Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Why Google Should Embrace OpenOffice.org

Posted by timothy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 05:04 PM
from the because-it's-soft-and-squishy dept.
CWmike writes "Preston Gralla has a decent idea that could move the office needle: If Google really wanted to deliver a knockout punch to Microsoft, it would integrate OpenOffice with Google Docs, and sell support for the combined suite to small businesses, medium-sized business, and large corporations. Given the reach of Google, the quality of OpenOffice, and the lure of free, it's a sure winner. Imagine if a version of it were available as a Web service from Google, combined with massive amounts of Google storage. Integrated with Google Docs, it would also allow online collaboration. For those who wanted more features, the full OpenOffice suite would be available as a client — supported by Google. wouldn't be at all surprised to see this happen. Just yesterday, IBM announced that it was selling support for its free Symphony office suite. It's not too much of a stretch to imagine Google doing the same for OpenOffice, after it integrates it with Google Docs."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Why? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by prockcore (543967) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:10PM (#23660099)
    What does OpenOffice offer the average user that Google Docs is lacking?

    And why would Google use OpenOffice to fill that gap when they could just improve Google Docs?
    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by peragrin (659227) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:21PM (#23660303)
      what really gets me is that google docs uses Open Document format as it's default output. use open office locally and google docs on the road for the same document.

      you can swap back and forth. You can use google docs to store your files pass US customs and download them again quickly and easily once you have passed customs.

      i am not seeing the point of the article.
    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by vux984 (928602) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:32PM (#23660477)
      What does OpenOffice offer the average user that Google Docs is lacking?

      Not running in a browser on AJAX, the stupidest application 'platform' ever congealed?
      Working reliably when offline?
      Working reliably with large documents, with embedded images etc?
      Performance? Even if you thought OO.o was slow, you'll be amazed at how badly you can bog things down if you implement it in mighty javascript, inside a browser.

      And why would Google use OpenOffice to fill that gap when they could just improve Google Docs?

      You mean by making google docs a real application instead of a gimped web based browser hosted mess? Why re-invent the wheel? Just enhance oo.o to store docs to google's servers and call it a day.

      Personally though, I don't know why anyone would even BOTHER with google docs. If you want web based document access I think we should be striving for remote desktop hosting and application publishing.

      Citrix already has this, and if you've ever used MSOffice as a published Citrix web application, you'll know what I'm talking about. None of this flaky ajax crap. Accessible from anywhere. Documents exist on the corporate server. It costs a bundle to license though and I don't know if it supports linux. -- but isn't that where FLOSS shines? I'd rather see this over another half baked AJAX app.
      • Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Threni (635302) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:55PM (#23660849)
        > Not running in a browser on AJAX, the stupidest application 'platform' ever congealed?

        Web apps are shit, period. If you want security, run in a virtual environment, or just stick with apps from people you trust, like Google.

        Otherwise you get flaky, embarrassing, unresponsive bollocks which fails the second there's a network problem anywhere between the servers in the States, thousand of miles away from me, right up to my ISP and the little bits of metal connecting to me. Plus my data isn't being sent halfway around the world for some spotty bedroom boy to packet sniff and/or fuck about with. That's the worse possible solution.

        Surely you want the opposite - apps downloaded from the net, run locally, with internet access as and when needed - infrequently, probably.
      • Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)

        by dave562 (969951) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:58PM (#23660877) Journal
        Citrix already has this, and if you've ever used MSOffice as a published Citrix web application, you'll know what I'm talking about. None of this flaky ajax crap. Accessible from anywhere. Documents exist on the corporate server. It costs a bundle to license though and I don't know if it supports linux.

        And if you want to take it to another level, you can implement something like this...

        http://www.sonicwall.com/us/products/Secure_Remote_Access.html

        It will do RDP or Citrix connections via a web browser, no VPN client software required. So anywhere you have a web browser and internet access, you have access to your applications and documents. Of course it isn't free, but when it comes to IT, I find that you get what you pay for.

      • Re:Why? (Score:4, Informative)

        by WhiteWolf666 (145211) <moornblade at gmail.com> on Wednesday June 04 2008, @06:06PM (#23661011) Homepage Journal
        Just use FreeNX+OpenOffice.org. Free, works great with Linux, does the job at least as good as Citrix, if not better.

        X11 is a wonderful thing, and extensions to it like FreeNX are quite incredible.
      • Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Firehed (942385) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @06:09PM (#23661063) Homepage
        For the most part I agree with you. However, remote access doesn't offer the realtime multi-user collaboration that's a part of Google's online office tools. Setting up centralized documents on the cheap is quite possible these days - I work for a company that sells that kind of thing, but for all intents and purposes it's an interface wrapped around a glorified subversion repository with some unrelated features that deal with the rest of that whole intranet thing. Hell, truly dumb it down and just have an FTP server. DropBox is one of those newer Web2.0 things that's basically a fancy wrapper around FTP (once again, we're starting to realize that user interface and ease of use is key to adoption); it's only meant for one user at a time and is more of a personal cross-computer document syncing tool. However, none of those to my knowledge deal with what happens when two people want to work on the same document at the same time. What we have at work has a check-in/check-out system, and DropBox would probably just give one user a read-only copy (since it treats it more like a network drive than an ftp server, and that's what happens on a local network). Google Docs/Spreadsheets, on the other hand, allows multiple users to edit the same document in real time and have each other's changes pushed to all other editors as they're being made, much more along the lines of SubEthaEngine [codingmonkeys.de].

        Granted, not a whole lot of people need that kind of functionality most of the time. For what I do, it's actually a great asset - it sure beats the hell out of emailing a document back and forward a dozen times over the space of ten minutes. And the functionality, again for what I do, is plenty - I'm just sharing lists of ideas with colleagues and clients 95% of the time. All of your points against Google Docs are very much valid, and I was going to point them out myself. The accessibility during offline time is the real killer for me, as I don't have a cellular card for my laptop and can't be bothered to pay for wifi at hotspots, so it certainly can't replace a desktop text editor. Some combination of a desktop editor, the "push FTP" of DropBox, and the realtime collaboration of Google Docs would be THE winner, but that's asking for a lot.

        At the end of the day, there's no one tool that's right for everyone right now. OOo is free, functional, and will get the job done for most people. Word is expensive, more functional and stable, somewhat faster, and has advanced features for power users that most people will never go near. Google Docs is free, limited in functionality, but doesn't require installation or local storage.

        (Yes, I know I didn't really address the whole Word/Citrix thing; however, assuming you have VPN access then you're already able to get to the central repository and then there should be no reason to bother with the published web app through Citrix thing since you could just locally install OOo/Word - the file access is the crucial thing there more so than the app itself. Yes, this still isn't quite what you meant, but humor me)
      • Re:Why? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by ady1 (873490) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @06:21PM (#23661217)
        I have used Citrix and to be honest, it is horrible. A royal pain in the ass to use on a regular basis. I would take Google docs any day over that torture.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              Google Docs, when being run over a fast computer with a decent network connection is just as joy to use.

              No. No its not. Google Docs isn't as full featured, and javascript in a browser isn't remotely as powerful or as flexible as what can be done with a native app either run locally, or even hosted via Citrix. There really is no comparison.

              Now Google has no former experience or desire to go in application hosting business.

              Really? I'll buy the no former experience, but pretty much everything they do lately is
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          A Linux Citrix client has existed for a while.

          That's not the point.

          We need a Linux based application *server*, preferably one that is FLOSS.
          Publishing OO.o from Windows 2003 Server and Citrix Presentation Server to a linux client almost defeats the point if you ask me.
        • Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by vux984 (928602) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @11:36PM (#23663855)
          The AJAX that Google uses for Google Docs certainly isn't.

          It isn't remotely on par with a native app either. And even google's flagship gmail -- it isn't that hard to confuse the UI to the point buttons stop working, context menus won't appear/disappear or render funny, while javascript is just grinding along in the background away slowing it all to a crawl, while the page loading icon spins endlessly...

          Sure I've seen MUCH worse. But really all AJAX 'web2.0' apps just aren't very robust.
    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by moderatorrater (1095745) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:37PM (#23660563)
      First, it doesn't operate entirely over the network ajax-style. For most things, you don't need the document to be online and updated live. When I'm using Google Docs, especially the spreadsheet program, it's dirt slow and slows down the rest of my browsing, too.

      Second, it provides an interface that's familiar to people, better than google docs. For a nerd like me or most of the people on slashdot, google docs works just fine; for people like my parents, OpenOffice is more familiar. Google can make internet browsers sing and dance, but the browser just can't replicate the experience as well.

      Third, it gets existing OpenOffice users to switch to google docs. The ability to save to google docs as easily as to the hard drive would be a compelling feature, at least to me. I run a DnD game online and I use google doc's spreadsheet to manage characters; this would make it a lot easier for me and my players to use it all.

      I would use this for my DnD game and most of my documents that I could possibly want in multiple places (and that wouldn't be interesting to law enforcement or identity thieves).
      • It's analogous to using $your_favourite_mail_client to access Gmail via IMAP. You still have the web interface if you want/need to use it but you can also take advantage of a familiar application running locally that's specifically designed for the task.
    • >What does OpenOffice offer the average
      >user that Google Docs is lacking?
      Why should we ever improve on software? Why should software ever do more than perform basic tasks poorly?

      These are the attitudes behind your statement. Google docs is not as good as open office. Open office is not as good as microsoft office.

      The arguments that people usually make are, "do you really need those extra features?" and to some extent it is true. I don't *absolutely* need everything that Microsoft Office has to offer,
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      There is a character limit to Google Docs. I thought it would be a good idea to get some video game walkthroughs saved to my Google Docs, so I didn't have to look them up all the time, so I copied the text to Google Docs and some of the files had too much text for Good Docs to handle.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      What does OpenOffice offer the average user that Google Docs is lacking?

      And why would Google use OpenOffice to fill that gap when they could just improve Google Docs?
      Footnotes. Text boxes. Styles.

      Whether Google can put these into their online Docs is a valid question, but it doesn't look easy.

  • by yog (19073) * on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:11PM (#23660121) Homepage Journal
    You can already import and export to OpenOffice from Google Docs. What more do we really need? Furthermore, I doubt that Google would gain much from taking sides. They are the premier provider of web services and that is where they should stay. Desktop applications are the past, web services are the future. Microsoft Office as a desktop application will eventually fade, too.

    Now, if Google wanted to give OOo a nice grant, that would be most welcome :)

    • by merreborn (853723) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @08:00PM (#23662169) Homepage Journal

      They are the premier provider of web services and that is where they should stay. Desktop applications are the past, web services are the future.
      Off the top of my head, I can think of several desktop applications that google produces:

      Google earth. Google desktop search. Google Chat.

      Their goal is not producing web services, it's making data more accessible. Making it easier to access google docs from a desktop office application may very well fall within that scope.

      As others have noted here, google docs does not perform terribly well. For performance-intensive things, desktop applications are still better solutions than web-based ones. Office applications are one of those things -- they have tons of functionality.

      Google would do well to:
        * make it trivial to save and load google docs docs from within OO.o
        * add real-time collaborative editing of google docs to OO.o

      It's just not possible to get all the functionality of OO.o into a web app, and have it perform comparably on the same hardware.
  • by Stanistani (808333) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:13PM (#23660143) Homepage Journal
    Imagine the repercussions if a large technology company like Sun Microsystems helped the development and support of OpenOffice.

    They could twin its codebase with their own corporate version [sun.com] and then the sky would truly be the limit.
  • by Wulfstan (180404) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:14PM (#23660181)
    I was working with a teacher on Sunday night trying to prepare a presentation in OpenOffice (it was running incredibly slowly) and she said "I hate OpenOffice". She isn't a geek, she doesn't particularly like computers, but to her it was a huge disappointment to have to use OpenOffice instead of being able to use PowerPoint.

    So far from a knockout punch, I think OpenOffice barely registers in terms of it's disruptive influence. I don't use it, my employees don't use it and everyone I know who has to use it hates it. Perhaps it's time as a community we considered alternatives. The "quality" of OpenOffice isn't something I think people are particularly happy with.
    • by urcreepyneighbor (1171755) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:26PM (#23660393)
      OpenOffice sucks. I'm sorry, but it does.

      Maybe under ideal conditions - like, oh, the same sort of environment that would make Crysis happy -it's "fine", but it's not an Office killer.

      It's a bloated pos that's nothing more than a clone of Office. Not a very good one, at that.

      Show me an Office-compatible suite than I can install on a PII / 300MHz (one of the boxes within my reach), that doesn't have performance issues, and I'll show you The Office Killer.
      • I hate it that OpenOffice is so often associated as "one of the best open source software" among with Linux and Firefox. Every time I've tried OOo (on Linux) I've immediately hated it. It's slow, bloated and annoying to use. Disabling its annoying "helpful" features takes a lot of time. So a while ago I bought MS Office 2008 for Mac, in part just so that I can say I would rather buy MS Office than use OOo for free.

        (And no, I won't try to help them make it better just because it's open source. I'm busy enoug
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Mod me down as troll but OpenOffice Impress was kind of pathetic. Last time I needed to prepare presentation in it, Impress was really bad - it would use about 50% of the CPU when I was editing text, do something really annoying every two minutes, and crash every fifteen minutes. However, when I tried to reproduce that stuff with my old presentation using OpenOffice 2.4, these bugs got all fixed.

      Also Impress seem to be the worse part of OpenOffice, Write and Calc are pretty good, at least for the last two y
      • by mysticgoat (582871) on Thursday June 05 2008, @01:18AM (#23664423) Journal

        I like OOo since Writer and Calc do what I need, Base is rock-solid where it counts, and Draw is at least adequate.

        But I am one of the few clear seers who know that the first and biggest step to improving an organization's performance is to ban the use of PowerPoint. (The second step, which would also result in a significant boost in efficiency, is to limit the use of MS Access to persons who have the training to know when it is actually the right tool for the job-- which, in corporate America, is roughly 3.72% of its current usage.)

    • by Thai-Pan (414112) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @06:10PM (#23661075) Journal
      I'm glad I'm not the only one.

      When I was a student, before getting assimilated by MS (I am now a MS employee), I ran Linux exclusively on my school laptop and used OpenOffice full time. There's no way around saying it, it was a terrible experience. When it wasn't crashing, losing my documents, or in some other way completely failing to function, it was painfully slow, bordering on unusable.

      I stuck by it and fiddled with it until one day in a lab I had to do some extensive spreadsheet work. Specifically, getting data out of a tab-delimited file, approx 15,000 rows and ~5ish columns. Every way I could possibly attempt to open, paste, import this file would throw OpenOffice into a seemingly endless loop. I'd wait 20, 30, 40 minutes, but it couldn't handle this 100kB file no matter how I diced it. I made all sorts of excuses as other students were doing the same thing in mere seconds on their Windows PCs or Macs. It was the last straw for me and I gave up, and used the lab machine with MS Office to do the same thing in about 5 seconds. A similar lab experience only a few weeks later, and I ended up dual-booting my laptop "just for Excel", and before I realized it, I liked the whole Office suite better than OpenOffice. I still used Linux primarily at that time, but every time I needed anything remotely Office related, I simply found OpenOffice to be inadequate.

      Sorry, I'm really not trying to be a troll about this, and I know many folks will scream bloody murder at me for even posting because of my bias. But before I had such a bias, I tried so very hard to love OpenOffice, and just couldn't. Like Wulfstan said, the quality of OpenOffice is just not very good.

      If I were Google, I'd be working hard to carve out this niche market for online services and stay out of desktop apps beyond perhaps plugins for better online integration. OpenOffice doesn't fit with Google's business model, and frankly, I think Google could probably crank out something superior to OpenOffice from scratch anyways.
      • by AnyoneEB (574727) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @07:48PM (#23662041)

        Needing MS Office is a bad reason to switch away from Linux. It runs quite well on wine.

        Personally, I do not use either because latex covers almost everything I would use an Office suite for. In the rare occasion I need a spreadsheet, I use gnumeric because it works a lot better than OOo Calc. That said, Excel is a great piece of software. A good replacement for it would be quite a project.

      • by merreborn (853723) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @08:09PM (#23662269) Homepage Journal

        I stuck by it and fiddled with it until one day in a lab I had to do some extensive spreadsheet work. Specifically, getting data out of a tab-delimited file, approx 15,000 rows and ~5ish columns. Every way I could possibly attempt to open, paste, import this file would throw OpenOffice into a seemingly endless loop. I'd wait 20, 30, 40 minutes, but it couldn't handle this 100kB file no matter how I diced it.
        I used OO.o for years for manipulating the exact same kinds of files, and found it vastly superior to Excel. Excel struggles to correctly read many varieties of CSV files, and loves to mangle data -- try opening a CSV full of ISBN numbers, and watch Excel helpfully mangle them to floats. Whatever you do, don't save the file, or Excel will *overwrite* your 10+ digit integers in exponential notation!

        Regarding performance, years ago, when I voiced the same complaint here on /., someone suggested disabling Java in OO.o. It made a big difference. I was using a 1.x version at the time; I don't know if this is still the case in 2.x.

        The performance may not be stellar (although I really don't recall noticing a substantial difference), but in terms of functionality, there are many areas where OO.o outshines MS Office.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        I hate OpenOffice because of its quality.

        I'm not a heavy office user.. I mainly use it to write an occasional report... maybe draw a diagram.

        But it's SO damn buggy I can barely use it! For example, I was illustrating a graph algorithm with Draw, and it was working quite nicely until I had to undo several levels.. then the alignment of everything went screwy. Nothing that moved during the undoing was anywhere it should have been. A redo didn't fix it either. (Not that alignment is ever quite right in that th
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            Tracking down and properly documenting a most probably intermittent and random bug in order to file a big report that is actually useful is not really the kind of task one feels like doing when one just wanted to draw a diagram.
        • by caseih (160668) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @06:25PM (#23661265)
          Wrong again. OpenOffice is written primarily in C++. It's surprising to see this myth perpetuated. Certain things like Base and various import export plugins require Java, but certainly not OpenOffice itself. Please stop spreading this kind of untruth. Besides being untrue, it's not relevant.
            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              Java is definetelly one of main factors for its slowness. There isn't a single Java GUI program that doesn't suck majorly when it comes to speed and responsiveness.

              To reiterate what the GP said, OpenOffice.org is not a Java GUI program. What Java components it might [optionally] use have nothing to do with screen rendering.

              Of course, the downside of my point is that OpenOffice.org manages to be sluggish on its own, with or without Java.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        I have to admit though, I sure miss the old reveal codes capability in Word Perfect.

        I used to use WP 5.1 and I'm not sure what you're talking about. Word will show you all of the underlying formatting for your document. In Word 2003 you can simply Shift+F1.

  • you mean like this? (Score:5, Informative)

    by nguy (1207026) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @05:20PM (#23660291)
  • Get your -1 Troll points ready, but unfortunately this is the truth. Sun has a stranglehold on OOo, which often stops developers from contributing code, or playing nice. Because of that, there are a variety of OOo forks out there. China's RedOffice has an Office 2007 ribbon-type sidebar that looks very promising. Symphony's UI is a huge step up over OOo. Go-oo.org and OxygenOffice provide many often requested features, templates, fonts, clip-art, a better solver, etc. NeoOffice seems to be the only one really focusing on solid Mac integration.

    All these improvements could be contributed upstream, but because of Sun's tight gripped control, they won't be. Sun isn't just going to hhand it over to Google, and I doubt Google is just going to sell Sun's product, unless Google felt like they had a strong-enough influence in the product's development.

    I agree that Google Docs is poor in its execution, but I doubt that OOo is the way to go for them. I see a product like Zimbra, that was developed with the web in mind, not an app forced into a browser, and that is where the future lies.

    When Google has an office suite that was designed with a web interface in mind, that works as fast as Zimbra, please let me know.
  • by ikeleib (125180) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @06:06PM (#23661013) Homepage
    Google hired developers to work on OpenOffice.org, but found it difficult to fill all the vacancies. They seemed unwilling to work on the project understaffed and the people they hired now work on other things.

    You can see a C|Net article about their hiring from a while back:
    http://news.cnet.com/Google-throws-bodies-at-OpenOffice/2100-7344_3-5920762.html [cnet.com]
  • I'd rather they (or anyone else) would develop a word processor that doesn't make me want to cut my hands off and write raw HTML by whistling morse code into a telephone because it would suck less.

    I am SO tired of every word processor out there, including the one by the white kool aid clan, mimicking the worst drawbacks of word because it makes it a bit easier to roundtrip documents to and from Word. I'd rather have the native format something like Docbook, but I'll take HTML if that's the only way to get real nested document structures and markup as THE native format.
  • by SEE (7681) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @07:53PM (#23662091) Homepage
    Seriously, why should Google want to focus on delivering a knockout to Microsoft? Google doesn't need to do an office suite, and Google doesn't need to do an OS. Google's doing just fine being Google.

    Were there a lot of people running around in 1980 saying Apple Computer had to start building mainframes in order to knock out IBM? I mean, that would make just as much sense.

    IBM tried to knock out Microsoft with OS/2. How'd that work out?

    Novell tried to knock out Microsoft with its purchases of Unix, Digital Research, and WordPerfect. How'd that work out?

    Sun has been trying to out Microsoft with Java and StarOffice and whatnot. How's that working out?

    And now, Microsoft's been obsessively focused with trying to knock out Google, pouring billions more into MSN. How's that working out?
  • OOo sucks (Score:3, Insightful)

    by menace3society (768451) on Thursday June 05 2008, @01:29AM (#23664467)
    Seriously. Everything[1] Google does, they do well. Internet search, desktop search, usenet, picasa, Google Earth/Maps, browser applications like Docs and Gmail, all phenomenal successes.

    OOo is a piece of crap. No, really. I do not think you could come up with a worse productivity suite without specifically designing it that way, and you certainly wouldn't have as much adoption.

    OOo is a (bad) clone of Word, mixed in with XML-pedantry and a really bad case of the second-system effect (made all the worse because none of the people involved had anything to do with the first system, which is Word itself).

    It, in a nutshell, shows the reason why getting free software onto the desktop has been so difficult: half the community is focused on feature-for-feature competitiveness and replication of the original product, and measures its success in market-share, and the other half of the community just hates MS software and tries to do the exact opposite, under the guise of "doing it right the first time." As a result we get something that actually manages to be slower than its MS equivalent in every respect, because on top of all the original features we copied without trying much in the way of procedural abstraction or optimization, we have even more stupid ideas bolted on, like using compressed XML files for the native data format, questionable default parameters that someone decided are "more correct", and the occasional bizarre bug.

    The same sort of thing is starting to happen to Firefox, too. It started out just trying to be fast, but then a number of advocates got on board and decided that more people should use it, and in order to get them to do that the browser should try to be all things to all people. Now Firefox is getting bigger, more bloated, and slower, and in a few years will just be another bald, fat, middle-aged, useless browser program that got passed by.

    All this is a long way of saying that Google shouldn't touch OOo with a ten-foot pole. It goes against everything they stand for: simplicity, usability, obviousness.

    [1]: Except Orkut. Sorry.
      • Re:quality? (Score:4, Funny)

        by secolactico (519805) on Wednesday June 04 2008, @06:08PM (#23661055) Journal
        Hands up all you home users using MS Office... yep, millions of you.

        Now hands up all you home users using MS Office that have legally purchased a copy rather than copying it from work or downloading a torrent... anyone?

        I rest my case.


        So... your point is that OO is so crappy, people would rather break the law than use it?