Linked by Kroc Camen on Wed 6th Oct 2010 13:22 UTC
Features, Office In an e-mail to their announce mailing list, the The Document Foundation have shared details of their first week of public operation: "One full week has gone by since the announcement of The Document Foundation, and we would like to share some numbers with the people who have decided to follow us since the first day."
Thread beginning with comment 444395
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
hornett
Member since:
2005-09-19

I had a long reply written out countering your points, but I really can't be arsed to argue about this.

All I'm going to say is this: you're living in a dream world!

When your product has 10-20% of the install base* and your competitor has the other 80-90% it is you who must be compatible - not them!

Rightly or wrongly, nobody apart from OO.o users give a damn about OO.o formats.

* I don't believe this statistic anyway

Reply Parent Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I had a long reply written out countering your points, but I really can't be arsed to argue about this. All I'm going to say is this: you're living in a dream world! When your product has 10-20% of the install base* and your competitor has the other 80-90% it is you who must be compatible - not them!


I agree with the first point, but not the second.

Rightly or wrongly, nobody apart from OO.o users give a damn about OO.o formats. * I don't believe this statistic anyway


Here is why I agree with the first point, but not the second: if I am using OO.o and you are using MS Office, and we are collaborating and exchanging files, then it is you who are far more likely to run into a problem than I.

Despite weirdly passionate claims to the contrary by those who apparently wish great fortunes for Microsoft, OO.o is a very capable Office suite. It entirely meets the requirements of well over 90% of Office suite users. It can easily be installed (from just one installation master) for no cost on as many machines as you own, and there will be no-one wanting to audit you for license compliance.

This is a powerful case for installing OpenOffice over the more mainstream competition.

There are a number of governments around the world who are officially adopting ODF, the native format of OpenOffice, as the data exchange format. MS Office has very significant issues in dealing with this format.

To arrive at the 10% to 20% installed base figure, the fonts installed on real-world office machines were interrogated. This method of detecting the Office suite installed was shown to be over 95% accurate. There is a fair amount of credibility to the figure. It tallies well enough with actual download counts of the installation packages.

OK, so one Office suite has good interoperability (not perfect, but good), is free, is capable and powerful enough to meet the needs of over 90% of users (probably more), and carries no risk of license non-compliance problems.

The other Office suite that you might consider carries a not-to-be-readily-dismissed purchase price, requires you to employ a license compliance manager, requires strict control over where and what is installed on your machines, has severe interoperability issues with between 10% and 20% of other Office suites (including the format that may be used by your nation's government), and which is mid-way through a transition in file formats that is guaranteed to cause you data interchange and data archiving headaches. It does not support any long-term recognised standard format, and the "standard" format that it does support is even called "transitional" to warn you that it isn't the final format.

I leave it up to the readers to weight the pros and cons.

Edited 2010-10-07 22:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2