91–100 of 100 posts
We WANT big companies to use LO, or anything else, simply so that it becomes acceptable and supported to do so, you freaking oafs.
Libreoffice provides a commodity for free. That's the whole value proposition. It's implied by the Libre part of the name. So, convincing businesses to donate money out of charity for "support" is not a business plan and never has been. The call for businesses to please pay up seems to indicate that the shift to introducing a community edition had little to no effect on the bank balances of the companies peddling vag…
In fact the opposite is true. Because “free” in English can be used both for freedom and for beer, the terms “libre” and “gratis” can be used to clarify what you’re talking about when you say “free”. Libre means freedom, as in liberty, and makes no reference to the price.
Of course LibreOffice is free of charge, and almost all open source software is, but the name definitely doesn’t imply it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because they trust you to do it right. At a certain stage of organization, if you put a lot of barriers in people's way your company will fail.
So you're a WFH developer AND a sec expert? If you had those skills you wouldn't be writing code. For example, would you use SMS for 2FA? (Hint: Many trust it, but shouldn't, right?) This isn't about trust or not. It's about liability. It's about accountability. It's about reasonable expectations. It's about making sure you're not putting your team in a compromising position. It's about not assuming.
Newer versions of libreoffice have been almost unusably buggy for me: constant crashes, and track changes + undo has all kinds of weird quirks and sometimes makes entire paragraphs disappear. I would not recommend it in a business context even if interoperability with Word wasn't an issue. I hate to sound harsh, particularly when I've been benefiting from their work for years, but it's hard to imagine a workplace tha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your employer should be providing the tools for you to do the job, including locally run software. So yes, they should be providing an office suite whether that be Office365/ Libre Office / etc.
> Your employer should be providing the tools for you to do the job Why? Skilled tradesmen frequently own their own tools, and many wouldn't have it any other way. You can bet your ass many of them have spent an order of magnitude more on their tools than a few measly software licenses ($20 for a text editor? Extortionist! But a cheap cordless drill costs several times that...) In California, employers are only requi…
Software developers who work as independent contractors generally own their own equipment and software (in Australia that's actually one of the legal criteria for determining whether someone is a contractor or an employee for taxation purposes).
Whereas employees generally use company-supplied hardware and software, which is to the employer's benefit as they have full control over it.
But that's really by the by; whoever is procuring software to be used for commercial purposes, it is reasonable to expect they would purchase commercial licenses to help fund the development of their tools.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A couple of thoughts: Many enterprises are moving away from thick client office software and moving to browser based office software with cloud backends. Google apps, Zoho, OnlyOffice, Bitrix, and Microsoft all have very usable cloud offerings. Collabora is trying to build an LibreOffice based cloud offering, but LibreOfice remains old-style "thick client" software. Apache OpenOffice is still available and free. Libr…
Given the sheer number of companies still using Office 2010 or 2007 or older, thick clients aren't the problem. A huge part of the LibreOffice value proposition is price. And choosing free LibreOffice over paid Office is a lot easier than choosing a paid option. Once you open the conversation about paying, Office is a no-brainer and you need a compelling reason to switch to something else.
I looked for ZDNet's source to see where it was getting such tone-deaf and counter-productive messaging. It's from the actual release announcement discussed earlier this week! https://blog.documentfoundation.org/blog/2021/02/03/libreoff... Open source sustainability is a real problem, but spending the first seven paragraphs of a release announcement berating a bunch of your users as freeloaders is a really bad look.
A couple of thoughts: Many enterprises are moving away from thick client office software and moving to browser based office software with cloud backends. Google apps, Zoho, OnlyOffice, Bitrix, and Microsoft all have very usable cloud offerings. Collabora is trying to build an LibreOffice based cloud offering, but LibreOfice remains old-style "thick client" software. Apache OpenOffice is still available and free. Libr…
Thick? Stuff that runs in the browser definitely uses more memory and CPU cycles.
There's a huge difference in resources between XWindow servers and the new Electron based applications.