<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://thestandard.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title></title>
 <link>http://thestandard.com/node/106218/comments</link>
 <description>comments feed.</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>OpenOffice.org Beta Fails the Office 2007 Test</title>
 <link>http://thestandard.com/news/2008/05/08/openoffice-org-beta-fails-office-2007-test</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I&#039;m not embarrassed to admit it: I&#039;m a big fan of &lt;a href=&quot;//www.pcworld.com/tags/Microsoft+Office.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Office 2007&lt;/a&gt;. I think Microsoft got a lot right with its latest release, starting with the ribbon interface and including any number of tweaks and improvements that make my day easier. I can&#039;t say I&#039;m thrilled about the price of the suite, however; nor the countless SKUs to choose from. Plus, I&#039;m also a big Linux fan. That&#039;s why I always try to keep my eye on the current state of &lt;a href=&quot;//www.pcworld.com/tags/OpenOffice.org.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;OpenOffice.org&lt;/a&gt;, the open source office suite founded by Sun Microsystems. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;//www.pcworld.com/article/id,145578/article.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;OpenOffice.org 3.0 has just entered public beta,&lt;/a&gt; and it promises plenty of improvements from the previous version. Mac users, in particular, will be pleased with the new &lt;a href=&quot;//www.pcworld.com/article/id,145637/article.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;native Aqua UI.&lt;/a&gt; Unfortunately, however, the one feature that I was really looking forward to on the Windows side -- compatibility with the Office 2007 XML file formats -- could still clearly use a lot of work. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As an experiment, I saved a simple Word 2003 document in Word 2007 format. Office 2007 opened it just fine, but OpenOffice.org Writer only got as far as the first two lines of the text; instead of skipping the next line, the rest was truncated. An Excel 2007 template fared no better. OpenOffice.org Calc preserved labels, numbers, and formulae; macros, embedded graphics, and page layout options disappeared. A plain .xlsx file created with the same template yielded identical results.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I&#039;m very disappointed to have to say it, but OpenOffice.org&#039;s support for the Office 2007 file formats simply isn&#039;t ready for prime time. I haven&#039;t had time yet to do a full review of the suite, but the tests I tried were extremely basic import/export operations on documents that were not in the least bit complex. Unfortunately, the beta OpenOffice.org struck out.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It&#039;s strange, if you think about it. Wasn&#039;t the whole point of XML file formats for Office to make the documents more compatible with other software? Isn&#039;t XML a self-describing, human-readable file format that should make reverse-engineering a breeze (compared to the old, binary Office formats, at least)? And isn&#039;t OOXML, the Office 2007 file format, &lt;a href=&quot;//www.pcworld.com/article/id,144009/article.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;a public ISO standard?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But then, if you&#039;ve been following the news, you know that &lt;a href=&quot;//www.pcworld.com/article/id,144036/article.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;there&#039;s more going on with OOXML than meets the eye.&lt;/a&gt; Not to mention the fact that Office 2007 itself reportedly &lt;a href=&quot;//news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39388229,00.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;doesn&#039;t conform to the published standards.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The final release of OpenOffice.org 3.0 is still a few months away (and, to be fair, the developers do not recommend the current beta release for production use). There may still be time to &lt;a href=&quot;//marketing.openoffice.org/3.0/announcementbeta.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;get involved and help iron out the bugs&lt;/a&gt; with Office 2007 support -- but I doubt it. For now, my recommendation remains the same: If you&#039;re an Office 2007 user, like me, you&#039;ll probably want to keep saving your documents in Office 2003 format -- at least until OpenDocument becomes more mainstream.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://thestandard.com/news/2008/05/08/openoffice-org-beta-fails-office-2007-test#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/1537">Applications</category>
 <category domain="http://thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/1661">Hosted</category>
 <category domain="http://thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/1402">IDGNS</category>
 <category domain="http://thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/1539">Office suites</category>
 <category domain="http://thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/4989">OpenOffice.org</category>
 <category domain="http://thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/1505">Services</category>
 <category domain="http://thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/1520">Software</category>
 <category domain="http://thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/5667">Software &amp;amp; Web</category>
 <category domain="http://thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/4988">StarOffice</category>
 <category domain="http://thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/99">Views &amp;amp; Analysis</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 16:21:05 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>IDG News Service</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">106218 at http://thestandard.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
