Slashdot Mirror


Forrester Research Shows Steep Decline in Free Office Suite Stats

An anonymous reader writes that although many Linux users (and others) are at home with OpenOffice and LibreOffice, typical organizations are as addicted as ever to MS office formats. In 2011 13% of organizations had OpenOffice variants installed on some computers. Today that number has dipped to 5% according to Forrester Research. ... The poll included [shows totals] over 100% as many organizations have multiple versions of offices installed. Also surprising, Office 2003 is alive kicking and screaming as almost 1/3 of companies and governments still use it even though EOL for Office 2003 ends with XP on the same date! The good news is online cloud-based platforms are gaining traction with Google Docs and Office 365 which are not so tied to Windows on the client."

15 of 337 comments (clear)

  1. Office 365 by Sarten-X · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So to avoid locking our data into a Windows-only proprietary format, we'll lock it into a Windows-centric Microsoft-owned cloud? Oh yeah, that's going to work much better.

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    1. Re:Office 365 by OhANameWhatName · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So to avoid locking our data into a Windows-only proprietary format, we'll lock it into a Windows-centric Microsoft-owned proprietary format cloud? Oh yeah, that's going to work much better.

      FTFY

    2. Re:Office 365 by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As a practical matter, you are "locked in" to whatever Office program you use - online or otherwise. OpenOffice is free and open source, but unless you use it company-wide, you will have compatibility issues with whatever the next guy uses. For instance, if you bring your presentation to the conference room and they don't have OpenOffice installed, then you will have problems (yes, you can use PDF but that has limitations for presentations). Yes, there is no excuse for not installing a free program - except that you may not have Admin rights on the machine or other IT issues.

      At home we tried to use OpenOffice (actually LibreOffice) exclusively. We struggled, mostly with PowerPoint, but also with Word formatting glitches when collaborating. In the end, I sucked it up and loaded MS Office. My wife simply has to be compatible with the rest of the world - same reason I keep one functioning Windows box around. I can RDP into work, so I don't have that need.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    3. Re:Office 365 by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Look at OwnCloud if you want to host your own stuff "in a cloud". But the sales pitch for Office 365 is that they do all the "icky computery" stuff, like backups and upgrades.

      Of course the drawbacks of cloud are well known, too: you need to be online, you need to pay them monthly, and it can be read by anyone with a warrant (or not a warrant, if they're the NSA. )

      Vendor lock-in changes, too. Sure, you can download an Office 365 document to import into Open Office. Today. And just because the TOS says you can today doesn't mean those terms can't be changed tomorrow.

      There's a lot to dislike about cloud solutions. But they sure meet the needs of a lot of people - at least those who don't think about it too much.

      --
      John
    4. Re:Office 365 by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What is the benefit of cloud-based office software?

      If you work in an enterprise with 1000 users running Office, with cloud-Office all you need to do is give your users a hyperlink. No suites to install, no version management, no software to maintain, no IT staff that you need to keep employed. And if your users collaborate around the country or around the world you don't have all these giant email attachments flying back and forth - It's all in the cloud.

    5. Re:Office 365 by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And the NSA have a copy of everything, so there's no need to back it up yourself.

  2. The whole Open/Libre Office thing hurt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think that's the full reason for the decline, but it didn't help. At first we were pushing Open Office at work, and then one day we had to start pushing Libre Office. So, people would say "What's wrong with Open Office?" and then you say "It's complicated... blah blah blah." And then they say "Okay, we'll just use regular Microsoft Office then."

    1. Re:The whole Open/Libre Office thing hurt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the answer is staring us all in the face... To appeal to Americans, but yet stay close to Libre in meaning... LibertyOffice. They could use a red, white and blue theme.

  3. Re:Peope use what works by Goody · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hated the ribbon at first, but it's actually quite usable once you get accustomed to it. I still think the classic menu is more efficient from a UI standpoint, but saying the ribbon makes Office unusable is unfair.

    --
    Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
  4. Re:Peope use what works by Morpf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You may call me unfair from now on.

  5. Re:Peope use what works by ohieaux · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I find using Office without the ribbon unusable. I can't find where anything is at now.

    Does that mean menus are inferior? No. It means I got used to a different way of doing them.

    Sorry, but after 5+ years of dealing with the ribbon I still regularly use Google to find out how to do something I know I could do in Office. Many of the functions in tools like Excel are not easily found behind the limited ribbon.

    This whole ribbon thing was the start of a bad trend. From Unity to Metro, this dumbing down of the interface to the 3rd grade level shows how organizations see their customers.

    --
    Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.
  6. Because MSFT Office is better by hessian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There, I said it.

    I work with documents frequently.

    The open source alternatives are not as good.

    Further, pretty much anything can read/write to .docx format, which is XML-based, so you're definitely not locked in.

    There's just a discernible difference in quality and when you're trying to make a good impression on the job, that's important.

  7. Re:Peope use what works by ShakaUVM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >saying the ribbon makes Office unusable is unfair.

    People said you just need to get used to the ribbon. Guess what? I has been 6 years now, and I still look for various insert commands on the Insert Ribbon. Where they are not.

  8. Re:155 Forrester Clients by asmkm22 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    None of my clients use open source software, and it has nothing to do with Forrester.

    The fact is, if your business is in an industry where you have to share or read documents that other people send to you (such as anything in contracting, law, real estate, medical, etc), then you kind of have to stick with Microsoft Office. The free stuff just doesn't do a very good job of reading doc and docx formats (and spreadsheets are unusable if they have any macros in them). Yes, a company *could* go with free software and just take a little extra time with formatting and training, and it wouldn't be an issue for most of what they do.

    But why bother? It's just easier and cheaper for them to buy Office and move on with actual work. For that to change, entire industries would have to change, or at least the biggest players in the industries would.

  9. The way to compete might be to not compete by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the failings of all these free Office suites is that they try to be MS Office and basically if they can be distinguished as being not office then they have failed. So my suggestion is to pretend that there are no existing office suites; what do people want to do? Then you move forward from there. A good start in that direction would be a product that I use called Bean. It is a very simple Mac word writing tool. The focus is on just writing words. It is fast to load, clean of interface, and doesn't do much in the way of formatting. Another good product is Scrivener; this product focuses on what you need when writing a complicated document such as a book.

    Google docs isn't too bad and brings the whole cloud thing to the table fairly well but I just don't see your average document generating office drone begging their IT department to help them with the switch.

    Here is a simple set of examples. Years ago I worked in an office where the secretaries used Word Processors. That is they used machines with big 8 inch floppies that could only do simple 80 characters per line word processing and print it to a printer that was basically a modified typewriter. In the office there was a shiny new IBM machine with Word Perfect and a sort of good quality dot matrix printer. The secretaries were super happy when I got it working and almost immediately were fighting over it. A few years later I witnessed secretaries demanding to upgrade to windows and Word for windows because it could make the new laser printers dance. The key there was that Word Perfect 4.2 for DOS liked to display things in 80 monospaced characters. But a laser printer could do around 132 characters per line and thus a WYSIWYG interface was a huge leap. Keep in mind that all of the above secretaries were very very good at using their previous systems and thus these switches were painful but there was something they wanted so they demanded it and learned it.

    So fast forward to the present and present your average Office user with Open Office. What is the win for them? For most people there is only a loss as things like the bad dictionary, and the slightly different interface will just be a pain. Maybe the CFO is happy with the lowered cost of operating but that is not how you win the hearts and minds of the average user.

    So the key to getting people to switch over to Open Source non Office environments it to offer them something that they really want. The reality is that they will give up many office features and put up with other pain if they are getting something super cool. So matching MS Office feature for feature is not needed in the winning product.

    This is where I come up empty. As I say the simple products like bean are good enough for me. Maybe the solution lay in a cool way to accomplish the work presently being done in the MS office suite using your mobile? Something where all the existing might of MS doesn't get them very far. Plus something truly innovative would no doubt be initially dismissed by MS as "missing the point".