Writer and Word compatibility question

users
#1

I've not use LO for a long time. Quite frankly, it's way too sophisticated for my uses. Read that as too many features I have no use for.

The same applies for Word.

Regarding the .odt file format...

If you are working in Word, and have a lot of tracking changes going on, and you save the file in Word as an .odt file, are those tracking changes and such carried over when you open the file in LO?

#2

I have been using LibreOffice since its first version.

I do not use many of its options either.

Why save the file to .odt instead of .doc or .docx?

I deal with many folks that use MS Office - state agencies require it. So you can make LibreOffice default to the Word file formats. I would prefer the .doc format, since each version of MS Office since 2007 were using a different version of the .docx format and not comply compatible with each other.

Actually, the last version of MS Office [not trial] I used was MSO 2003.

I started using OpenOffice.org since before it was able to read/write the .doc format. Then I switched to LO after I waited over a year for a new version of OOo. I have not gone back. When I had to use MSO 2007 on a computer center system, I did not like all of the changes to the interface or all the newer options. I do remember in the 1990 era of MS Office where I read an advertisement touting that MS added over 500 new functions and options added to the new version over the previous one. Back then is seemed to me that MS wanted Word to be both a word processor and a spreadsheet package, along with other non word processing options. Back in the early/mid 2000's software companies started to require a gig of disk space for default installation on the "new affordable" hard drive sizes more than 20 gig of storage. All of the added options/functions of MS Office and Adobe packages started to need more than 40% of the free space after a fresh MS Windows XP install.

Still MS Office keeps adding more and more functions/options to each package, like World or Excel, where you need to be a "advanced specialist" to know how to use even half of all of the functions/options in Word or Excel alone, let alone of the whole Office suite.

LibreOffice does add new options/functions but not as many as MSO does for each version/line.

#3

I have been using LibreOffice since its first version.

I do not use many of its options either.

Why save the file to .odt instead of .doc or .docx?

I'm looking for ways to have people be inclusive rather than exclusive. IOW, you can have people be able to share files, and not force anyone to use a particular word processor. If you want LO, Mary wants Word, Sam wants Word Perfect, Joe wants Pages, Esther wants Nisus (Mac), everyone can work on the project yet each use the word processor of their choice.

This can be done if you're willing to work with PDF files, but people seem to dislike the idea. I'm beginning to suspect people don't know how to annotate a PDF file rather than directly editing the file.

I deal with many folks that use MS Office - state agencies require it.
So you can make LibreOffice default to the Word file formats. I would
prefer the .doc format, since each version of MS Office since 2007 were
using a different version of the .docx format and not comply compatible
with each other.

That compatibility issue is what I'm talking about, and want to avoid.

3 or 4 years ago, a friend of mine had a new job, and initially had to use her own computer. All she had was Open Office XXXX. But she would save them either .doc or .docx format. I would open them in Word 2007, and it wasn't right. I would fix them in 2007 and send them back. And as you probably expect, OOo wouldn't open them correctly.

The company has now provided a company owned computer with 2010 so that issue no longer exists.

She still has OOo on her personal computer. I've tried with no success to get her to try LO, but with no success. For that matter, I haven't been able to get her to try anything else either.

Myself, I like Softmaker Office Free, and am considering purchasing the paid version.

Being free is simply not the best reason to chose a piece of software.

Actually, the last version of MS Office [not trial] I used was MSO 2003.

2007, here, which I'm using for a document at work. A coworker things Word is the greatest thing since sliced bread. We're using the tracking and changes features of Word, and I'm beginning to remember why I hated the feature. I tried to get him to do it using PDF, but that was a no go. My suspicion is the only way he knows to deal with PDFs is with a browser.

I started using OpenOffice.org since before it was able to read/write
the .doc format. Then I switched to LO after I waited over a year for a
new version of OOo. I have not gone back. When I had to use MSO 2007
on a computer center system, I did not like all of the changes to the
interface or all the newer options. I do remember in the 1990 era of MS
Office where I read an advertisement touting that MS added over 500 new
functions and options added to the new version over the previous one.
Back then is seemed to me that MS wanted Word to be both a word
processor and a spreadsheet package, along with other non word
processing options. Back in the early/mid 2000's software companies
started to require a gig of disk space for default installation on the
"new affordable" hard drive sizes more than 20 gig of storage. All of
the added options/functions of MS Office and Adobe packages started to
need more than 40% of the free space after a fresh MS Windows XP install.

Still MS Office keeps adding more and more functions/options to each
package, like World or Excel, where you need to be a "advanced
specialist" to know how to use even half of all of the functions/options
in Word or Excel alone, let alone of the whole Office suite.

Way too many options for most people. I think it's an effort to be everything to everybody. As a result, lots of features are just mediocre. My philosophy is do a few things well, let someone else do the other things.

My friend I mentioned above had to do some wall displays/posters and tried to do them in OOo. I kept telling her she needed a page layout program. "Oh, no, OOo will do it." Serif had a sale on PagePlus X6 just before they released X7. $25/copy. I bought us each a copy, and once she started using it, she now won't use anything else. It is terribly easy to use.

Almost every word processor offers compatibility, but ability to follow through varies. But if you use PDF, there shouldn't be any problem.

LibreOffice does add new options/functions but not as many as MSO does
for each version/line.

And those plethora of features can be daunting, some people are totally baffled by all of them in any program. I met a senior citizen who wanted to write a book and had a really nice Windows laptop. Every one told her she needed Word, yet she hardly knew how to the mouse. :frowning: I turned her on to WordPad, and she was off and running. I told her when she discovered there were things she wanted to do that WordPad couldn't do, get with me and we'd get her a next level up word processor.

#4

I have been using LibreOffice since its first version.

I do not use many of its options either.

Why save the file to .odt instead of .doc or .docx?

I'm looking for ways to have people be inclusive rather than exclusive. IOW, you can have people be able to share files, and not force anyone to use a particular word processor. If you want LO, Mary wants Word, Sam wants Word Perfect, Joe wants Pages, Esther wants Nisus (Mac), everyone can work on the project yet each use the word processor of their choice.

This can be done if you're willing to work with PDF files, but people seem to dislike the idea. I'm beginning to suspect people don't know how to annotate a PDF file rather than directly editing the file.

I deal with many folks that use MS Office - state agencies require it.
So you can make LibreOffice default to the Word file formats. I would
prefer the .doc format, since each version of MS Office since 2007 were
using a different version of the .docx format and not comply compatible
with each other.

That compatibility issue is what I'm talking about, and want to avoid.

3 or 4 years ago, a friend of mine had a new job, and initially had to use her own computer. All she had was Open Office XXXX. But she would save them either .doc or .docx format. I would open them in Word 2007, and it wasn't right. I would fix them in 2007 and send them back. And as you probably expect, OOo wouldn't open them correctly.

The company has now provided a company owned computer with 2010 so that issue no longer exists.

She still has OOo on her personal computer. I've tried with no success to get her to try LO, but with no success. For that matter, I haven't been able to get her to try anything else either.

Myself, I like Softmaker Office Free, and am considering purchasing the paid version.

Being free is simply not the best reason to chose a piece of software.

Actually, the last version of MS Office [not trial] I used was MSO 2003.

2007, here, which I'm using for a document at work. A coworker things Word is the greatest thing since sliced bread. We're using the tracking and changes features of Word, and I'm beginning to remember why I hated the feature. I tried to get him to do it using PDF, but that was a no go. My suspicion is the only way he knows to deal with PDFs is with a browser.

I started using OpenOffice.org since before it was able to read/write
the .doc format. Then I switched to LO after I waited over a year for a
new version of OOo. I have not gone back. When I had to use MSO 2007
on a computer center system, I did not like all of the changes to the
interface or all the newer options. I do remember in the 1990 era of MS
Office where I read an advertisement touting that MS added over 500 new
functions and options added to the new version over the previous one.
Back then is seemed to me that MS wanted Word to be both a word
processor and a spreadsheet package, along with other non word
processing options. Back in the early/mid 2000's software companies
started to require a gig of disk space for default installation on the
"new affordable" hard drive sizes more than 20 gig of storage. All of
the added options/functions of MS Office and Adobe packages started to
need more than 40% of the free space after a fresh MS Windows XP install.

Still MS Office keeps adding more and more functions/options to each
package, like World or Excel, where you need to be a "advanced
specialist" to know how to use even half of all of the functions/options
in Word or Excel alone, let alone of the whole Office suite.

Way too many options for most people. I think it's an effort to be everything to everybody. As a result, lots of features are just mediocre. My philosophy is do a few things well, let someone else do the other things.

My friend I mentioned above had to do some wall displays/posters and tried to do them in OOo. I kept telling her she needed a page layout program. "Oh, no, OOo will do it." Serif had a sale on PagePlus X6 just before they released X7. $25/copy. I bought us each a copy, and once she started using it, she now won't use anything else. It is terribly easy to use.

Almost every word processor offers compatibility, but ability to follow through varies. But if you use PDF, there shouldn't be any problem.

LibreOffice does add new options/functions but not as many as MSO does
for each version/line.

And those plethora of features can be daunting, some people are totally baffled by all of them in any program. I met a senior citizen who wanted to write a book and had a really nice Windows laptop. Every one told her she needed Word, yet she hardly knew how to the mouse. :frowning: I turned her on to WordPad, and she was off and running. I told her when she discovered there were things she wanted to do that WordPad couldn't do, get with me and we'd get her a next level up word processor.

You do not need Word for writing books. You just need to provide the book in the format that the editor/publisher requires - after you finish your work.

There is a really prolific author - Piers Anthony - who went to Linux and OOo years ago. I believe he is now using LO. He wrote macros and uses a non-standard keyboard. He use to write 3 to 5 books a year. Now that he is in the late 70's he has slowed down a lot. He use to have author's notes at the end of his books, but now does most of it in a blog. After reading he used OOo on his old Windows system, I started using it. Then a few years later he moved to Linux for writing while his wife used Windows - no dial-up modem support for Linux in the forested area of Florida he lived in.

#5

<snip>

You do not need Word for writing books. You just need to provide the
book in the format that the editor/publisher requires - after you finish
your work.

Writing whatever isn't my point. It's allowing a group of people to collaborate on a writing project, with each one being able to use the word processor of their choice, and not be forced to use a particular program.

There is a really prolific author - Piers Anthony - who went to Linux
and OOo years ago. I believe he is now using LO. He wrote macros and
uses a non-standard keyboard. He use to write 3 to 5 books a year. Now
that he is in the late 70's he has slowed down a lot. He use to have
author's notes at the end of his books, but now does most of it in a
blog. After reading he used OOo on his old Windows system, I started
using it. Then a few years later he moved to Linux for writing while
his wife used Windows - no dial-up modem support for Linux in the
forested area of Florida he lived in.

I don't know if I've read any his books or not.

Not having any modem support might have been a blessing in disguise! LOL

<snip>