Apache OpenOffice vs. LibreOffice

askubuntu.com/questions/180232/why-ubuntu-12-04-is-shipped-with-libre-office

This answer (your link) is not correct.

First of all Apache OpenOffice is NOT the same as LibreOffice.
The code is now different between this two projects. It is possible the LibreOffice have got some new features, but it contain many new (and old) bugs. Apache OpenOffice is much more stable and I feel it everyday using it. It is not just my words, it is real difference in using.
Now I use version 3.4.1 of Apache OpenOffice and I like this version. I see that the Community now works on 4.0 version.

And about licenses: Apache OpenOffice is trademark of The Apache Software Foundation (see information on official site). And Apache OpenOffice is released under the Apache 2.0 license. It is not depend more from Oracle. Apache 2.0 license is really free license (isn't it?).

Additional Apache OpenOffice is good supported by Apache Software Foundation. I saw this on my own experience. When I post my problem to Apache bug tracker, I've got very fast answer and my problem was solved. When I post same problem to Libre bug tracker, I've got no one answer on this problem.

As a result of all, I do not see any reasons why you can't add the Apache OpenOffice to Ubuntu repository.
It is stable, good supported and completely free.

Seems Canonical want to distance themselves from Oracle.

Did you read my previous comment?
Apache OpenOffice is not depends from Oracle more.
Apache OpenOffice now is trademark of The Apache Software Foundation (not Oracle).
Please answer this question only if you really have an answer.
This is my suggestion and a wish to Canonical to return Apache OpenOffice to Ubuntu.

Thanks Warren Hill, that solved my question.

Isn't that what I said.....

Sorry, actionparsnip, but you only said that Canonical want to distance themselves from Oracle.
But as I wrote many time the OpenOffice is not related to Oracle any more. I wrote about I do not see any reasons why Canonical can't return to OpenOffice now (when it is not related to Oracle). You do not answer this question. You answer on other question which I have not asked: why Canonical replace OpenOffice with LO in past. I have not asked this question. I have asked: why not return OO now when it not related to Oracle any more. What is the reasons now? I see not more any reasons.
All your answers is not informative for my question.
Warren Hill do not answer this question too, but he gives me good suggestion to post my suggestion to http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com. I think this is best solution for this problem.

Hi ,

Where did you post your problem about LibreOffice and you didn't get any answer ? Here ?

Here is not a LibreOffice specific support , here is a general support for Ubuntu .

Please provide the link where you posted your problem.. and you didn't get any answer.

I don't know if Apache OpenOffice is not anymore Oracle's property (or not) , but we have a complete Office suite right now (LibreOffice) and well development and maybe Canonical do not want to complicate things.

Although it was a useful and informative discussion.

Of course you are free to download and install OpenOffice if you want.
Is not necessary for Ubuntu to have the Apache OpenOffice in its Official repositories. (IMHO)

Thank you

Hi, NikTh.

May be you are one of LibreOffice developers? If yes, than it is an answer why you try to defend your product.
I am not enemy to LO. When this project started, I was very happy and think about it as a new and better office. I was think it is very good to replace OO with LO. But when I try to use LO some years, I everyday have some bugs which is really painful for me. I've posted some of that bugs (2 or 3) to LO bug tracker, but it is not helpful for me.

I use Ubuntu till 2007 (7.10 is my first) and I see regression in Offices. In my opinion most stable of old OpenOffice.org releases was in Ubuntu 8.04. Later OO releases have more bugs than older OO. When it is replaced by LO, I think this bugs is fixed in LO, but all bugs successfully goes from OO to LO. I wait and think may be you fix this bugs in future releases of LO, but you don't. And now, when I have installed new OO (version 3.4.1) from official site, I see it have not that painful bugs. It is really much more stable than all older OO and LO (and new LO too). That older OO from Ubuntu repo was less stable than current version from official site. The new OO looks like "Ubuntu LTS release": may be it not contain newest features, but it is much more stable (much less bugs). I work with OO, I need not very new features, I need old features works good (without bugs), I need stable OO (for everyday work, not for experiments). In LO you concentrate on new features, but not on fix old bugs (that bugs goes from release to release). LO developers are make new releases faster and more frequently than OO, but OO releases much more stable.

You right: here is not a LibreOffice specific support. And I wrote that I've posted bugs to LO official bug tracker. I've got answer on one bug, but this answer is not helpful. And I've got no one answer on other bug. Sorry, I do not remember now links on that bugs, if I found it, than I post it.
Now I goes to LO Bugzilla and I see this Bugzilla does not work now. I see a message: "It seems there is a problem to connect with Bugzilla. Please try again later". Is it good support when Bugzilla does not work?

And, please, not more words about Oracle. OO is not linked to Oracle any more. No more Oracle. If you don't know about this (or you don't trust me), you can read it yourself on official site. Apache OpenOffice is trademark of The Apache Software Foundation and released under Apache 2.0 license (free license).

Result: Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 is really very stable. It much more stable than all previous OOo releases and much more stable than LO. It not just my words, it is real. I feel it everyday work with AOO. I have tested AOO 3.4.1 on numerous different computers with Ubuntu 11.10, Ubuntu 12.04 LTS and on Linux Mint 12, on 32-bit and 64-bit architectures, and I like it. It work very stable, it have not that old bugs. AOO 3.4.1 keep my nerves safe, LO (and older OOo) makes me feel pain.

Oh Oh .. no.. !
misunderstood here.

I'm a user of Ubuntu just like you are. No developer or Canonical member or anything like that. Simple user. :-)

Also I'm not a fanatic or enemy of anything. I'm trying always to use what is working good and what Ubuntu offers to me (pre-installed). L.O is pre-installed in Ubuntu.

If something not working good , then I will try to find a solution and if I cannot find a solution I will use something else and probably I will report a bug.(or question or brainstorm Idea).

I've visited the openoffice.org site and I read all about you said. Ok , no more Oracle. Agreed.

At my opinion if you want a straight answer and if you want to interferer with developers the Launchpad Bugs tracker is a good place to start.

Brainstorm is a good place for ideas , ok . But if you want the developers of maybe Canonical members to answer your question (query) then a bug report would be a good idea (IMHO).

I never tried Apache OpenOffice but I will give it a shot.

Thank you

Also it would be a good idea if the title of the bug (if you open one) will be something like

"Why Apache OpenOffice not included in Ubuntu Software Center ? " ..

The title "OpenOffice vs LibreOffice" it seems like a debate or something...

:-)

Tried Abiword and Gnumeric :-)

OK. Sorry for misunderstood.

May be it is good idea to post a bug, but I think "Apache OpenOffice not included ... " is not a bug of Ubuntu. Some people may be can work with LO, but some can't. I've posted this as a suggestion and a wish to Canonical, not as a bug.

All software can contain bugs. Ubuntu sometime contain bugs.
But some bugs are not painful (not interfere with my work style), and some other bugs is really painful when I work. I don't like when in some software, some feature works fine in one version, but does not work fine in newer version - regression. Developers can add many new good features to software to make this software better, but if some old features (may be just one feature) doesn't work fine (with bugs), then this software can be unusable for some users. It is my suggestion to all developers: please do not make regressions in your software.

And I like too when I can use software from Ubuntu repo, but some times this is impossible. If Canonical include Apache OO to Ubuntu repo, then everyone who need it can use AOO from Ubuntu repo.

I suggest it only because I doesn't see any reasons now against do it. What is better in LO than in AOO? May be someone can change my opinion against my suggestion. I see some bugs in LO which is unusable for me, AOO have not this bugs, but may be some users have any reasons to use LO instead AOO? If some user have this reasons, I want to see this reasons. For now only one reason all of you wrote is "Oracle...". For now Oracle is not more a reason. Have you any other reasons against AOO 3.4.1? If you have not, then Canonical can return OO back to Ubuntu. This return is very easy to do and painless for users.

To actionparsnip:
No I doesn't try Abiword and Gnumeric. May be this is good software. But if this software is interfere with my work style, then it is hard to me to use it.