Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 29th Mar 2008 23:02 UTC
Permalink for comment 307364
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-10-08
That would be nearly my point. The users I have to support are using OpenOffice for some years now, they're using it cross-platform - the same application and the same files on Linux, BSD, Solaris and, yes, it's true, on "Windows"; some of them who had tried a MICROS~1 office product started complaining: "Hey, this can't export to PDF!" or "Automatic sectioning, numbering and referencing leads to strange results." up to "You tell me: Why is it sooo slow?!" And the best one: "What's this? It doesn't support Linux?!" :-)
From my individual experience, OpenOffice is a great office suite. For real typesetting success I still prefer LaTeX.
Thanks to ODF, stand-alone applications can produce OpenOffice documents as their output (!) so they can be opened, changed and saved (!) with OpenOffice. For some appliances, this is a real good idea.
The development of new features is impressing, but that's what I always may say: Home users treat their office applications (no matter who made them) like a worse typewriter; they won't benefit from it, because they don't want to enter the "bright and scary" world of document and section templates, adjustable margins, multicolumn alignment and automatic enumeration. :-)