6 ms·

You know, I don't get that. I can see how the feature set of OpenOffice or LibreOffice would be sufficient for just about anyone. However, I strongly feel that

You know, I don't get that. I can see how the feature set of OpenOffice or LibreOffice would be sufficient for just about anyone. However, I strongly feel that both Microsoft Office and Apple iWork do offer some real benefits in terms of usability over (Libre|Open)Office. Seriously, I tried this for real: My mom got a new computer. It was a Mac. We installed OpenOffice, then NeoOffice, then LibreOffice for her. Over the course of several months she never got the hang of it. She was always asking how to do stuff and could never figure out how to do simple things. Then we installed iWork and she got along fine. There is this inspector thing, and if you want to do something, you will probably find it in there. She was happy with that and even discovered some features on her own. Later we installed Microsoft Office for Mac for her (for *.doc compatibility reasons). Again, she got along fine. There is that ribbon/palette thing, and if you want to do something, you will probably find it in there. She was happy with that and even discovered some features on her own. I mean, I very much hope that a wider adoption of (Open|Libre)Office with European Officials would make the European Union invest some money in porting (Open|Libre)Office into the 21 century. But until they do, I can not recommend it to anyone with a straight face.

tehayj 15y ago
The majority of government computers in Munich already run on Linux and they run well. It does work for them. Munich rocks by the way.
- jimbobimbo 15y ago
  And if anyone's interested - "majority" is ~65%* in _eight_ years into the project: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiMux http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiMux * 9000 of 14000 as of December 2011. However, "LiMux is a project by the city council of Munich to migrate their software systems, including 14,000", so, probably the total count is actually more than 14000, which makes the percentage even less.
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    Why is eight years significant?
    - jimbobimbo 15y ago
      Because of someone is spending public money on a dubious cause that takes forever to implement?
      - burgerbrain 15y ago
        Considering the number of people currently using an operating system that is over a decade old, I think you don't quite understand the pace at which large, particularly government, projects tend to move. Eight years for 65% is quite impressive actually. Regardless, this is quite the tangent...
        jimbobimbo 15y ago
        Let's see: LiMux was based on Debian Etch (2007) until 2011, when it was moved over to Ubuntu 8.10 (Oct 2008); AzLinux, the sole survivor of similar attempts, is based on Suse 11.2 (2009) and only moving towards 11.4 (2011), but it's still in development. For the record, Windows XP SP3 was released in April 2008. So, "a decade old" OS (2008 in fact) is being replaced by basically OS from the same time period over the course of 8 years and is still in progress. I'm sorry, if I don't think it is impressive.
        burgerbrain 15y ago
        "Windows XP SP3 was released in April 2008." LOL
      - vidarh 15y ago
        You missed out the part where this is ahead of their goal. Instead of wasting money by trying an ambitious big-bang transition with according requirement for additional staff and support, they've purposefully planned out a gradual, and orderly transition. As for "spending public money on a dubious cause", they're spending roughly as much as before, but they're spending it in the local economy instead of sending it to the US, before you even count any other benefits.
  - jimbobimbo 15y ago
    ...And of course downvoting for pointing out that 65% of the project in 8 years might be not as rosy, as someone would paint it to be. Ah, gotta love to have a non-popular opinion!
    - rbanffy 15y ago
      You are being modded down because the 65% is ahead of their original schedule. This means they are investing less public money than originally planned in the migration and spending less in Microsoft licenses than they would be had the project been behind schedule.
HotKFreshSwag 15y ago
I would imagine that employees would get training for the software they use so the benefits of the software being easier to learn on your own isn't an issue for government workers or really any place where they train their employees.
Duff 15y ago
The Mayor of Munich didn't talk about the feature set available to public employees. He did talk about making "public knowledge accessible in the future". Public institutions have a moral and legal obligation to preserve certain items for posterity. The problem with a proprietary application like iWork is that it uses a closed file format that may or may not stand the test of time. I've worked with archivists in government institutions, and they are already struggling to preserve digital documents produced as late as the 1980s. As a citizen, I have the ability to learn from the primary sources that are hundreds of years old. One of my college friends spent a semester examining the papers of colonial New York State governors and looking at maps and treaties produced with Indian nations. Unfortunately, the chances are very high that our children will not be able to read many of the important papers produced from the 1980's through today. How accessible will WordStar documents be in 2060? Or Excel XP spreadsheets in 2100? There are different approaches to improving the current situation. The State of Washington chose to convert everything from native format to TIFF or PDF images. South Africa and cities like Munich are choosing to mandate the use of free and open native formats. There are ups and downs to each approach.
- pyre 15y ago
  But the free market says that the private sector will save us!
  - tjr 15y ago
    If you throw enough money at the problem, the private sector probably could figure out a way to open ancient WordStar documents. But it'd be so much easier to avoid the problem in the first place...
    - jiggy2011 15y ago
      I'm sure I could given a bit of time write a program to open wordstar documents even without a spec or reference implementation. I imagine the text itself is just stored as ASCII (even if it's not you could just brute force possible encodings until something legible came out). You might not manage to get the formatting 100% but that isn't really any worse than degredation of physical medium. Hell we cracked the german army and naval codes without even really knowing what a computer was.
sandGorgon 15y ago
There's a bigger problem than usability - I say this because each of the places that adopts any kind of workplace software usually has IT/helpdesks/consultants to handhold this kind of stuff. The biggest problem is really the spreadsheet - people can live with even Google Docs for documents and even presentations. But Excel has managed to be irreplaceable. When billion dollar termsheets (and all its macros) come bundled in the XLS format, there is no way we can get away with anything less than 100% Excel compatibility. I speak of this from experience in a failed attempt to port an accounting office to Linux - Excel was the only roadblock ... and I tried everything including Softmaker. I am willing to wager real money that if LibreOffice Calc becomes 100% compatible with XLS 2000 and XLSX formats, we would see the adoption of Linux just explode. Word and Powerpoint dont matter as much - web based offerings like Prezi are increasingly compelling alternatives.
dhs 15y ago
Let me offer a counterpoint: I started out with Word 3.0 for DOS, in 1987. From there, I went through lots of office software for PC, Mac, and Atari. A good ten years ago, I installed OpenOffice, which I have been using ever since. I never had any .doc compatibility problems. Today, I'm working for a small retail company in Madrid, Spain: Ten people, running Windows, Linux, and Mac OS. All of us are using OpenOffice. It already was that way when I came here a year ago. Until now, I heard nobody even mentioning our office software. And these people are not "computer geeks" by any measure; we sell clothes. I guess it is the reliance on Excel macros, which are not compatible with OpenOffice Calc, that prevents lots of companies from switching. If you don't depend on any of those, I honestly see no advantages in using MS Office.
- Derbasti 15y ago
  I can only tell you that my mom regularly had issues with people sending her .doc files, which she edited in OpenOffice and they came back somewhat garbled.
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    All the more reason to avoid the problem altogether and not create unreadable documents in Office. Seriously: it's not like someone won't be able to buy a copy of LibreOffice. OTOH, a government should avoid mandating the use of proprietary solutions because they exclude people who can't pay for them.
- jamesbritt 15y ago
  I wish I had your good fortune. I do almost all my development on Linux, and clients would routinely send me Word documents. Most of the time OOo was good enough for reading the content, but formatting was always in some way wonky. I could have lived with that except there was always the occasional document with table formatting OOo could not handle. In these cases the file was essentially unreadable. I would often fire up Windows, load the office docs I had been sent, and save them out as PDFs so that I could at least have reliably readable files on my development machine. I had zero confidence that OOo could correctly generate any complex document that would render identically in Office so I either sent clients PDF files created in OOo or authored the documents in Office on Windows. In fact, I much prefer using Word for anything moderately complex simply because document manipulation is just so much easier. (E.g. resizing all text in a document.) I've seen a number of testimonials from people saying OOo has worked out perfectly fine for them, and I've no doubt it's true for their circumstances. But it does not have the degree of Office interchangeability needed to make it a complete stand-in when you have to exchange Office docs that go beyond simple formatting.

tehayj 15y ago

The majority of government computers in Munich already run on Linux and they run well. It does work for them. Munich rocks by the way.

jimbobimbo 15y ago
And if anyone's interested - "majority" is ~65%* in _eight_ years into the project: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiMux http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiMux * 9000 of 14000 as of December 2011. However, "LiMux is a project by the city council of Munich to migrate their software systems, including 14,000", so, probably the total count is actually more than 14000, which makes the percentage even less.
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  Why is eight years significant?
  - jimbobimbo 15y ago
    Because of someone is spending public money on a dubious cause that takes forever to implement?
    - burgerbrain 15y ago
      Considering the number of people currently using an operating system that is over a decade old, I think you don't quite understand the pace at which large, particularly government, projects tend to move. Eight years for 65% is quite impressive actually. Regardless, this is quite the tangent...
      - jimbobimbo 15y ago
        Let's see: LiMux was based on Debian Etch (2007) until 2011, when it was moved over to Ubuntu 8.10 (Oct 2008); AzLinux, the sole survivor of similar attempts, is based on Suse 11.2 (2009) and only moving towards 11.4 (2011), but it's still in development. For the record, Windows XP SP3 was released in April 2008. So, "a decade old" OS (2008 in fact) is being replaced by basically OS from the same time period over the course of 8 years and is still in progress. I'm sorry, if I don't think it is impressive.
        burgerbrain 15y ago
        "Windows XP SP3 was released in April 2008." LOL
    - vidarh 15y ago
      You missed out the part where this is ahead of their goal. Instead of wasting money by trying an ambitious big-bang transition with according requirement for additional staff and support, they've purposefully planned out a gradual, and orderly transition. As for "spending public money on a dubious cause", they're spending roughly as much as before, but they're spending it in the local economy instead of sending it to the US, before you even count any other benefits.
- jimbobimbo 15y ago
  ...And of course downvoting for pointing out that 65% of the project in 8 years might be not as rosy, as someone would paint it to be. Ah, gotta love to have a non-popular opinion!
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    You are being modded down because the 65% is ahead of their original schedule. This means they are investing less public money than originally planned in the migration and spending less in Microsoft licenses than they would be had the project been behind schedule.

HotKFreshSwag 15y ago

I would imagine that employees would get training for the software they use so the benefits of the software being easier to learn on your own isn't an issue for government workers or really any place where they train their employees.

Duff 15y ago

The Mayor of Munich didn't talk about the feature set available to public employees. He did talk about making "public knowledge accessible in the future". Public institutions have a moral and legal obligation to preserve certain items for posterity. The problem with a proprietary application like iWork is that it uses a closed file format that may or may not stand the test of time. I've worked with archivists in government institutions, and they are already struggling to preserve digital documents produced as late as the 1980s. As a citizen, I have the ability to learn from the primary sources that are hundreds of years old. One of my college friends spent a semester examining the papers of colonial New York State governors and looking at maps and treaties produced with Indian nations. Unfortunately, the chances are very high that our children will not be able to read many of the important papers produced from the 1980's through today. How accessible will WordStar documents be in 2060? Or Excel XP spreadsheets in 2100? There are different approaches to improving the current situation. The State of Washington chose to convert everything from native format to TIFF or PDF images. South Africa and cities like Munich are choosing to mandate the use of free and open native formats. There are ups and downs to each approach.

pyre 15y ago
But the free market says that the private sector will save us!
- tjr 15y ago
  If you throw enough money at the problem, the private sector probably could figure out a way to open ancient WordStar documents. But it'd be so much easier to avoid the problem in the first place...
  - jiggy2011 15y ago
    I'm sure I could given a bit of time write a program to open wordstar documents even without a spec or reference implementation. I imagine the text itself is just stored as ASCII (even if it's not you could just brute force possible encodings until something legible came out). You might not manage to get the formatting 100% but that isn't really any worse than degredation of physical medium. Hell we cracked the german army and naval codes without even really knowing what a computer was.

sandGorgon 15y ago

There's a bigger problem than usability - I say this because each of the places that adopts any kind of workplace software usually has IT/helpdesks/consultants to handhold this kind of stuff. The biggest problem is really the spreadsheet - people can live with even Google Docs for documents and even presentations. But Excel has managed to be irreplaceable. When billion dollar termsheets (and all its macros) come bundled in the XLS format, there is no way we can get away with anything less than 100% Excel compatibility. I speak of this from experience in a failed attempt to port an accounting office to Linux - Excel was the only roadblock ... and I tried everything including Softmaker. I am willing to wager real money that if LibreOffice Calc becomes 100% compatible with XLS 2000 and XLSX formats, we would see the adoption of Linux just explode. Word and Powerpoint dont matter as much - web based offerings like Prezi are increasingly compelling alternatives.

dhs 15y ago

Let me offer a counterpoint: I started out with Word 3.0 for DOS, in 1987. From there, I went through lots of office software for PC, Mac, and Atari. A good ten years ago, I installed OpenOffice, which I have been using ever since. I never had any .doc compatibility problems. Today, I'm working for a small retail company in Madrid, Spain: Ten people, running Windows, Linux, and Mac OS. All of us are using OpenOffice. It already was that way when I came here a year ago. Until now, I heard nobody even mentioning our office software. And these people are not "computer geeks" by any measure; we sell clothes. I guess it is the reliance on Excel macros, which are not compatible with OpenOffice Calc, that prevents lots of companies from switching. If you don't depend on any of those, I honestly see no advantages in using MS Office.

Derbasti 15y ago
I can only tell you that my mom regularly had issues with people sending her .doc files, which she edited in OpenOffice and they came back somewhat garbled.
- rbanffy 15y ago
  All the more reason to avoid the problem altogether and not create unreadable documents in Office. Seriously: it's not like someone won't be able to buy a copy of LibreOffice. OTOH, a government should avoid mandating the use of proprietary solutions because they exclude people who can't pay for them.
jamesbritt 15y ago
I wish I had your good fortune. I do almost all my development on Linux, and clients would routinely send me Word documents. Most of the time OOo was good enough for reading the content, but formatting was always in some way wonky. I could have lived with that except there was always the occasional document with table formatting OOo could not handle. In these cases the file was essentially unreadable. I would often fire up Windows, load the office docs I had been sent, and save them out as PDFs so that I could at least have reliably readable files on my development machine. I had zero confidence that OOo could correctly generate any complex document that would render identically in Office so I either sent clients PDF files created in OOo or authored the documents in Office on Windows. In fact, I much prefer using Word for anything moderately complex simply because document manipulation is just so much easier. (E.g. resizing all text in a document.) I've seen a number of testimonials from people saying OOo has worked out perfectly fine for them, and I've no doubt it's true for their circumstances. But it does not have the degree of Office interchangeability needed to make it a complete stand-in when you have to exchange Office docs that go beyond simple formatting.