For what it's worth... In a review of Microsoft Office 2016 in the November 2015 of PC Magazine, long time reviewer Edward Mendelson gives the new version of Microsoft's suite 4.5 of 5 stars. As is typical of such reviews, the main discussion is followed by a short section – in this case titled “Office Alternatives” – describing other competitive offerings, such as Google Apps, Corel WordPerfect Office, Apple's iWorks, etc.. He had the following to say about LibreOffice:
“Although Office 2016 as a whole towers over its competition, it isn't the best at everything. LibreOffice 5 is a free and open-source suite, so governments and security-conscious organizations can use it without worrying about what might be hidden inside Microsoft's code – but it's also clumsy and unstable.” “Clumsy” seems to me to be a matter of what one is used to (i.e. de gustibus non disputandum as Horace said), and Mr. Mendelson doesn't explain what he means by “unstable” (it's of course easy to find “bugs,” but I consider “unstable” to suggest frequent crashes, which I haven't experienced or heard about). There are a variety of use cases for which LibreOffice is simply inadequate for serious work of course, but these are not the sort of things that the average user would run across. Given that LibreOffice is FREE, and coded mostly by volunteers with a wide range of programming skills and experience, it seems to me that the author's characterization misses the whole value proposition of LibreOffice. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/PC-Magazine-Comments-about-LibreOffice-tp4165317.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
