This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new!

What matters most is the file format

Posted by: Anonymous [ip:] on June 11, 2008 03:22 AM
If this is a vector that can increase ODF's presence in enterprises, then I'm all for it. The more ubiquitous ODF becomes, the better off we all are (unless your a MS stockholder/employee, that is! Heh heh).

That said, I would never, ever use it on my systems. I'm at OO.o 2.4; good though OO.o 1.1.4 was for its time, why would I go back to it now? I get ODF with what I have, and I get to use an office suite in freedom, regardless of platform.

The only reason I'd go for an older version of OO.o is if I'm in a third-world country with 486/Pentium I PC's running Windows 95. Yes, Windows 95, from 12-13 years ago. They don't have the money to upgrade, pure and simple, and they're not networked. But they want MS Office 97/2000/XP compatibility. So, I give them OO.o 1.0.3 on a CD (these older PC's at least do have 4x CD-ROM readers). I give them several others to share w/ their friends. The fact that the original OO.o formats are ZIP archives keeps the files small enough to fit on their floppies.

The result has been that they (and their friends) all start using .sxw and the other default OO.o formats...which, of course, are supported on all subsequent OO.o versions, too!

But that's the only time I'd ever go backwards. If someone's got a Pentium III or newer, OO.o 2.4 is (today) the way I would lead them.


Return to IBM Lotus Symphony turns old OOo code into enterprise Judas goat