Is Open Office (at the time, 3.0) better than Microsoft Office (at the time, 2007)?
In short, and in my opinion, No.
But, consider a few things first…
Cons and Pros of OpenOffice over Microsoft Office
- Pros:
- Its free. Microsoft Office can be a very expensive program, depending on what specific versions you choose.
- I should note, students can get Microsoft Office Standard for around $80 in the USA
- Its formats are completely open source. Other word processors should be able to open OpenOffice documents fine, as long as the programmers included support for OpenOffice
- It comes with everything in one download, that being:
- Writer (like Word)
- Impress (like Powerpoint)
- Base (Database program, like Access)
- Math (advanced computation program)
- Calc (Like Excel)
- Comes with basic templates, but, Microsoft Office does as well (though, Microsoft does have more…)
- Highly supported on the major operating systems: Windows, Linux, MacOS 10
- Its free. Microsoft Office can be a very expensive program, depending on what specific versions you choose.
- Cons:
- It does not have a program with the same function as Outlook, so it lacks a calendar, reminder, and email client.
- It can be extremely slow on some computers
- It requires the Java Platform. I personally cringe when I see “Java Required”, since Java has far too many updates, and Java alone takes an extremely long time to install.
Pros and Cons of Microsoft Office over Open Office:
- Pros:
- Faster than OpenOffice
- Requires nothing but Windows
- Comes with Outlook, featuring email, calendar, and tasklist
- This is especially useful in medium to large business places running off domain servers, as you can easily send calendar events to others on the same network using the Exchange server
- Cons:
- The number one Con: EXPENSIVE! Expect to pay over $100, but, most people who do office work find it worthwhile, not to mention, Office isnt easily outdated for at least a few years
Cons and Pros that both share:
- Pro: Both are updated frequently, squishing bugs and managing security.
- Con: Both have failed to perfect their abilities to open other document types from other word processors, which can cause you to loose important formatting. EDIT: In the last year, these issues with formats on major competitors have been largely resolved.
Just a few of the things.
“Living in the Plastic Age” – The Buggles
“Burning Down the House” – The Talking Heads
EDIT: A few things changed. Originally published on January 2, 2009 at 12:17 am, updated at 8:16PM on February 23rd, 2010.
I would agree that lacking Outlook capabilities would put OO behind in an office environment and for that reason alone make MS Office preferable for a business. However, you made no mention of substituting the Mozilla Thunderbird-Sunbird-Lightening apps, also Open Source. Integration isn't as good, but it's a workable alternative.
While OO may be a bit slower loading up the difference would be negligible if preloader is used. Even so, it's a minor point.
I really don't see an issue with OO using Java. I strongly suspect you have Java installed on your system anyway. Maybe not, but that's my guess. And you mention as a plus that both MS-Office and OO are updated frequently, but as a negative that Java updates frequently. So what's the point?
And you have it as a Con that you have to download OO. How about being a Pro because you CAN just download it? Unless you are a troglodyte without Internet or friends to download it for you then downloading is more of a convenience than going to a store, never mind the price difference. Even with a dial-up connection one could start it downloading before bed and wake up next morning with it ready to install.
Admittedly my experience with MS-Office is somewhat stale. But it used to be that OO was far more configurable for personal preference. Maybe your omission of this is because it is no longer an issue.
Here again, as far as compatibility, does OO recognize/save in less formats?
Just my 2¢
Thunderbird with Lightning is getting much much better, but when it comes to creating appointments, sharing them on a group calendar and using distribution lists from ActiveDirectory these programs don’t quite work so well. This has been one of the bigger focuses of both Mozilla and OpenOffice.
As for the preloaded making OO start faster, that’s good for some but I have a lot of programs starting up with my computer already, and I think it’s that way for a lot of people. The number one PC-slowdown is multiple startup items.
Java: Java is getting better, worse, and better again. Most people do have it, but when it needs updating or when you do need to install it the installation takes a very long time. This becomes very cumbersome over dialup. The MS-Office and OO frequent updates being a plus are towards good security and bug fixing, where as Java often has updates that are small, but require a whole installation process to be installed again. What I especially love about the MS-Office updating is its’ integration with Microsoft Updates, allowing it to be updated along with other Windows updates. Being as I am a Linux user, OO does not bother me for updates and updates do take place in the background with system updates, however for the average Windows user you must manually download updates.
Con of downloading: Actually, I just removed that as a con. I suppose it isn’t that big of a deal.
OpenOffice used to have more problems with opening other formats, but these issues have largely been resolved fairly recently. (The article was first published in Jan of 2009, at 12:17AM… the 12:17AM part may have had some effect as well…)
The part about OpenOffice being too configurable is still debatable. Most of the options I do not even mess with. The more necessary stuff is put in front, and the more advanced, complex, confusing stuff tends to be farther back.
On the Mozilla products, I did agree that it was a valid concern of a business N/W. My main point here was that there ARE alternatives for businesses. (Google docs also). But for the individual user there is no Con here.
I agree with your comment on Pre-Loads. They are mostly a burden on the computer. I myself use NONE! Perhaps if I was largely using OO on a daily basis I would allow it. Instead I wait a few seconds longer. (See my note below on instant gratification)
"for the average Windows user you must manually download updates [for OO]" Manually, as in clicking a button with a mouse? Are you sure this is the "Instant Gratification" generation you want to grow up with?
Configurability (my spell-checker didn't like that) is a highly important issue with me. True, you only need/want what's presently useful to you. But needs & wants change, as does skills. It's always good to be able to set up your software so that it best serves your present-time requirements.
Specific question here (as I do not have a modern copy of MS-Office. Can it open an OO document?
Just lost my reply, retyping…
Google Docs: Many businesses still think that these types of services are either unprofessional, or the people in charge just refuse/won’t understand the concept. This does not, of course, mean that Google Docs is not a viable solution. The other concern with Google for all businesses is, of course, privacy and ads. Premium services will remove the ads, however companies worry that employees will not treat these online resources correctly and also worry about the legal issues associated with hosting content on an outside resource.
OpenOffice Updates:
Updates appear as a message telling you about a newer version, you click it, it takes you to a webpage, and you download the whole program again, all 100+MB of it. They may have changed this on the Windows version since I wrote this, but Linux updates it differently for me.
I read at one point that because both OO and MS-Office use an XML format, MS-Office is now able to open OO files. I quickly Googled, and found one website that said MS-Office 2007 with SP2 could open OO files but had some flaws, another website said MS-Office 2007 needs a special plugin to open OO files… of course, saving in MS-Word format in OO would be suitable, but not something that the person on the other end could do without a converter.
Don’t worry, I didn’t grow up in the Instant Gratification, money is nothing, no hard work, respect is pointless, parents-basement-forever, video gaming generation :) (but, I do enjoy my Grand Theft Auto…)
Fair enough on Grand Theft Auto. But I do find that "of course, saving in MS-Word format in OO would be suitable, but not something that the person on the other end could do without a converter" very close to political doublespeak. Or is it just a modifier issue?
An OO user can save in the MS-Word format, which is enough for a person with MS-Word to open the OO file; However, a person with only MS-Word would need a a converter to open an OO document (unless they had MS-Word 2007, providing that 2007 is actually capable of opening OO documents without too many problems).
I feel like my website has actual discussion! (as compared to only having spammers making comments that look valid).