Is OpenOffice.org a Threat? Microsoft Thinks So

[markwolfe Veteran]

If Microsoft want to keep Office in the hunt, I feel they need to price it a bit more competitively. Granted, the pro version of Office is very powerful, but at the prices Microsoft charge (I am referring to normal retail, not student licensing) they may be likely to loose customers as OO gets better and better.

A lot of OEM sales are made, just because it is so convenient for people to order it pre-installed. A tidy profit for both Microsoft and the OEM.

People like my mother-in-law probably don't even know there is an alternative. They just think they have to buy Microsoft Office to open .doc files.

[still1]

No offense for OO but it sucks. It uses more resource and its slow compared to MS office.

It has less features than MS office suite. Microsoft dont have to worry about it for now.

[Xenomorph]

What many people fail to realise is OpenOffice doesnt have 1/10 of the budget Microsoft Office does.

If you give 2 children different amount of ingrediants to create the most extravagent meal they can, the one with the more ingrediants surely has the better chance?

More money doesn't make something better. Think of all the millions spent on shovelware and junk software.

Lots of free software comes out that is well polished and works great.

Does Mozilla have a larger budget with Firefox than Microsoft does?? Firefox is preferred by many people over IE. More money thrown at IE doesn't make it better.

[FloatingFatMan]

Oh, I guess you are new to this "Microsoft" thing. They will undoubtedly use Silverlight for the "optimal customer experience", and that will exclude Linux users. Microsoft doesn't release Silverlight for Linux, and Moonlight is well behind the Silverlight release. And you know Microsoft will require the latest Silverlight for it to work correctly. ;)

Well, if they do... It'll provide the Moonlight folks with some additional incentive to catch up then, won't it? :p

[fhpuqrgrpgvirzhpujbj]

OO still lacks support for Full-Color PNGS and is pretty slow.

MSO All the way.

[fhpuqrgrpgvirzhpujbj]

Oh, I guess you are new to this "Microsoft" thing. They will undoubtedly use Silverlight for the "optimal customer experience", and that will exclude Linux users. Microsoft doesn't release Silverlight for Linux, and Moonlight is well behind the Silverlight release. And you know Microsoft will require the latest Silverlight for it to work correctly. ;)

I just tried web apps and it doesn't appear to use silverlight.

[4CxbqFxVnstmA Veteran]

Is this a thread about which is better, OO.org or MSO? Or was it originally about Microsoft feeling threatened by OO.org?

It is probably not insane for them to feel a bit threatened. When I start my own business, all my computers will have Linux and OO.org on them, as that makes good business sense. If any of my employees want to use MSO, they will be welcome to buy it themselves, along with a Windows license, and run it under VirtualBox-OSE.? :yes:

[farmeunit]

No offense for OO but it sucks. It uses more resource and its slow compared to MS office.

It has less features than MS office suite. Microsoft dont have to worry about it for now.

The majority of people only use 10% of the features that are available in either office suite, so it really doesn't matter who has "the most" features. And the average consumer doesn't pay attention to slowness or resources as most of them use Norton or McAfee since they are what come on computer generally be default and they are notorious resource hogs. They just think they NEED MS Office because it's been beaten into their heads. I work at a school and that's generally the thought of most of the people there. I suggest OpenOffice for all the kids and they have absolutely no problem using OO.

I agree for the hardcore users, they might need MS Office, but that's probably 10% of the population.

[PGHammer]

I use both OO and MSO, unfortunately, I have to admit, I enjoyed MSO more than OO.

I've also used both MSO and OO (in fact, I had both installed on Windows Vista) because of one advantage OO had (yes; I said *had*) - speed of converting Word files to PDF. Word 2010 x64 (though still in beta) has completely erased that advantage (and supports conversion to ODF as well). Worse (for OO) is that it still lacks an e-mail program (most of the Office SKUs include Outlook). The big advantage OO has (in fact, currently the *only* advantage OO has) is *price* (the fact that it's free).

Most of the objections to Microsoft Office aren't due to size, or features, or code-bloat - they are due to cost.

Everyone wants a bargain.

[nekrosoft13]

Someone please wake me up when they get updating right and not require bloated 200 MB installers on Windows every time.

uhh, 200mb, thats like 30 seconds download,oh the horror

[etempest]

Ms Should be

Office (as long as it's the "standard") will be safely locked in with most busniesses.

However, the poor college student (that doesn't pirate it), small family, etc that just needs something that works and using the "basic" features, it can be a threat.

[PGHammer]

The majority of people only use 10% of the features that are available in either office suite, so it really doesn't matter who has "the most" features. And the average consumer doesn't pay attention to slowness or resources as most of them use Norton or McAfee since they are what come on computer generally be default and they are notorious resource hogs. They just think they NEED MS Office because it's been beaten into their heads. I work at a school and that's generally the thought of most of the people there. I suggest OpenOffice for all the kids and they have absolutely no problem using OO.

I agree for the hardcore users, they might need MS Office, but that's probably 10% of the population.

While that may be true, OO has one striking lack, compared to Microsoft Office - e-mail.

While Outlook is thought of primarily as a client for Microsoft Exchange, it's also a solid POP and IMAP client (I first used Outlook as, of all things, a fax program, back before I had broadband).

OO does not include an e-mail program, and, quite honestly, I have to wonder why. (The excuse that Linux already includes serviceable e-mail programs doesn't work for Windows OO users, and *any* productivity suite that doesn't support e-mail is passe. Why else is Microsoft Works going away, and being replaced with either Office Starter or Office Home and Business - the latter of which includes Outlook?)

OO has a price advantage; however, that is OO's only advantage (and against Office 2010, which is in public beta, it lacks even that).

[Xilo]

OpenOffice.org is a buggy piece of crap.

I can't stand using it.

[zhangm Supervisor]

OpenOffice.org is a buggy piece of crap.

I can't stand using it.

I never really found it to be buggy, but it was certainly slow starting up, and irritatingly laggy even after it had finished loading.

[PGHammer]

Ms Should be

Office (as long as it's the "standard") will be safely locked in with most busniesses.

However, the poor college student (that doesn't pirate it), small family, etc that just needs something that works and using the "basic" features, it can be a threat.

That is what Office Home and Student (which will become Home and Business when Office 2010 ships) is about. It is the alternative to Office Starter 2010 (especially for existing PCs); further, unlike OO, x64 is available *and* it includes an e-mail program (Outlook). Everybody (especially families and those poor college students) needs e-mail software (especially e-mail software that supports IMAP, the favorite of a lot of colleges) and Outlook has probably the best IMAP client going, period.

OO could have been a threat; however, following Microsoft's old mistake of ignoring e-mail (which Microsoft is correcting) is coming back to bite it.

[_neutrino Veteran]

Honestly I Use Open Office, However i also use Microsoft Office.

[BigBoobLover]

Worse (for OO) is that it still lacks an e-mail program (most of the Office SKUs include Outlook). The big advantage OO has (in fact, currently the *only* advantage OO has) is *price* (the fact that it's free).

The fact that it doesn't include an e-mail program is kind of outweighed by the fact that there are quite a few good free e-mail programs out there that can easily be used with it (such as Thunderbird).

[scratch42069]

I'd take Open Office hands down for the features you get for the cost, which is free. All I need is a basic word processor and every now and then a spread sheet program and Open Office provides that nicely.

[farmeunit]

While that may be true, OO has one striking lack, compared to Microsoft Office - e-mail.

While Outlook is thought of primarily as a client for Microsoft Exchange, it's also a solid POP and IMAP client (I first used Outlook as, of all things, a fax program, back before I had broadband).

I agree with that, but for the MAJORITY of people, Outlook is not needed. Most people use web mail anyway, because they don't know how to setup an email client, or they can use Outlook Express, Thunderbird, Evolution, etc.

I use and love Outlook myself. I just don't think it's necessarily a deal breaker. From a business perspective, maybe, but not for most people.

[Xenomorph]

Do people not understand that "Office" is more than just a word processor and spreadsheet?

Most of the Microsoft Office usage I've seen is OUTLOOK.

OpenOffice.org has no Outlook equivalent. You can get a word processor or spreadsheet anywhere. Outlook is a fully integrated Exchange client with communication and collaboration that big companies use.

There is no substitute if you use Exchange. You will need Outlook.

Apple made some nice attempts to integrate with Exchange with Mac OS X 10.6. But there is nothing from OpenOffice.org like that.

If you don't use Exchange, then OpenOffice.org becomes an option. If you're willing to give up the speed and functionality of MS Office of course.

[farmeunit]

Do people not understand that "Office" is more than just a word processor and spreadsheet?

Most of the Microsoft Office usage I've seen is OUTLOOK.

OpenOffice.org has no Outlook equivalent. You can get a word processor or spreadsheet anywhere. Outlook is a fully integrated Exchange client with communication and collaboration that big companies use.

There is no substitute if you use Exchange. You will need Outlook.

Apple made some nice attempts to integrate with Exchange with Mac OS X 10.6. But there is nothing from OpenOffice.org like that.

If you don't use Exchange, then OpenOffice.org becomes an option. If you're willing to give up the speed and functionality of MS Office of course.

You can use Evolution and Thunderbird with Exchange.

[Solid Knight]

When it comes to comparing OOo to Office people tend to forget the primary customer of Office and instead focus on home needs. OOo really only competes with a subset of home users and some very small businesses. In a large organization Office wipes the floor with OOo.

[OmART]

OO still lacks support for Full-Color PNGS and is pretty slow.

MSO All the way.

Huh?? Could you explain?

[attachment] - Files in those documents are 32 Bit PNG (24 Bit Color + 8 Bit Alpha) :-/

[Growled Member]

I'd take Open Office hands down for the features you get for the cost, which is free. All I need is a basic word processor and every now and then a spread sheet program and Open Office provides that nicely.

That's all a lot of people need. I think it's foolish to buy a $400 program just to write a letter occasionally. Office is sort of like Photoshop. A lot of well meaning people convince them that they have to have it, so they go and buy it.

OO is not as good as Office, especially for advanced users like me. But for your average user, OO is just fine.

[MR_Candyman]

I am one of only 2 people in this thread that PREFERS OO over MS Office. I just find it to be a nicer program to use, and I have yet to run across anything I've needed to do that it couldn't.