LibreOffice vs OpenOffice.org

[sawchmo]

Thank you much. Will download it right now and start working with it.

[/a3]

I just tried to download and install the latest version of OpenOffice and it now seems that you can't install it without paying for support. The costs are not high but I think Oracle's reasons are now becoming clear.

That's what this website is for!

User community support forum for OpenOffice.org, LibreOffice, StarOffice, NeoOffice, OOo4kids and OOoLight

[Horus]

I've just tried LibreOffice and I have to say that it starts up a lot faster than OOo. For years, every new version of OOo takes a bit longer to start up than its previous version, and it's a good news that LO has broken this "tradition".

It's been more than 3 months that Oracle had offered OOo to Apache but it's still not clear about the BIG question of LibreOffice vs OpenOffice.org. I've been waiting for some sort of official announcement from both sides, but there's still nothing. For me, here are my questions:
* Will they merge back again and work together as a whole in the future?
* Or will they just go apart and become concurrent/rival applications with features found in one but not the other and vice versa?
* What about odt, ods, etc? Will the format be independent of OOo and LO? If yes, then in the long term, OOo vs LO will just like the "text editor war" and it'll become nightmare to end-users: "nightmare" because users might need to install several applications to access different features, just like I've installed several text editors in the same computer because "some have this and some have that but sometimes I need this and sometimes I need that"!

So, will there be any official announcement??

[Villeroy]

My chrystal ball indicates clearly that the Apache foundation will publish OOo 3.4 next year.
After 5 more years, LibreOffice will be a free implementation of the OOXML "standard" while still offering ODF as exchange format. The OOo desktop application will be part of a rich tool set around ODF-XML and cloud technologies.

[Hagar Delest]

I've just tried LibreOffice and I have to say that it starts up a lot faster than OOo. For years, every new version of OOo takes a bit longer to start up than its previous version, and it's a good news that LO has broken this "tradition".

I don't see any difference in the time needed by LibO vs. OOo. It may come from the fact that you had kept your OOo profile. It's better to reset it for major upgrades. Old files can cause trouble with new structure/management from the new version.

[Horus]

OK, I've removed the OOo profile directories (%APPDATA%\OpenOffice.org and similar directories -- I suppose it's what you meant) but I still find that LO is opening a bit faster than OOo.

Well, maybe you would say it's psychological. I don't know, maybe. But there's at least one thing that LO 3.4.3 beats OOo 3.3: it's the support of "data table" in xlsx format and it's something I use a lot in Excel and it's one of the reasons why I still need to keep MSO (cf image below):

Well, for the moment, "table" support in LO is very limited but at least, it's quite promising and looks better than in OOo.

[Villeroy]

Nothing changed in that respect. There are no "data tables" in the ODF spreadsheet model but since OOo1.x there used to be named database ranges (Data>Define...) separated from named ranges (Insert>Names).
Novell belongs to Microsoft while being the main contributor to the LibreOffice project. They do have better import filters for the obsolete OOXML format. It may be that OOo could not recognize the data table and/or auto-filter in OOXML.

[Dunk_the_Lunk]

Not sure about windows/linux versions but on my Imac (G5 - MacOS 10.5) and MacBook Pro (Core i5 MacOS 10.6) LO 3.4.3 is significantly quicker than OOo 3.3 (both fresh installs). Opening the same 16KB Writer document on the MacBook LO takes approx 7 seconds and OOo 3.3 takes approx 12 seconds.....

[Horus]

Off-topic begins:

Nothing changed in that respect. There are no "data tables" in the ODF spreadsheet model but since OOo1.x there used to be named database ranges (Data>Define...) separated from named ranges (Insert>Names).

You mean named database ranges can do more or less the same thing as Excel table?
I've been looking for the way to do (almost) the same thing as Excel table in OOO calc for a long time but I can't find anything. Maybe I'm not using the good keywords for search. It would be nice if there's an article showing how. I've seen the "differences in use between Calc and Excel" in OOO wiki but it's not there.
Off-topic ends.

Novell belongs to Microsoft while being the main contributor to the LibreOffice project. They do have better import filters for the obsolete OOXML format. It may be that OOo could not recognize the data table and/or auto-filter in OOXML.

Novell belongs to Microsoft?
OOXML is already obsolete? What is its successor?

[Villeroy]

While editing documents, ODF is the one and only relevant file format.
When you send documents to others for reading, PDF or XHTML might be the only relevant export formats.
When you send documents to co-editors using MS Office, xls/doc/ppt is the best suitable file format which is very well supported by LibreOffice/OOo and 100% supported by MSOffice.
For perfect compatibility the MSOffice user has to install the ODF plug-in from Sun Microsystems representing the ODF file filters of OOo 3.2.

Sorry, I have no clear idea about data ranges in Excel. But I'm pretty sure that Base can do a lot more.
Database ranges store import settings, filter settings and sort orders. They keep track of record sets.

Novell would not exist anymore without MS money.

OOXML has been bribed through the international standardization boards to fight the ODF standard.
OOXML is made for incompatibility while having something cute with "Office and Open" in the name.

OOXML is completely obsolete for all users of LibreOffice, OpenOffice.org and the vast majority of MS Office users as well.
Each new MSOffice feature that can be stored in OOXML is not availlable in LibreOffice nor OpenOffice.org nor any other software.
When using OOXML in any software other than MSO2007 or 2010 you may get errors, broken documents or you do not see some details.

[PGAGA]

Thursday, September 22, 2011

[1] For ODF import into Word the filters on the following page are better than the Sun product, which is a cut down version of StarOffice:

http://odf-converter.sourceforge.net/download.html

[2] The reason LO may load faster is the removal of excess code. That may also be the reason for some of the bugs which have been reported.

Phil

[italovignoli]

I have read quite a lot of FUD about Novell and LibreOffice, which I would like to clarify.

Novell is an independent company, which in the past had a regular contract with Microsoft for the development of OOXML filters. Today, that part of the company has been renamed back as SUSE, and has renewed the contract with Microsoft for the development of OOXML filters. The relationship between the parties ends here. Spreading FUD on Novell qualifies a person, and does not need any additional comment. FUD, by the way, has been invented by IBM, and in fact Rob Weir is the champion of FUD about Novell.

TDF and LibreOffice are committed to ODF more than any other company, and key members of TDF have done for the promotion of TDF more than any other organization. LibreOffice will always support ODF, but will also support as many other formats as possible in the interest of the user. Here, again, IBM is spreading FUD on LibreOffice, but I think that users should have their own opinion on the subject.

[Hagar Delest]

But at least the political decision of OOo was not to support OOXML (i.e. saving).
If you allow users to save in OOXML, why should they bother looking at another format?

[Villeroy]

I have read quite a lot of FUD about Novell and LibreOffice, which I would like to clarify.

Novell is an independent company, which in the past had a regular contract with Microsoft for the development of OOXML filters.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/109868319.html

[italovignoli]

So, to support your point you provide the link to a press release announcing that Novell has been acquired by Attachmate? Funny. As far as I know, Attachmate is not Microsoft, although they might have commercial relationships with Microsoft. Sun used to have commercial relationships with Microsoft, as Oracle and IBM and many other companies. I do not see a commercial relationship with Microsoft as a problem, but - of course - you might have a different opinion.

If - on the contrary - you are relating to the other piece of information, i.e. the sale of patents to a consortium whose members are Apple, Microsoft, Oracle and VMWare, you should be aware that thanks to the action of RedHat and the supporting evidence provided by TDF in private hearings with the DoJ the terms of that agreement have been modified and the patents cannot be used to limit the development of free software.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/April/11-at-491.html

TDF is independent from any software vendor. Our bylaws state that people affiliated to a company can not exceed 30% of members of any governing body, and this is true for the Engineering Steering Committee as well as for the Board of Directors.

[tcongo24]

The main reason I switched to LibreOffice was they included the ability to open WPS files ...A product of Microsoft Works but other then that I haven't noticed any differences between the two..

[henke54]

Had the Apache project that IBM and Oracle decided to establish over this summer been started last year instead of this, there is every chance that TDF and LibreOffice might not have happened.

http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon- ... /index.htm

[memewin]

Openoffice.org has always been great software, even back when it was StarOffice, and still is. LibreOffice is based on Openoffice.org and as such is a great product as well, with features that some want.

From StarOffice, to Sun, to Oracle, to Apache Foundation, the project has gone through to much and still kept working together to stop working together now. I find it promising that IBM is willing to provide the Symphony standalone code to the Apache Foundation. While some may shun IBM's contribution with FUD, in my view IBM has not been detrimental to any of the many open source projects they have contributed time, code, or other resources to.

Oddly enough, I really liked the Symphony user interface but stopped using it because it was not open. Others do not like the Symphony interface, but one of the various other offshoots or openoffice.org itself for various reasons. OO4Kids is great for some, OOLite for others, others LibreOffice, and others OpenOffice.org.

Personally I use OpenOffice.org because the licensing is not an issue with me and the OpenOffice.org features are what I need. I am overjoyed to see the Apache Foundation handling OpenOffice.org since they have a wealth of experience with open source, and working well with others to bring great things to users.