
Mayor of Munich: "EU laptops should have LibreOffice or OpenOffice" - Tsiolkovsky
http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/news/mayor-munich-eu-laptops-should-have-libreoffice-or-openoffice
======
Derbasti
You know, I don't get that.

I can see how the feature set of OpenOffice or LibreOffice would be sufficient
for just about anyone. However, I strongly feel that both Microsoft Office and
Apple iWork do offer some real benefits in terms of usability over
(Libre|Open)Office.

Seriously, I tried this for real: My mom got a new computer. It was a Mac. We
installed OpenOffice, then NeoOffice, then LibreOffice for her. Over the
course of several months she never got the hang of it. She was always asking
how to do stuff and could never figure out how to do simple things.

Then we installed iWork and she got along fine. There is this inspector thing,
and if you want to do something, you will probably find it in there. She was
happy with that and even discovered some features on her own.

Later we installed Microsoft Office for Mac for her (for *.doc compatibility
reasons). Again, she got along fine. There is that ribbon/palette thing, and
if you want to do something, you will probably find it in there. She was happy
with that and even discovered some features on her own.

I mean, I very much hope that a wider adoption of (Open|Libre)Office with
European Officials would make the European Union invest some money in porting
(Open|Libre)Office into the 21 century. But until they do, I can not recommend
it to anyone with a straight face.

~~~
Duff
The Mayor of Munich didn't talk about the feature set available to public
employees.

He did talk about making "public knowledge accessible in the future". Public
institutions have a moral and legal obligation to preserve certain items for
posterity.

The problem with a proprietary application like iWork is that it uses a closed
file format that may or may not stand the test of time. I've worked with
archivists in government institutions, and they are already struggling to
preserve digital documents produced as late as the 1980s.

As a citizen, I have the ability to learn from the primary sources that are
hundreds of years old. One of my college friends spent a semester examining
the papers of colonial New York State governors and looking at maps and
treaties produced with Indian nations.

Unfortunately, the chances are very high that our children will not be able to
read many of the important papers produced from the 1980's through today. How
accessible will WordStar documents be in 2060? Or Excel XP spreadsheets in
2100?

There are different approaches to improving the current situation. The State
of Washington chose to convert everything from native format to TIFF or PDF
images. South Africa and cities like Munich are choosing to mandate the use of
free and open native formats. There are ups and downs to each approach.

~~~
CWuestefeld
_He did talk about making "public knowledge accessible in the future"._

Yes, but the conclusion does not follow from this goal.

There's no reason that an open format will be readable in the future. If I
define some document format, build an application that reads/writes it, and
publish it to github with GPL licensing, then in all likelihood it will be
forgotten completely in a decade. My inability to gain users will ensure that
it withers.

On the other hand, even if the .DOC and .XLS files made by Microsoft are
proprietary, they've been reverse-engineered and are well-understood; the
.DOCX and .XLSX file formats are even documented. Because they're so
universally used, out of necessity, someone in the future will be thinking
about how to read those old files.

So being open might make it more likely that something obscure will be
readable in the future. But I don't think it's nearly so strong a likelihood
as what demand from an army of users of proprietary software will lead to.

~~~
Duff
Open is just part of the equation. ODF is also an international standard:
ISO/IEC 26300:2006 Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument)
v1.0

The point is, in the distant future, someone will be able to use the
specification for ODF and read a document that complies with the standard. All
aspects of the file will be reproducible, including metadata, tables, etc.

And as I said, open formats are just one approach. The approach that the US
Courts and the State of Washington takes (conversion to PDF/A or TIFF) is a
valid approach too.

~~~
tzs
If all they have is the document and the ODF specification, they are out of
luck. They'll need the OpenOffice or LibreOffice source code, as that is the
_real_ specification.

~~~
Duff
Both Google and Microsoft were able to independently produce ODF
implementations from the spec.

~~~
tzs
No, they looked at things outside the spec. That's the only way to do it with
ODF 1.0, since the spec is massively incomplete.

For instance, it does not specify how formulas work in spreadsheets.

~~~
rat87
but its in 1.2, right?

------
babarock
More important than the software suite they use, I wish they would impose the
use of open formats. After that, they (and generations of people to come) can
use which ever reader software they like.

~~~
rbanffy
This seems the cheapest way to ensure the use of open formats.

------
jpkeisala
I am a bit sceptic if LibreOffice or OpenOffice would be well received. There
has been companies who have tried it but in the end returned back to MS
Office. I think tools like Google Docs have brighter further.

However, As a tax payer. I would love to hear € savings on licenses over next
10 years if they would do it.

~~~
protomyth
Beware that you actually see the savings and someone else isn't getting the
money for "consulting" or "premium training". I have seen a few budgets that
saved money on the software only to get hammered on the back-end.

// this is really, really common with Point-of-Sale solutions

~~~
hippich
With open source software money usually spent on adaptation. And this
adaptation often done by local companies. So in this particular case instead
of paying microsoft and usa goverment, munich government will pay local german
company of trainers who will explain how to use particular open source
software. Another local company will develop custom integration with whatever
CRM government have and hopefuly part of this code either as patches or
modules will be contributed back to community.

I totally sure their decision is right in long term.

------
melling
I gave up on the project after the split. Why can't there be a concerted
effort behind OpenOffice or LibreOffice? Two half-baked open source projects
don't equal one good commercial project. I'd rather give my money to Apple and
hope that they eventually build a better product.

Free is great, but I'll take reasonably priced quality commercial software.
That reminds me, it's time to upgrade to IntelliJ 11.

~~~
rbanffy
There is no split. LibreOffice is clearly the successor and OpenOffice is
clearly the legacy project. Oracle abandoned it long before donating it to the
Apache Foundation.

~~~
melling
So there is no redundant effort being donee at Apache? No wasted effort?

~~~
rbanffy
I really hope not. By now, one would have to be seriously delusional to
believe OOo will catch up with LibreOffice.

------
loftsy
Surely he/she should have said "German laptops should have LibreOffice or
OpenOffice". It seems built into the German mindset that policy should be
enforced at a federal level.

Whilst I agree with a more integrated monetary policy in the Eurozone the
continual assimilation of power in Brussels is the wrong way for Europe to go.

~~~
sgift
If you've taken the time to actually read the article you would've noticed
that he talks about laptops used by EU officials not all laptops in Europe.
This aside: Yes, laptops of german officials should use LibreOffice/OpenOffice
too.

------
Craiggybear
He's right. All computers should come with a fully functional word processor
and spreadsheet and these should be free.

This is simply common-sense. Let Microsoft compete for a change.

~~~
protomyth
If Microsoft gave Office away with Windows there would be a bit of litigation
showing up at their door.

~~~
Craiggybear
Simply suggesting if Microsoft want to sell Office they should make it an
attractive proposition to part with cash.

~~~
protomyth
I'm not a big Microsoft fan, but Office - as bought by companies and
governments - in quantity is a pretty attractive proposition. It costs a
reasonable amount of money, has well defined deployment, and has training and
certifications aplenty. None of the open source alternatives come close to the
total package. I wish they did, but it just isn't so.

