Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

12 Ways LibreOffice Writer Tops MS Word

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the depends-who's-asking dept.

Open Source 642

Open source office software is has gotten pretty good over the past decade or so; I got through grad school with OpenOffice (now known as LibreOfifice), and in my estimation was no worse off when it came to exchanging files with classmates than were friends with different versions of Word. Now, reader dgharmon writes "Writer has at least twelve major advantages over Word. Together, these advantages not only suggest a very different design philosophy from Word, but also demonstrate that, from the perspective of an expert user, Writer is the superior tool."

cancel ×

642 comments

LaTeX (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39735837)

And there are an infinite number of reasons why LaTeX is better than both.

Re:LaTeX (5, Funny)

sosume (680416) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735883)

From the perspective of an expert user, Emacs is the superior tool.

Re:LaTeX (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39735951)

punch cards rule them all!

Re:LaTeX (5, Funny)

crazyjj (2598719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735967)

You kids with your fancy punch cards. Hand-wiring is the only way to program!

Re:LaTeX (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736173)

Yeah, and none of those plug boards with pre-connectorized wires; real writers gnaw the insulation off with their teeth, twist the strands together, and cover the mess with electrical tape. If that was good enough for Gutenburg then it should be good enough for us.

Re:LaTeX (5, Funny)

Rhodri Mawr (862554) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736039)

...and in the darkness bind them?

Re:LaTeX (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736263)

Let's hope so. Ring or no ring, I'm not sorting a pile of unbound punch cards in the dark.

Re:punched cards (1)

ygslash (893445) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736375)

...and in the darkness bind them?

Only if you remembered to number the cards.

Re:LaTeX (5, Insightful)

agrif (960591) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735953)

From the perspective of an expert user, {thing the user is expert with} is the superior tool.

Re:LaTeX (5, Funny)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736203)

From the perspective of an expert user, {thing the user is expert with} is the superior tool.

No no no.
 
 

From the perspective of a normal user, the expert is the superior tool.

Re:LaTeX (5, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735977)

No, a real expert uses VI.

Nice try though.

Re:LaTeX (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736031)

No, REAL experts use $FAVORITE_TOOL_OF_POSTER, clearly. Someday when you're all grown up you'll see the clear advantages of $FAVORITE_TOOL_OF_POSTER.

Re:LaTeX (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736211)

true experts do not care about the flavor of the day. they only care about reliable, proven tools.

Re:LaTeX (2)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736317)

Right, emacs. :p

Re:LaTeX (1)

david.emery (127135) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736339)

No, a real expert uses VI.

Nice try though.

True. To edit the makefile for Emacs when it's not resident on a new machine. :-)

Re:LaTeX (1)

christurkel (520220) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736241)

Show me an emacs word processing mode and I'm sold. (No really I wanted one for years).

Re:LaTeX (5, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736269)

From the perspective of a vi user, an emacs user is a superior tool.

TROFF (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736273)

No No TROFF on a daisywheel printer is the only way to produce goodlooking documents fools! it has been down hill from there.

Re:LaTeX (5, Funny)

Oddweb (1625975) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735945)

And there are an infinite number of reasons why LaTeX is better than both.

While I personally prefer LaTeX, it can be a lot more awkward to get into for most people than either of the offices.

Re:LaTeX (2)

WillAdams (45638) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736073)

LyX:

http://www.lyx.org/ [lyx.org]

should address such awkwardness.

Re:LaTeX (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736293)

For a lot of office scenarios, you probably don't want to be using LaTeX directly, you want to be providing a web front end with a set of fixed fields that generates a LaTeX document. This is how a lot of businesses use Word: via a custom wizard that takes inputs and inserts them into a template at the correct points.

Re:LaTeX (3, Interesting)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735959)

And there are an infinite number of reasons why LaTeX is better than both.

Until you find yourself writing your own document classes or other custom macro sets. Then, there are an infinite number of reasons why just about anything is better than LaTeX.

Re:LaTeX (3, Informative)

ClickOnThis (137803) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736205)

And there are an infinite number of reasons why LaTeX is better than both.

Until you find yourself writing your own document classes or other custom macro sets. Then, there are an infinite number of reasons why just about anything is better than LaTeX.

Fortunately, you rarely need to do this. Either the generic classes are fine for what you need to do, or someone else has already written a class or macro for you. For example, many journal publishers provide LaTeX style/class files, and there are many custom ones available for PhD dissertations, etc. Just google for it and you'll probably find it.

At the end of the day, I find that LaTeX documents simply look better than those created with word processors of any ilk. LaTeX's ability to control logical design (as opposed to visual design) is a great asset.

Re:LaTeX (1)

SwedishPenguin (1035756) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735997)

Especially if you're in grad school, and if you're in a computer science related field, I just can't see how anyone could miss it. It seems to be the most popular tool of choice around here at least for everyone from grad students to professors and even some undergrad students. Already in the first year of my programme, LaTeX were the preferred tool for submission of written assignments in the introduction to computer science course.

Re:LaTeX (3, Interesting)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736113)

We tried that and have a few people who still think like that, but now that journals outside of physics have moved away from LaTeX it's pretty much dead for us. None of our students know it when they come in, they're capable enough MS office users that they can do any of the formatting needed in office, so what does LaTeX get you? Marginally better equation editing, and a lot more work fighting with the document preparation than the actual writing. And then you're asked to submit documents in office format anyway for most internal or government documents because you don't seriously think the secretarial staff have any clue what to do with a latex document.

10 years ago when I was an undergrad it was still a critical part of the experience to know how to use LaTeX. Now it's like forcing people to use IE6, there are some people still clinging to it for various reasons that are hard to change, but for everyone else office tools get the job done. Of course if your office training at the highschool level is bad you probably aren't any better off either way.

Re:LaTeX (1)

SwedishPenguin (1035756) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736243)

If the secreterial staff can't handle a pdf, get new secreterial staff. I haven't submitted to any journals yet, but the conferences in my field all seem to have LaTeX templates and accept pdfs..

Re:LaTeX (2)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736379)

Maybe it's different for physics, but I've only come across one journal in computer science that required submissions in Word format, and it had a very poor reputation (slightly better than an unreviewed technical report, but only slightly). Most others now provide a Word template and a LaTeX template. You can easily spot the papers that used the Word one: they are the ones with kerning that looks crap.

Scribe (1)

david.emery (127135) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736361)

LaTeX without the ugliness... Still my favorite document production system.

In defense of Word headers/footers (5, Informative)

crazyjj (2598719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735845)

For at least the last three versions of Word, you can do pretty much anything you want in Word headers/footers. You can put in text boxes, graphics anywhere on the page, etc. I used to use Word headers to put in background graphics for the whole page.

I think a lot of people mistakenly think that Word headers are limited to the little box at the top of the page and don't realize that you can use them to put pretty much put anything, anywhere on the page. It will automatically take anything you do while in header/footer edit mode and put it in the background and replicate it on every page. Not sure if LibreOffice does that too or not, but I think the article makes it sound like Word's header and footer are a lot more restricted than they actually are.

Re:In defense ofAlso correcma Word headers/footers (1, Insightful)

djsmiley (752149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736135)

Sigh :(

Re:In defense of Word headers/footers (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736197)

... why on earth would you want to put a header anywhere other than the page header? Are there not other functions that do the job better?

Re:In defense of Word headers/footers (3, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736279)

It's a very quick and easy way to lock down a complex background layout that replicates on every page and isn't easily changed or screwed-up by a clueless user.

Number One! (4, Insightful)

Kagato (116051) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735873)

It doesn't have that stupid Ribbon UI interface!

Re:Number One! (3, Insightful)

TheNinjaroach (878876) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736049)

It doesn't have that stupid Ribbon UI interface!

Is Ribbon really that stupid? I kind of like that part of Office.

What I hate is text formatting and the way that Outlook will randomly change my font color between words. That is a UI that's broken as hell but most people don't even seem to care...

Re:Number One! (1)

Shimdaddy (898354) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736055)

Different strokes I suppose -- I love using the ribbon.

Re:Number One! (2)

Tough Love (215404) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736223)

Different strokes I suppose -- I love using the ribbon.

I prefer real toilet paper myself.

Re:Number One! (2, Insightful)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736167)

Yes, everyone hates the ribbon interface! That's why Office 2010 has sold over 200 million copies. You'd think if it was so universally reviled and killed productivity (as slashdot claims with no proof), people would have stopped buying Office at 2007. Fact is the ribbon was designed from user feedback, and while slashdot trolls can cite himself and his 5 immediate co-workers as people who do not like the ribbon, Microsoft can point to thousands of data points and usage metrics to explain why the Ribbon is in fact a better UI.

Journalist telling me how product he uses (5, Insightful)

postmortem (906676) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735903)

is better than one he does not use.

Not defending Word here, but MS PR can also write article '12 ways word tops writer'.

Re:Journalist telling me how product he uses (3)

Derekloffin (741455) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735979)

Indeed. Personally, I find all 12 of those points meaningless. I'd rather have some simple things, like a working web view, or having the ability to search and replace across paragraphs, or how about just letting me access all the F'ing auto format options (although as I recall Word had that issue too, just with slightly less annoying hidden untouchable options).

Re:Journalist telling me how product he uses (2)

crazyjj (2598719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736311)

I would write "12 Reasons Why I Agree With You."

No way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39735913)

Whoever the writer is hasn't used either product much in a collaborative setting. Libre/Open Office has come a long way, but it still has a long way to go to rival Word. I've yet to load any Word file and have it look the same as it does in Word, and that's a deal breaker in a collaborative setting.

Re:No way (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736009)

Seems unfair to pick that direction. Why is that not Word's fault?

It is also why I always send important documents in pdf, I have seen different versions of Word render documents very differently.

Re:No way (1)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736147)

Because the standard MS uses is now public.

PDF is good for the final version of a document, but not for collaborative editing. Whether or not MS gets its shit together for Skydrive/sharepoint and lets us edit documents as conveniently as google docs does remains to be seen, but that would be very appealing in a corporate setting.

Re:No way (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736341)

That is false.
The docx Word 2010 produces does not follow the documented standard.

Even if it was true, the openoffice/libreoffice document types are actually publicly documented.

Re:No way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736153)

Unfortunately, I keep Word around for a single document: my résumé. Other than that, Libre Office would work well enough for my purposes.

OTOH, I have recovered several important MS Word documents that Word had completely hosed up. Just load them into Libre Office, then save them as MS Word format, and suddenly they're readable again in MS Word.

Re:No way (1)

Tough Love (215404) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736271)

I've yet to load any Word file and have it look the same as it does in Word, and that's a deal breaker in a collaborative setting.

In the long run, it sounds to me like a deal breaker for Microsoft Word.

Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbon? (5, Interesting)

sandytaru (1158959) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735915)

I like the Ribbon layout. Go figure. After an initial "what the hell?" week I got used to it, and now I don't even notice it or think about it.

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39735969)

Did you like Microsoft Bob as well? How long have you been a member of the communist party?

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (5, Funny)

crazyjj (2598719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736363)

I can top it. It miss Clippy. I thought the Ewoks and Jar Jar were cute. And I liked disco.

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39735975)

Yes. You are. Great Job!

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39735999)

I like the Ribbon layout.

Yes, I think you're the only one. In my company, of the 500 or so users, not one likes the ribbon. Many hate it.

On the other hand, there are some features that some people really love in office 2007 & 2010 (for example, excel spreadsheets can now go beyond 64k rows).

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736053)

What pisses me off is that what used to be a straightforward step-by-step wizard (say, creating labels) now has all the buttons across a ribbon in no particular order (no, it doesn't start from the left, the "Create Labels" button that Create Label (singular) is not what you want to push).

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736017)

I didn't get the hate for Ribbon either...till I realized that it was mainly all the people who had memorized all their shortcuts and exactly which obscure menu had the function/tools they needed to use. They were the power users of old, and suddenly they were castrated, and they were back to being on the same level as MS noobs. To make matters worse, the ribbon interface actually made the MS Office suite of software easier to use for noobs and probably made these same power users feel threatened.

I was never a power user of Excel/Word/Power Point 2003, but I always found them to be exceedingly frustrating to work with. Sure, if your work requires you to master those tools, I'm sure you'd get really good after months/years of use, but to a new user, the tons of nested menus with features hidden away made MS Office use an exercise in frustration.

Then I used Office 2007, and once I realized the orb was the file menu (that, I agree was a terrible decision), I found myself using tons of new features that I could never have known about or discovered in Office 2003. The quality of my Word documents, Powerpoint presentations and Excel files greatly improved. I actually find the interface extremely useful because everything is arranged in a logical manner and it is fairly easy to find the tools you need to use without having to spend tens of minutes trying to find the feature in some hidden menu.

Not to say that Word and Office doesn't have its fair share of issues (formatting documents consistently in Word is just a nightmare. I had to write my doctoral thesis in Word because my adviser did not know to use or care about LaTeX), but as far as the new ribbon interface goes, it certainly seems a big improvement over the old Office interface.

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (2)

hawkbat05 (1952326) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736037)

I'm with you on this one. Sure it took getting used to but now I find it much easier than browsing through multi-level menus. Plus it's really just a glorified quick access toolbar and you can do a lot of customization as to what commands are on it. I could live without the File menu taking over my whole window though.

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (4, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736059)

The problem with ribbon I have is that it assumes what I need and don't need. It works fine until I have to do something that isn't easily found. Then it is hidden two or three menus deep that I have to use MS help or the Internet to find. I could customize the ribbon but that requires precognition that what I want is not obvious.

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (4, Insightful)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736235)

Isn't that the problem with any interface? Due to limited screen space, they can't make every option available in a menu system or the ribbon system (which is really still a hierarchical menu, just a different layout). So they have to make obvious the most common features, and hide some of the more esoteric ones. The benefit of the ribbon is that 90% of the functionality of Word is available in 3 clicks or less. With the old system, many more options were hidden in multiple layers deep. So much so, that people started requesting functionality to be added that has been there the whole time, because they couldn't find those features in the menu layout.

At any rate, if you really need to, you can customize the ribbon layout in Office 2010 in pretty much any way you choose.

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (2)

ChaoticCoyote (195677) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736065)

You're not alone. I like the ribbon.

It's a helluva lot better than a thousand menu layers.

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (2)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736079)

I've had to only just use it because my new employer uses office (I use libre office at home) and no, ribbon is shit.

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (2)

bemymonkey (1244086) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736103)

You're not alone. I just don't like the fact that it requires actual processing power to work, unlike a regular old Word 2003-style menu... this results in keyboard shortcuts lagging on slow machines (such as netbooks). Other than that, I actually quite like it - much easier to find stuff if you're actually new to Office or haven't used the application for a while...

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736323)

No, you aren't, apparently. But I personally don't like it, probably because my "What the hell?" phase has lasted for about a year and there are still some things I struggle to find or that are hidden in inconvenient locations (and, yes, I know I can reconfigure the Ribbon, which I regularly waste more time trying to do in order to solve the problem that what it thinks are commonly-used features aren't what I think are commonly-used features). I don't begrudge Microsoft the observation that some people like the Ribbon interface. Obviously some people do prefer it. Fine. More power to them. What I really hate them for is not offering the option of a "classic" menu layout in the Windows version of Office. What were they thinking?

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (3, Informative)

Yewbert (708667) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736355)

I don't mind the ribbon much one way or the other - but I still find myself getting more use out of an extensively customized Quick Access Toolbar than out of the ribbon itself.

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (1)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736365)

Let's see:
Using more screen real estate at the top of the window just as the industry is moving to 16:9, 1080p screens with more horizontal space: FAIL. (especially c.f. the palette used in the previous Mac version).
Dynamically hiding icons or drastically changing their appearance depending on the window width.... have wide/narrow layouts maybe, but continually juggle the layout as you resize? FAIL.

With two such fundamental design fails, Is there a need to go any further?

(There's also the nice new equation editor that only works in one font, Callibri, when most of the universe specifies either Times or TeX Computer Modern for equations, but that's not a ribbon fail).

Re:Am I the only one in the world that likes Ribbo (2)

Mr Z (6791) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736377)

What I don't like about the ribbon is that there are many functions I used to use regularly that were always on screen. Now they're spread out across many different ribbon tabs, and sometimes where they ended up is non-intuitive for me. What used to be a simple click turns into an Easter egg hunt.

Perhaps if I used Office daily, I'd develop the appropriate muscle memory. But, I only use it a few times a month, and it's usually different apps -- this week it's Excel, next week it's PowerPoint.

I don't care if "zoom", "increase font size", "merge and center", and "fill with color" all belong on logically different tabs based on their function. For me, they all belong on the "I use this regularly" page.

Don't these features interfere w/ compatibility? (2)

WillAdams (45638) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735917)

The note that one can use Libre Office as a replacement for FrameMaker is interesting though.

The one feature I've always wanted to see in Word was for the style formatting area to have each paragraph style be a pop-up menu which one can click on (or better still tab to) and change the current paragraph style w/ the keyboard.

But for raw sadism. . . (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735947)

. . .nothing beats lighting off the VBA editor, putting a leash on MS Word, and walking it around the block like your dog. Although, as noted above, Emacs remains far above the fray.

It's free. (5, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735963)

I made a big mistake when I bought MS Office. I spent ~$150 and used it to update my resume. Have done very little else with it.

For us casual users the free version of Open/Libre Office can save a lot of money. PLUS writer doesn't come with the stupid ribbon interface. (Where's the find menu option? Where's spellcheck? I don't want to play Where's Waldo? with my software.)

Usability (2)

spike hay (534165) | more than 2 years ago | (#39735973)

Libreoffice writer is more annoying to use than Word, but it's not so bad. I use LaTeX/vim for the vast majority of what I write. It actually does what I tell it to do, which is better than any WYSISWG program.

What's really bad is Impress. It's a complete mess from a usability standpoint. When I need to make a presentation, I use Powerpoint. I should figure out how to use LaTeX instead.

Re:Usability (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736051)

I use both Powerpoint and Impress, and other than the ribbon interface, I really haven't noticed a difference usability-wise. Of course, I'm not a novice user, so usability has to be *really* bad before I start to notice an affect on my productivity.

Beemer (3, Informative)

getto man d (619850) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736063)

When I need to make a presentation, I use Powerpoint. I should figure out how to use LaTeX instead.

Check out the Beemer [wikipedia.org] class; it's handy but not exactly pretty. However, you can find some decent templates floating around the net.

Re:Usability (1)

SwedishPenguin (1035756) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736067)

I use beamer for presentations and love it. I never tried to do anything serious in any of the WYSIWYG tools though so I can't really compare.

The Real Problem with Libre/Open Office (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39735981)

I've used several variants of Libre/Open Office and I've found one fundamental problem with all of them. The developers insist on copying MS Word's brain dead interface.

One time, I was trying to do a vertical layout that should have been simple. After fighting with Open Office for about an hour, I gave up assuming that the Open Office developers just hated their users. So I broke down, fired up the Windows machine and started using MS Word.

What did I discover. All the brain cell killing UI design had been copied exactly from MS Word. So I will continue to use Libre Office and I will curse Microsoft every time I find a hard to use feature.

To the Libre Office developers, I say it's okay to branch from MS Word's UI, especially on the obscure features. Most of the users that can't deal with a different UI barely do more than change fonts anyway.

Formatting features are not the killer app anymore (5, Insightful)

DeadDecoy (877617) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736007)

If I wanted superior formatting control, I'd use LaTeX. The primary reason I'm stuck with MS Word, and sometimes google docs, is due to superior collaboration tools: change tracking, multiple views for revision and final draft; identifiers for whose made changes where (provided the userid has been setup properly); notes/comments in the margins.

For the record, I haven't taken the recent version LibreOffice for a spin. But from what I remember of OpenOffice, these features were not that functional. I thought OpenOffice was a decent piece of software, but it's still based on prior definitions of what a documenting software has been, rather than what it could be.

Re:Formatting features are not the killer app anym (2)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736305)

Putting latex files under revision control just works. Doesn't work so well with word/openoffice.

Unicode consistency (1)

Yewbert (708667) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736029)

Word could be improved for some hardcore uses by getting rid of every last vestige of non-Unicode compliant font usage propagated in the name of backward-compatibility. And make all codepoint usage uniformly hexadecimal and accommodate double-byte codepoints in VBA, and stop trating Symbol font so weirdly. Harumph.

If LibreOffice gave me the power and flexibility to deal with Unicode properly, I'd jump on it for at home. At work,... always gonna be stuck with Word.

no more article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736041)

Page unavailable after 20 comments. That must be the weakest server in the history of /. .

Re:no more article (2)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736319)

Who says it was after 20 comments? None of them appear to have RTFA. The article may never have existed!

Ishas and Ofifice (2)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736083)

It does seem like LibreOffice's spell- and grammar-checking-tools still need some work, though.

Broken link 403 Forbidden (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736089)

Getting 403 Forbidden

You don't have permission to access /applications/how-libreoffice-writer-tops-ms-word-12-features-1.html on this server.

Re:Broken link 403 Forbidden (1)

qrwe (625937) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736181)

Same here. Anyone found a working link?

Re:Broken link 403 Forbidden (1)

M1FCJ (586251) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736215)

Their own front page has the broken link. After a frantic call from an MS Lawyer, they must have decided to pull it down, I guess...

Re:Broken link 403 Forbidden (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736299)

Search the address with Google, get the preview to appear (double arrow to the right of the link) and select the cached version (you may need to skip an ad).

It's forbidden for me even if clicked on Datamation's main page! Talk about paranoid...

About half of those ways were just . . . (3, Insightful)

InvisibleClergy (1430277) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736093)

. . . "Guys, we have a styles system! And it's better than Word's!"

From the title of the article, I was expecting 12 distinct and separate features, not 6 features and a treatise on how awesome Styles are in LibreOffice.

I am counting hyphens as another point in styles, because the hyphens point is essentially "You can specify this with styles too!"

Forbidden features! (4, Funny)

metrometro (1092237) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736131)

You don't have permission to access /applications/how-libreoffice-writer-tops-ms-word-12-features-1.html on this server.

Re:Forbidden features! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736183)

Clearly the advantages of LibreOffice are too advanced and nuanced for mere mortals to understand, only the few enlightened may view such wisdom.

Re:Forbidden features! (1)

present_arms (848116) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736285)

same here

Re:Forbidden features! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736321)

You people REALLY need to stop reading the articles. Clearly this is having a negative effect.

Cue Microsoft shills (-1, Troll)

Tough Love (215404) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736149)

Here they come.

Re:Cue Microsoft shills (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736227)

God forbid anybody likes a product from Microsoft! Therefor they MUST be on Microsoft's payroll!

Software is a tool. Use the right one for the job. If you like Open/Libre/Staroffice over Office... Good for you. I don't. Stop trying to 'convert' me, all you're doing is annoying me and wasting my time.

Secret? Slashdotted? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736157)

Is anybody else getting 403 forbidden when hitting the link?

Ways number 13 and 14 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736165)

13. Incompatibility
14. General shittiness

So, did anyone even read this article? (0)

Keyslapper (852034) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736179)

Is it just me or did nobody posting here actually read the article?

I know I didn't. Why? Well, the F'n thing is 403'd. How are we supposed to read an article we can't bloody get to?

And since we can't get to this article, are we supposed to just assume there really are 12 ways A is better than B?

And how did this even get posted if the article is no more than a tease?

Sorry for the rant, but I was really wanting to see if there was anything in there I didn't already think of.

Re:So, did anyone even read this article? (1)

Derekloffin (741455) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736225)

I skimmed it. It apparently got slashdotted since then.

Re:So, did anyone even read this article? (1)

BravoZuluM (232200) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736261)

I had the same result, so I started reading the comments to see if others were able to read the article. And then...oh yeah...this is Slashdot. At least the posters read the title or the comments would be off topic. :-)

All these things are irrelevant in the office (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736187)

I love Openoffice/Libreoffice, but they really need to start focusing on more than the basics of Microsoft Word. I really don't care if Microsoft Word or Libreoffice does tables better or prints better PDF documents. All this is completely irrelevant to me because both Word and Writer gets the job done regardless who thinks they integrate those basic features better. If Libreoffice wants to get better, they need to improve their database integration because it's absolutely horrendous, even with the provided opensource ODBC drivers which work half the time and others don't work at all. When they do work, they don't work right with writer or Calc. Even the Microsoft Office Third party ODBC drivers for Postgresql or Mysql works 1000000 times better than for Libreoffice, and the database integration in MS Office is more integrated and easy to do. Should also note that MS office stuff is better documented than Libreoffice in these technical issues. And for office work, database integration is key and Libreoffice just plain sucks on that.

Hell, if Libreoffice wants to just compare those basic features to being better than word, I could say Abiword is 100 times better than both of them combined. This article is just dumb.

LibreOffice is great... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39736245)

...when per-user productivity is so low that you can't justify the cost of MS Office.

They have one huge disadvantage: Landscape mode. (1, Interesting)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736313)

There's one major flaw in OO or LO. That's the difficulty of changing a document to Landscape mode.

Word: Click Landscape radio button
OO: Search on google for the tutorial, edit a template, save, open the new docume... you know what, I don't know. It's a PITA and it's a killer PITA that's probably the biggest reason there isn't a bigger market share. Half the documents I write are in landscape mode.

And I use Ubuntu at home (with significant modifications), I've contributed to one of the projects, and I've done life-critical assembly programming for money.

If I think it's a PITA, 80%+ of the potential users will think it's impossible.

OpenOffice LibreOffice (1)

MacColossus (932054) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736315)

The original post states "I got through grad school with OpenOffice (now known as LibreOfifice)," I thought OpenOffice was still OpenOffice and LibreOffice is a fork project of OpenOffice based on reaction to Oracle's purchase of Sun.

Love Libre but... (1)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | more than 2 years ago | (#39736327)

Love Libre but the MS Word spell check is way better. I doubt I can type two paragraphs without Libre saying I have misspelled a word that is, in fact, spelled correctly. Nice to see that Libre is pulling away from the creepy Oracle version.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...