Invisible Adjunct

When I tried OO in its first release, it was usable, but needed some menu-trimming and general interaction easing. I am told that this work has been done in the latest revs, but I can't vouch for it personally.

If you try OO but can't quite manage to like it, there is also StarOffice, which costs (not too much) but is a more polished version of much the same application.

Coincidentally enough, I just started running OpenOffice for Mac OS X (X11) yesterday. So far, so good. It takes a little tinkering, and a little patience at first, and of course for OS X users, its interface is not yet Aqua-fied, but it's a solid program.

I'm using OO 1.1 on Windows 2000 and like it enormously, since I can save to multiple versions of word, html and xml at will. The interface is a lot smoother than when I started using 1.0 beta, and the stability of the suite is improved. I like the PowerPoint clone more, even, than Corel's. It all takes some getting used to, but considering it's both OS and free, it's worth it.

I have used the current versions of OpenOffice (on Windows and Linux) for academic (legal) writing. I found OO very usable -- stable, fast and capable of doing pretty much everything I wanted it to do. Its feature set seems to be roughly Word 97, plus a few bells and whistles (eg built in 'save as pdf' without needing the full price Acrobat writer). It produces compact files (an OO file is a zipped package of various xml definition and content files). It exports much better HTML than Word (not surprising as its native format is XML). All this is true of the other components of the OO suite as well.

However, I have gone back to using Microsoft Word as my primary word processor. I had three main reasons.

* Collaboration: My colleagues and students use Microsoft Word. Although OpenOffice opens and saves Word files and handles almost everything perfectly, there are some things it messes up (your mileage may differ) -- automatic cross references in footnotes work fine in OO and in Word but they don't seem to understand each others' approach; bulleted lists are handled differently (Word's list handling is notoriously bad) and get mangled when going back and forwards; and numbered headings likewise. Font translation was a bit touch and go, also, especially when moving between different computers. All this meant that what I saw was not necessarily what my colleagues and students saw, and vice versa.

* Headings again: I never quite got the hang of how OO handled nested numbered headings. That's my failing, not its, but I didn't want to invest more time in figuring it out.

* Endnote: I gather this is no longer a problem -- the current version of Endnote does integrate with OO.

All this said, I still use OO from time to time; if only I could persuade my colleagues to switch I'd use it more often ...

Simon,
Thanks for your comment. For me, collaboration is key. It's the reason I've (sort of, but not really) switched from WordPerfect to Word.

I've used OO from time to time. I found what Simon found: it will do everything you need it to do, but, depending on the complexity of your documents, there may be some residual conversion issues.

That said, it is free, and uses Word-like menus, so you won't have to spend much time and money finding out if it works for you.

Well, I eventually moved to WordStar on CP/M machines, all said and done, it does everything you really need -- except provide for freely exchangeable documents.

When I was a partner downtown on the 23rd floor, I used WordPerfect (our machines came with Word, I just bought WP for myself). It may be dying, but WP 9 (who needs 10 or later) is robust, good patches and does everything.

I've hated Word for a long time, but actually bought WordXP for home after using it at work when we upgraded. WordXP (avaiable cheap at academic discount or as part of Microsoft Works at SAMS) finally is good enough.

StarOffice is cheap on CD, was free last time I looked at a download (does it now cost to download?) and works very well.

The problem is all the bundling. Otherwise, everyone would be using NoteBene or WordPerfect -- well, maybe not.

Wish you luck.

But ...

OO or SO, free downloads.

WP 9 or so, usually $10.00 on e-bay.

WordXP around $50.00, bundled on most computers when you buy them.

IA, is the death of WordPerfect, as you put it, across disciplines, or are you making a localized observation? I hadn't noticed any problem with accepting WordPerfect (I submitted my last two articles in WP format), but perhaps history and/or literature journals have more of a MS Word slant than theory and politics journals.

Well, I got all excited when I read the Endnote and OO comment I must say. Unfortunately, it seems that it only supports RTF Document scan, with no indication of what this actually is. Anyone?

IA, if I may ask, when you say collaboration do you want the equivalent of Track Changes in Word? Or do you just want to be able to exchange documents with people, cut, paste etc and not have the formatting messed up?

I've been using it exclusively for over a year, and I love it. I find that if I save documents in RTF format, Word users don't have a problem opening them. I've never had a problem opening others' Word documents.

At least no one is recomending vi:-)

I love Open Office! It's all I use. My favorite part is the pdf button in the newest release--you can convert any of your files to pdf very easily that way.

vi???

emacs, emacs all the way

/troll

OO is what I try to use (and I advocate it on my webpage), but it has the following problems for my life:
1. No real Endnote integration. Yes, you can RTF scan, but this requires saving your references in your document, outputting the document to an RTF (Rich Text Format) file (RTF is a sort of platform neutral interchange format), having Endnote scan the RTF document for references, and Endnote will then produce an outputted document with full references for you. Should you need to change output formats, you will have to re-scan and output your RTF document. BUT, OO 2.0 (scheduled for release in about one year) will have a fully integrated bibliographic database tool within the software package. What this means in English is that in about a year, you should have a single program that does what MS Office does and what Endnote does, all in one package, and for free....

2. Yeah, the bulleting thing is true and somewhat annoying.

3. I don't collaborate. (*grin* I'm an academic -- we'd rather die than truly collaborate).

Good stuff:
1. Integrated PDF. No more having to save Word docs to a Postscript printer file and than have Ghostwrite make a PDF of them!

2. Word doc conversion is pretty damn good. For all but the most sophisticated formatting, it's pretty seamless.

3. A far superior equation editor. If you do any mathematical typesetting at all, the OO interface is MUCH easier to use.

4. No damn paperclip pet! (Yeah, I know I can turn it off in MS Office, but why should I have to put up with it in the first place?)

I've used OpenOffice.org on both Windows & Linux systems for more than two years now, and I think it is great. I began using it as a suppliment to my favorite WP, and now I use it almost exclusively because of the need to swim in a sea of Word users. As others have mentioned, there are occasionally some minor font/formatting issues, but I've never run across anything fatal. If formatting is crucial, I export my document as a PDF file and send that. It also feels good to use and support free software - as a grad student, even the academic edition of MS Office is still a lot of money. I could probably install MS Office illegally, but OpenOffice.org is free of cost and I can keep a clear conscience.

I love Open Office. I used it originally as an alternative to Microsoft. But now I actually like it.

This is the way I see it. It follows the 80/20 rule. In MSOffice, 80% of the users use 20% of the features. And they charge everyone top dollar for all of these features. Now if you are one of the 80%ers who only user 20% of the features, make the move to Open Office, and pay 100% less.

I've used OpenOffice for several years (including when it was called StarOffice). The free aspect was initially the most appealing part of it.

It works best when the user is a "plain vanilla" kind of writer. You can save your documents in a variety of formats, but occasionally they have a glitch when bringing them up in Word. WordPerfect doesn't seem to have a problem with them.

I still use Office for some things, primarily because I'm in grad school, and most of the professors (mostly education types) are clueless about non-MS products.

I've installed it in a few schools, because once you save the cost of a few copies of MS Office, you're really looking at a bargain. Plus, I haven't found that kids really care about the specifics of a package. They just want to be able to generate a nice output, which it does.

I've used OpenOffice for several years (including when it was called StarOffice). The free aspect was initially the most appealing part of it.

It works best when the user is a "plain vanilla" kind of writer. You can save your documents in a variety of formats, but occasionally they have a glitch when bringing them up in Word. WordPerfect doesn't seem to have a problem with them.

I still use Office for some things, primarily because I'm in grad school, and most of the professors (mostly education types) are clueless about non-MS products.

I've installed it in a few schools, because once you save the cost of a few copies of MS Office, you're really looking at a bargain. Plus, I haven't found that kids really care about the specifics of a package. They just want to be able to generate a nice output, which it does.