Linked by Debjit on Fri 15th Jul 2011 13:06 UTC
IBM "After most of the developers and Linux distributions deserted them for LibreOffice, Oracle donated OpenOffice.org to the Apache Software Foundation. IBM has surprisingly thrown its weight behind OpenOffice.org in the OpenOffice.org vs LibreOffice fight. Tomorrow IBM will announce the donation of the source code of their free office suite - IBM Lotus Symphony - to the Apache OpenOffice.org."
Thread beginning with comment 481061
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Interesting development
by madcrow on Fri 15th Jul 2011 14:01 UTC
madcrow
Member since:
2006-03-13

Symphony has a nice interface, but is well behind the current state of OO and LO "under the hood". Still, maybe the new interface, once ported to the OO codebase, will finally provide a real point of differentiation between them and will help to solidify OO as its own project rather than merely the failed parent of LO.

Edited 2011-07-15 14:01 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE: Interesting development
by jabjoe on Fri 15th Jul 2011 14:08 in reply to "Interesting development"
jabjoe Member since:
2009-05-06

Due to licensing, LO can take from OO and OO can't take from LO. If IBM provides any useful code to OO, it will make into LO. It's a very one sided relationship. OO is set up to loose even if it's developer community hadn't moved over to LO. A good podcast about this is: http://faif.us/cast/2011/jun/07/0x11/

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Interesting development
by kragil on Fri 15th Jul 2011 16:14 in reply to "RE: Interesting development"
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

Sure, but somebody still has to integrate it. It is not like TDF has a lot of resources. My guess is that the codebases will diverge if IBM gets its way, which doesn't have to be bad: http://blogs.gnome.org/bolsh/2011/07/15/openoffice-org-in-apache-th...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Interesting development
by bassbeast on Mon 18th Jul 2011 19:39 in reply to "Interesting development"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

The problem is I truly believe without SERIOUS corporate funding LO is doomed. Have you looked at the LO/OO code? It is massive, monolithic,complex as can be, and written by dozens of guys over the years. If they manage to lose the original Sun guys that worked on it for years (which I haven't heard of any of them staying, just a few of the Novell guys before they went and got bought out so they are probably gone too) then you are probably looking at a good year and a half or more just to get someone up to speed it is THAT big and complex.

The problem that the Linux community doesn't seem to want to accept is the days of the "basement hacker" died out in the late 90s. Most of the big projects now are strictly run by corporations with their own agendas. Do you know who gave the most code to the Linux 3.0 kernel? MSFT! They needed better hooks for their hypervisior so there you go.

But all the corps are spending money on SERVER and don't care about the desktop. MSFT certainly isn't gonna spend anything on LO, RH? Server is where their bread is buttered and not only does Canonical rarely if ever give any back but their latest moves seem to be toward netbooks and tablets, neither of which will be a good fit to a big hulking office suite when you could just use Google Docs.

This is why I believe if they don't get some serious sponsors they are dead in the water. Already MS Office compatibility is frankly shite on a crusty roll, with serious formatting errors and DocX files of any complexity turning into word salad and things will only get worse with each new MS Office version. How will they afford to improve the existing compatibility while keeping up with the new features and formats of MS Office?

Answer: They won't, not if some serious annual income can't be found. Oh they'll try their little hearts out, beg and hold fund raising events, but to afford the number of coders they need the tin cup model simply won't do. It is just too large and complex for a weekend coder, and pro coders with that level of exp cost good money. And I apologize about the length, but I think this is something that needs to be said and action taken. As a retailer that often hands out plenty of FOSS to my customers I'd hate to see LO die but I already have to warn them about sharing with MS Office users, I don't see how having Oracle and IBM both drop support is gonna help make that any better in the long run.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Interesting development
by lemur2 on Tue 19th Jul 2011 00:32 in reply to "RE: Interesting development"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

The problem is I truly believe without SERIOUS corporate funding LO is doomed. Have you looked at the LO/OO code? It is massive, monolithic,complex as can be, and written by dozens of guys over the years. If they manage to lose the original Sun guys that worked on it for years (which I haven't heard of any of them staying, just a few of the Novell guys before they went and got bought out so they are probably gone too) then you are probably looking at a good year and a half or more just to get someone up to speed it is THAT big and complex. The problem that the Linux community doesn't seem to want to accept is the days of the "basement hacker" died out in the late 90s. Most of the big projects now are strictly run by corporations with their own agendas.


http://fossforce.com/2011/07/openoffice-org-and-symphony-did-ibm-do...
"When the OpenOffice/LibreOffice fork occurred last September, IBM was noticeably MIA, even as practically every important FOSS player was bending over backwards to come-out in support of The Document Foundation. Novell, Red Hat, Canonical and Google immediately jumped on board, and soon afterward nearly all Linux distros dropped OpenOffice to proclaim LibreOffice as the new standard bearer open source office productivity suite.

IBM was about the only exception."


There is ample support for LibreOffice, including corporate support.

Do you know who gave the most code to the Linux 3.0 kernel? MSFT! They needed better hooks for their hypervisior so there you go. But all the corps are spending money on SERVER and don't care about the desktop.


http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Microsoft-contributes-a-lot-...
"Microsoft provided a total of 361 changes, putting it in seventh place on the list of companies and groups that contributed code to the Linux kernel. By comparison, independent developers provided 1,085 change sets to Linux 3.0, while Red Hat provided 1,000 and Intel 839."

Just keeping it real here.

MSFT certainly isn't gonna spend anything on LO, RH? Server is where their bread is buttered and not only does Canonical rarely if ever give any back but their latest moves seem to be toward netbooks and tablets, neither of which will be a good fit to a big hulking office suite when you could just use Google Docs. This is why I believe if they don't get some serious sponsors they are dead in the water. Already MS Office compatibility is frankly shite on a crusty roll, with serious formatting errors and DocX files of any complexity turning into word salad and things will only get worse with each new MS Office version. How will they afford to improve the existing compatibility while keeping up with the new features and formats of MS Office? Answer: They won't, not if some serious annual income can't be found. Oh they'll try their little hearts out, beg and hold fund raising events, but to afford the number of coders they need the tin cup model simply won't do. It is just too large and complex for a weekend coder, and pro coders with that level of exp cost good money.


Since it forked from OpenOffice, LibreOffice has released two major updates to LibreOffice.

http://www.libreoffice.org/download/new-features-and-fixes/
"Features tagged with a * are specific to LibreOffice."

http://www.libreoffice.org/download/3-4-new-features-and-fixes/

In addition to these user-facing improvements, LibreOffice has removed a lot of legacy "cruft" from the inherited OpenOffice codebase. As a result, it now loads considerably faster than OpenOffice. On my netbook, where startup times are quite slow, under Windows 7 LibreOffice starts faster than MS Office 2010.

Since it forked from OpenOffice, LibreOffice has had far more code commits to it than OpenOffice has had in the same period.

"The Apache License will allow LibreOffice to use the OpenOffice code and relicense it under the LGPL."

Just keeping it real here.

And I apologize about the length, but I think this is something that needs to be said and action taken. As a retailer that often hands out plenty of FOSS to my customers I'd hate to see LO die but I already have to warn them about sharing with MS Office users, I don't see how having Oracle and IBM both drop support is gonna help make that any better in the long run.


LibreOffice has better support for .docx than OpenOffice does. It goes without saying that both OpenOffice and LibreOffice have enormously better support for ODF than MS Office does (MS Office makes word salad of ODF documents). In fact, both OpenOffice and LibreOffice both have enormously better support for MS Office than MS Office has for OpenOffice or LibreOffice.

If you are going to warn customers about sharing with MS Office users, it is only fair to also warn your customers who are MS Office users about sharing with OpenOffice and LibreOffice users, because it is the MS Office users who are getting the lesser capability to interoperate.

Edited 2011-07-19 00:47 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2