←back to thread

96 points CharlesW | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.201s | source
Show context
billy99k ◴[] No.45400808[source]
It's not because it's better. If you just need a basic excel/doc alternative, maybe.

As soon as you need some more complex excel calculations, LibreOffice falls flat.

Good luck getting formatting to look correct in a .doc file opened by Microsoft Office 99% of the time.

replies(6): >>45402206 #>>45402363 #>>45402821 #>>45402923 #>>45403171 #>>45456912 #
GuestFAUniverse ◴[] No.45402821[source]
OMG, the usual FUD. Cannot here that anymore.

If one depends on opening old MS documents, MS Office often fails while LibreOffice (LO) does the job -- been there, done that; e.g. book manuscripts of old professors who close to never migrate to newer versions, old calculations in Excel, etc. Formatting isn't even the prime issue there. MS Office utterly fails -- for me that's _peak incompetence_: flooding the world with a overly complex format, that they cannot reliabily open themselves.

So, depending on the context LO _might_ be an issue, or it totally is the opposite: the go-to solution to a serious problem.

replies(2): >>45403377 #>>45486563 #
1. euanc ◴[] No.45486563[source]
LO may open old files, doesn't mean you're seeing the original/complete/"authentic" content https://natlib.govt.nz/records/46031753

Also, that reports highlights that yes most users don't use most rare features of office products, but many/most seem to use at least one