3 ms·

If they had focused on true interop with Office a decade ago, then they'd have more traction (and credibility) here. Back when Office was absurdly expensive, t

If they had focused on true interop with Office a decade ago, then they'd have more traction (and credibility) here. Back when Office was absurdly expensive, the need for a free/Free option was pretty huge. I don't see that need now -- I mean, I get that there are free-as-in-freedom types who will always choose LO over MS Office, and good on them for it, but that's an uncommon position. In every collaborative business context I've ever been in, using something OTHER than true-blue MS Office was a recipe for sadness. This-or-that formatting wouldn't work. Macros wouldn't work. Templates and styles wouldn't work. It's always been a nightmare. We'd put up with it if there was literally no other way, but now that Office is both affordable and much, much more broadly available, I don't see any reason to experiment with LO at all.

davidgerard 5y ago
I sincerely believe this is actually a made-up problem. It has literally always been an excuse, not an actual issue. My evidence: nobody EVER bags Google Docs over its terrible DOCX compatibility. It makes an absolute hash of DOCX. Have you ever heard anyone complain of this? No you haven't. The claim that this was the killer issue was always just an excuse.
- fartcannon 5y ago
  FUD, to use the old term.
- ubermonkey 5y ago
  >My evidence: nobody EVER bags Google Docs over its terrible DOCX compatibility. It makes an absolute hash of DOCX. This is probably because most orgs that use Google Docs don't care about DOCX compatibility. But the vast majority of offices use MS Office, so Docx compatibility is a big damn deal. But! I will say that I absolutely HAVE heard many, many people reference the lack of docx compatibility as a reason NOT to use Google Docs -- or anything else that isn't Office. Even if we entertain your idea, though, and this isn't really a reason people don't use LO (even though it is), what then is the REAL reason people don't use LO?

davidgerard 5y ago

I sincerely believe this is actually a made-up problem. It has literally always been an excuse, not an actual issue. My evidence: nobody EVER bags Google Docs over its terrible DOCX compatibility. It makes an absolute hash of DOCX. Have you ever heard anyone complain of this? No you haven't. The claim that this was the killer issue was always just an excuse.

fartcannon 5y ago
FUD, to use the old term.
ubermonkey 5y ago
>My evidence: nobody EVER bags Google Docs over its terrible DOCX compatibility. It makes an absolute hash of DOCX. This is probably because most orgs that use Google Docs don't care about DOCX compatibility. But the vast majority of offices use MS Office, so Docx compatibility is a big damn deal. But! I will say that I absolutely HAVE heard many, many people reference the lack of docx compatibility as a reason NOT to use Google Docs -- or anything else that isn't Office. Even if we entertain your idea, though, and this isn't really a reason people don't use LO (even though it is), what then is the REAL reason people don't use LO?