I think not...(*poof*)
  29. What's in a name? by Phoeniyx · · Score: 1

    Nothing... Everything.. -- Bonus points to the man (or sultan) who knows the reference --

  30. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

    Curious. What is IBM using it for that requires the code be kept under non-copyleft terms?

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  31. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by shikaisi · · Score: 1

    Libre (pron.: /libr/) is a loan word in English borrowed from French. As it does in that language, "libre" in English denotes "the state of being free", as in "having freedom" or "liberty".

    Well that's your problem right there. Who wants to use a piece of software that might have been written by cheese-eating surrender monkeys? Now, call it Liberty Office and you've got an office suite that a red-blooded, patriotic Murikan can use to defeat the terrists.

    --
    No left turn unstoned.
  32. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by archen · · Score: 1

    Questions for you:

    • What do you think LibreOffice should do to make its brand more recognizable?

    Most people probably think this is irrelevent, but make icons that look like something or ANYTHING. The Libre Office Icons seriously look like the system "I have no icon for this file type" icon. I think a problem with Libre Office is that there is nothing BUT the name. At least Open Office I kind of assocate with the seagulls.

  33. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    • What do you think LibreOffice should do to make its brand more recognizable?
    • How 'known' would the project need to be for you to start calling it "LibreOffice" ?

    They need to lose that LibreOffice name. Seriously.

    After the KOffice split, the name Calligra (from the Greek word for artistic drawing of texts) was chosen for the fork. That was an excellent choice and much better than what they had before. In contrast, "LibreOffice" is just terrible. The Document Foundation needs to invite their users to choose a new name.

  34. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    and LibreOffice gets everything else. LibreOffice is such a better piece of software after all the hard work done since the fork. But sometimes even when talking to my techy friends I have to elaborate when I say I created the doc in "LibreOffice".

    ===
    The difference in downloads has to do with name popularity. OpenOffice implies free and unencumbered . LibreOffice, if it was called FreeOffice would probably have done better in terms of downloads. To non English speakers, LibreOffice means freedom. But most Americans don't think about libre as meaning free or free to use or unencumbered.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  35. Re:Windows 8 Sold 100 Million Copies by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

    Windows 8 has sold over 100 million copies in the last 6 months, but is regarded as a failure.

    Just thought I'd throw cold a little splash of perspective on the back slappers.

    But if you subtract all the computer systems that were sold where Windows 8 came preinstalled whether the customer wanted it or not, then how many copies of Windows 8 were really sold? Since the typical choice in operating systems for premade non-Mac computers for the masses is either the one that comes with the system, or no computer at all, those really can't be considered Windows 8 sales.

    --
    This space unintentionally left blank.
  36. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Qubit · · Score: 2

    I've been using LibreOffice for a number of years, and love it (having written two, and typeset three, books with it), but the name is a hindrence. When I speak to my wife and use the term LibreOffice her eyes glaze over, whereas Open Office has a natural name people understand.

    Free Office would have been better than LibreOffice, or any of a dozen other names I can think of (Community Office, OpenSource Office, New Office, World Office, even abbbreviating it to L-Office ...anything like that would lead to far better name recognition).

    I personally think the name LibreOffice is pretty good. Yes, the abbreviations aren't great ("LO"? "LibO"? "LibOff"? ...), but the name itself captures a bit more about the project and its purpose than some other names out there. When I tell people about the Free Software Foundation, I have to explain to them what "Free Software" means and how it's different from Open Source. Have you ever tried to google for "Free Software"? Now try "Libre Software" -- much better :-)

    So basically you get the concept of "Free Software" + Office suite, wrapped up in a name that is much less ambiguous, at least in English. Unfortunately (fortunately?) it sets up all users/contributors to be in the position of explaining this to everyone they talk to. Tradeoffs, tradeoffs...

    I wasn't involved in selecting the name, but I wonder if there was a strong preference for keeping the word "Office" in the title. I understand that the name might help people understand that the project is an Office suite in a similar fashion to Microsoft Office, Corel Office, etc..., but perhaps a distinct name like "Firefox" or "Inkscape" would make for a much more recognizable and powerful brand?

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
  37. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by darthdavid · · Score: 1

    Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man

  38. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Pf0tzenpfritz · · Score: 1

    Lotus Symphony, IIRC.

    --
    Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
  39. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    Note: I am not the grand parent.

    I would suggest differentiating the brand from just being an 'OpenOffice.org fork'. Give it a more unique name, points for:

    • Name rolls off the tongue
    • Is easily pronounceable in most languages
    • Advertising - Full page ads in magazines (and being an opensource project, you might get a special deal)
    • Affiliate linking programs similar to the earlier days of Firefox, where users could compete with each other based on how many people they referred uniquely.
    • A distinctive large icon in the UI that notable, so potential users can recognize the use of this program in multiple places.
    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  40. Re:Bet that LibrOffice download count doesn't incl by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    nice try, fan boy. most people use the office suite that comes with their distro, the package tracking of Debian and Ubuntu prove it.

  41. Re:It is a shame that OpenOffice gets the nice nam by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    Simple. IBM gets to sell it for gazillions for those companies which demand IBM tech support under the Lotus Symphony brand. More or less like the relationship between Eclipse and Rational Application Developer.