To be honest, I have not read the article, but it can be said that a
cardinal rule is that you do not alienate your advertisers within your
articles.
Unless a writer is not biased towards one system or another, there will
always be some issues with their reviews and ideas about their reviewed
tech, so many people would say.
Yes, MS Office has the market share for providing office software. Yes,
they have the money to make sure there are advertisements on how great
their software is. If you were a publisher with MS advertising money
coming into your publication, you may do what you can to make any
article favor MS and make the competition look unfavorable for your
needs. I have seen articles written with a slat towards one side of a
debated idea and then the editors/publishers edit it towards the other
side without the authors knowledge. "Don't bite the hand that feed you"
is a major idea where the businesses who pay for advertisements get to
influence what gets "said" in the publications.
We all have opinions about MS vs. open-source or FOSS. I cannot afford
to keep paying for my software and its upgrades. That is why I first
looked into Linux and its software alternatives. Yes, I still have some
Windows systems, but I tend to use the packages I use on my Ubuntu
systems on my Windows systems, if they have both Linux and Windows
versions. LibreOffice, VLC, Firefox, and a bunch of other software, are
a major part of my computer usage on both Ubuntu and Windows systems.
So, back to the article. . .
Was the author uninformed or was their other reasons that such an
article content written.
Then there is the question on how much research was done days or week
before the article was written and who researched it for the author. I
know that a professional writer may not have the time to do all of his
or hers research included within an article. If you have to write an
article every few days, or daily for a blog article, how much time does
that author have for research?
So since this system of providing information and help for a growing
competitor to MS Office suite, I say most of us tend think differently
than what the article states about LibreOffice 5.x.x, or at least what
we hear about what the article stated in these posts. I dumped MS
Office due to costs, while others had a variety of other reasons. I do
my best to promote locally LibreOffice. Having major tech articles that
"bash" the abilities and stability of LibreOffice is not helpful, but
these publications need the computer industry's money to survive. If
the major supplies of this money needs MS products to keep the lights
on, then it is hard to be objective towards alternatives to MS
products. Rarely do the people in charge of a business look towards
publications based on Linux and FOSS ideas and services for their
information about products for their businesses. WE were raised on MS
based products to be the only source personal and business solution to
our computer needs. WE need to have a major push by the Linux and FOSS
based communities to re-educate people that there is a different way of
thinking and a different source for our computer needs. European
communities are slowly learning this, but the USA communities are not
hearing the shouting of the voices of change.
Pro MS articles in publications, without articles that show the real
truth about the alternatives to MS, are what is holding back the USA
expansion into the alternative products and markets, like LibreOffice
others that can replace MS products in you personal and business
computer environment.
On 11/04/2015 05:32 PM, Bastián Díaz wrote:
I think some very whimsical and uninformed comments from the author.
Unfortunately, that information makes users distrust LibreOffice not
want to test their virtues. I would say that LibreOffice is in its
best and still much more to do.
Some articles with facts showing quality and low error that has
LibreOffice:
-http://www.coverity.com/press-releases/libreoffice-makes-strides-in-software-quality-with-coverity-scan/
-http://www.infoworld.com/article/2687117/open-source-software/libreoffice-code-ten-times-better-than-proprietary.html
-https://colonelqubit.wordpress.com/2015/10/15/libreoffice-qa-over-1000-bibisects-served/
-https://mmohrhard.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/short-update-about-the-performance-testing/
Cheers
---
BASTIÁN DÍAZ
https://telegram.me/diazbastian
El 04-11-2015 17:58, CVAlkan escribió:
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
[1]
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Links:
------
[1]
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/PC-Magazine-Comments-about-LibreOffice-tp4165317.html
--
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
