3 ms·
Office formats have also, as mentioned in the source link, been an open standard for fifteen years. It may not be the better open standard, but it is an open st
by ocdtrekkie 8mo ago
Office formats have also, as mentioned in the source link, been an open standard for fifteen years. It may not be the better open standard, but it is an open standard, and it works fine, including with LibreOffice's software, for many years.
This is like if Google was whining someone sent them a JPG instead of a WebP. Not invented here syndrome more than an actual openness complaint.
It's also stupid and self-defeating: The top reason people disregard LibreOffice as an option at work is because people believe it's incompatible with the Office everyone else uses. And it's NOT! But if LibreOffice itself keeps promoting misinformation about its own software, it's going to continue to be obscure in business.
LibreOffice is better software and deserves better marketing than this incredibly dumb claim made above.
- einpoklum 8mo ago> Office formats have also, as mentioned in the source link, been an open standard for fifteen years. No, they haven't. See: https://fossforce.com/2026/02/why-ooxml-is-not-a-standard-format-for-office-documents/ https://fossforce.com/2026/02/why-ooxml-is-not-a-standard-fo... I mean, ODF has been a standard; what Microsoft uses isn't.
- ocdtrekkie 8mo agoWell, first of all, your source is the same author as the blog post. Second, a messy standard is still a standard. And the biggest problem is by claiming it doesn't handle OOXML well, LibreOffice sabotages its own marketability. This blog is exactly what you write if you want to torpedo LibreOffice's success in the business environment. You can not like Office or Office's file formats, but it's important to understand that it is table stakes for LibreOffice to promote how well it handles those formats and how safely it can be used as a replacement for Microsoft Office in an environment dominated by it.