Microsoft Office 2003 or Open Office

gnolan · 29-09-2010 09:51AM #1

Had no idea where to put this as there doesn't seem to be a dedicated software forum.

I had a problem with my hard drive recently and so most information was wiped. I have MS Office 2003 here at home but don't know whether to reinstall it or go down the Open Office route.

Can someone tell me whether one is better than the other?

If i was reasonably proficient with MS Office 2003 would i adapt quite well to Open Office?

Basically if anyone could suggest some pros and cons with each. Thanks

Fysh · 29-09-2010 10:11AM

Office 2003 pros: viewed as "the proper office tools" by many places, therefore being proficient in its use and accustomed to it is perceived to be better than merely knowing how a general office productivity suite should work. Also, comes with full version of Outlook which, if you're used to it and have old mail archives stored as PSTs or if you use a mail service running on an Exchange mailserver, is very useful. Lots of official support available out there along with extensive documentation and training courses.

Office 2003 cons: Is now the n-2th revision of Microsoft Office and therefore positively ancient. At an interface and file format level has little to do with the current revision of Office. Also, it costs money.

OpenOffice.org pros: Free of charge, can handle most standards-compliant Microsoft Office files, uses standards-compliant file formats, is cross platform.

OpenOfficeo.org cons: Not supported (either officially or unofficially) to quite the same level as Microsoft Office. Some functionality of Microsoft Office (eg advanced macros in Excel) doesn't work in quite the same way in Oo.org. Also, there's a current legal spat over the future of OpenOffice.org as the steerage group who look after it are trying to fork from Oracle (who effectively inherited OpenOffice.org as part of the Sun Microsystems buyout).

SeanW · 29-09-2010 11:01AM

OpenOffice.org is so good, MS Office isn't even worth pirating anymore, even if it can still be done.

OO.o all the way.

EvilMonkey · 29-09-2010 12:58PM

If you have Microsoft office then its a no brainier. Microsoft office 2003 is better than Open Office apart from supporting some newer file formats.

Since open office is free, try it and see which you prefer.

gnolan · 29-09-2010 10:36PM

Thanks. Lot of differing opinions...

Ghost Train · 29-09-2010 10:43PM

Would probably go with office just because you have a more standard product that will produce documents that will look exactly the same when you send them to somebody else using MS Office, or when someone sends you a doc file it will be fully compatible

Openoffice for me seems to loose some formatting when it opens some doc files

That being said you can install both and see which you prefer

Fysh · 30-09-2010 05:54AM

Ghost Train wrote: »

Would probably go with office just because you have a more standard product that will produce documents that will look exactly the same when you send them to somebody else using MS Office, or when someone sends you a doc file it will be fully compatible

Openoffice for me seems to loose some formatting when it opens some doc files

I do know what you mean, but I'm not convinced whether it's only a problem with OO.o or whether Microsoft do their best to make it difficult for everyone else to play nice with their file formats. Given other silly rubbish MS have done in the past it would be par for the course.

jahalpin · 30-09-2010 06:37AM

I would definately go for Microsoft Office as it is far better than OpenOffice

I have tried OpenOffice on a few occasions and have been disapointed each time. It doesn't seem to be actually finished, unlike Microsoft Office which is a very polished and professional product.

I have all used all the versions of Microsoft Office since version 4, and 2003 is by far the best version so far. The 2010 version is also very good, but takes a while to get used to

Fysh · 30-09-2010 08:32AM

jahalpin wrote: »

I would definately go for Microsoft Office as it is far better than OpenOffice

I have tried OpenOffice on a few occasions and have been disapointed each time. It doesn't seem to be actually finished, unlike Microsoft Office which is a very polished and professional product.

I have all used all the versions of Microsoft Office since version 4, and 2003 is by far the best version so far. The 2010 version is also very good, but takes a while to get used to

If you want a polished, professional and current product, you probably shouldn't be considering using a 7-year old version of that product which is two iterations behind the current major release version.

Shankly Gates · 01-10-2010 01:24AM

SeanW wrote: »

OpenOffice.org is so good, MS Office isn't even worth pirating anymore, even if it can still be done.

OO.o all the way.

What a stupid thing to say. Vague statements and no backup.

bhickey · 01-10-2010 06:26AM

jahalpin wrote: »

I would definately go for Microsoft Office as it is far better than OpenOffice

I think most people would prefer MS Office (inc. Outlook as their e-mail client) as long as it's someone else (i.e. their employer) that's paying for it.

I've found that people that try Openoffice generally are happy enough to stick with it (unless someone else offers to buy MS Office for them of course).

Biggins · 03-10-2010 01:36PM

There is a cheaper alternative - "Textmaker".
TextMaker is a word processor developed by the Nuremberg (Germany) based software company SoftMaker and available as part of the SoftMaker office suite.

I use this a lot more for office documents and its saves in "Microsoft Office" formats too.
Its much faster, cheaper and you can even install 3 copies of it for the cheap price of one!

* See here: http://www.softmaker.com/english/ofwtm_en.htm

* Demo version here: http://www.softmaker.com/english/ofwdemo_en.htm

I have Office 2007 but love Textmaker (and the other components of the full package) much, much better for document creation.

Microsoft Office 2003 or Open Office

Comments