Microsoft Office vs OpenOffice.org

In this article, we try to  compare key features of the new brand of Microsoft,  Microsoft Office 2010 Professional to OpenOffice.org 3.2, released in January 2010. We’ll look at their word processors (Microsoft's Word 2010 versus OpenOffice's Writer), spreadsheets (Excel 2010 versus OpenOffice's Calc), and presentation tools (PowerPoint 2010 versus OpenOffice’s Impress).

Before we examine the specific features of Microsoft Office and OpenOffice, it may be helpful to step back to compare the philosophical differences between the two packages, and how these differences might impact how you purchase and use them.

With commercially licensed software like Microsoft Office, a product is developed by a single company; sales help fund product testing and development, marketing and sales, as well as salaries and shareholder dividends. In contrast, open-source software like OpenOffice is developed collaboratively, often by volunteers, and freely distributed, allowing anyone to use, redistribute, adapt, or improve the code — all free of charge.

The open-source philosophy is not just limited to software, and can attract loyal adherents who believe that information should be shared freely. Likewise, some consumers feel more comfortable with a for-profit model they feel rewards ingenuity and innovation. If you have deep convictions in either direction, we suspect that we're not going to change your mind here. However, each model does offer tangible advantages:

1.     Open-source applications often cost nothing. OpenOffice is free — and who doesn’t love a bargain?

2.     Updates to open-source applications also cost nothing. As an open-source product, OpenOffice updates are free; the same is not always true of Microsoft updates. Microsoft, however, gives Office to nonprofits as part of a philanthropic program, meaning that it is possible (although not likely, given the length of Microsoft’s commitment to philanthropy) that if the donation program ended, you would have to pay to update the suite down the road.

3.     You can do what you like with open-source code. You can study OpenOffice and adapt it to your needs. You can improve the program or build something completely new with it and release your changes to the public. If this is important to you, Microsoft doesn't offer anything comparable.

4.     Commercially licensed software offers a company behind the code. Microsoft depends on the sales of Office and its other software to remain profitable, giving it a strong incentive to offer the features, support, and interface that will make it attractive to users and competitive in the market. Microsoft has built a vast pool of talented developers, a mature platform, and polished user interfaces, and Office’s success has provided it with a large user and support base. Although OpenOffice has a formal relationship with Oracle, the mandates for open-source applications like OpenOffice are a bit fuzzier and tend to be driven by tech-savvy programmers. In practice, this has resulted in a somewhat less polished interface and more limited documentation.

5.     Open-source has code beyond a company. Because its source code is available to all, OpenOffice is not solely dependent on its current crop of developers and current corporate sponsor. If all these people were to disappear, the code would still exist and other people could pick of the project. The same is not always true for closed-source, commercial projects. That being said, it doesn't appear that Microsoft is in any danger of going bankrupt in the foreseeable future.

6.     OpenOffice 3’s interface, in contrast, is very similar to Office 2003, making it an intriguing option for those who are concerned about a wholesale move to the ribbon interface. Anyone who has used Word or Excel 2003 will feel comfortable in Write and Calc. A move from Microsoft Office 2003 to OpenOffice 3 might be compared to a move from Office 2000 to Office 2003: there are small differences, and users who have learned things by rote may require some training, but the concepts are all the same. In fact, many regard OpenOffice 3 as simpler, and thus easier to learn, than Microsoft Office 2010. OpenOffice 3 is also about as polished as Office 2003 — perfectly functional, but not as sleek as Office 2010.

7.     OpenOffice 3 offers better support for older computers than the latest version of Microsoft Office. For instance, Office 2010 notes its minimum spec is a Pentium 700MHz with 512 MB of RAM, while OpenOffice lists 256 MB of RAM (although 512 MB RAM is recommended). While Office 2010 requires Windows 7, XP, or Vista to run fully, OpenOffice will run on Windows 2000 or 2003. What's more, OpenOffice will run under Linux, and Linux runs much more effectively on old computers than Windows 7 or XP. This makes Linux and OpenOffice a practical combination even on older computers, especially those that require few other applications (as you might find in a public computer lab setting.)

One final consideration: because OpenOffice has much looser licensing requirements, you needn’t worry about installing unlimited copies around your office or for friends or partner organizations. When you buy or receive a version of Office 2010, however, you may only install it on a specified number of computers within your organization, so you'll need to keep track of exactly where it's been installed.

OpenOffice does not have complete support for the new file formats created by Office 2007 and 2010. In our tests, simply saving an Office 2003 document into the Office 2010 file format and then opening that same document in OpenOffice resulted in a substantial loss of formatting fidelity, particularly from Word to Writer. As these file formats are fairly new, one would expect the OpenOffice community to improve their support over time. OpenOffice also cannot save to the new 2007 and 2010 file formats; however, as Office 2010 is able to open the Office 2003 file formats