There is no brand confusion here, just because someone writes something on a blog on the internet does not make it true.
I admire the Apache Software Foundation methods & practices. OO is in 'incubator' status, IP review, migration and setting up of a large project in a new home, not confusing at all.
I am a long time Debian user , while Debian shipped OO for years at some point it was based on Go0Office, the predecessor to LO. I created templates for my business using OO, first submitted report to one of my clients was 2003. Before OO, Star Office shipped with Suse.
My expectation is to have my templates & archives look the same, be readable for years, that is what archives are for. LO has consistently fiddled with 'features' changing the look and more recently making some of my date in my archives unreadable.
I have started testing Apache OO dev builds when current vesions of LO corrupted my archives & templates. The document fidelity is perfect, I have not seen my originally designed templates for years.
Now that I realize that I have to pay more attention to what my distro ships, I find that OO/LO has changed how my docs look as far back as ver Oo v.3.2.1, which ships with Debian stable, do not have older versions to check.
Apache will have a release in the 'near' future, not years. So far Linux distro's do not seem to be on board with packaging AOO. That could change with a final release. My impression is the *BSD's will provide it. Apache releases binaries in deb & rpm format now.
I suggest reading the dev & user lists for LO & AOO, using the products, and making more informed opinions of the two projects.