| |||||||||||||
LibreOffice and OpenOffice clash over user numbers (OStatic)LibreOffice and OpenOffice clash over user numbers (OStatic)Posted Nov 7, 2012 0:22 UTC (Wed) by rcweir (subscriber, #48888)In reply to: LibreOffice and OpenOffice clash over user numbers (OStatic) by tialaramex Parent article: LibreOffice and OpenOffice clash over user numbers (OStatic)
Actually, if a user is interested in free office software then they probably query Google for "free office software". The AOO website comes up at the top of that list, but it is not because of "brand recognition". This is SEO.
Was Apache the beneficiary of a contributed trademark? Yes, of course. Were we also the beneficiary of donated source code? Yes, of course. And so was LibreOffice, which benefited greatly from source code primary developed by Sun employees over the past 10 years.
Of course, if LibreOffice really cared about the OpenOffice trademarks and websites then their strategy of publicly attacking Oracle at every opportunity and making Oracle their boogeyman to rally the troops against a common enemy seems, in retrospect, ill-advised.
(Log in to post comments)
LibreOffice and OpenOffice clash over user numbers (OStatic) Posted Nov 7, 2012 11:03 UTC (Wed) by mjw (subscriber, #16740) [Link]
Would it be an idea to share the Trademark/SEO/update goodwill between The Document Foundation and Apache? Since there are now two forks based on the same code base it would be nice to give the user choice. Whenever they search for an OpenOffice successor or whenever the automatic updater kicks in they would get a Free Office choice screen where they can choose either free derivative of OpenOffice, Apache Office or LibreOffice. That might spur some nice coopetition where the user decides which innovations are the most desirable. As a bonus you would share download statistics, so you can easily compare.
LibreOffice and OpenOffice clash over user numbers (OStatic) Posted Nov 10, 2012 1:45 UTC (Sat) by rcweir (subscriber, #48888) [Link]
"Since there are now two forks based on the same code base..."
There is only one fork, LibreOffice. Apache OpenOffice is the continuation of an open source project that has had continuity for over a decade, first at Sun, then Oracle, now at Apache. Same code, same website, same trademarks and branding, same user base. Forks come and go. Symphony is merging back in, ending that fork. LibreOffice has not yet ended its fork. But I think that is just a matter of time for their corporate sponsors to realize that it makes as little sense for them to bear the complete cost of development as it did for Oracle.
LibreOffice and OpenOffice clash over user numbers (OStatic) Posted Nov 10, 2012 16:24 UTC (Sat) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106) [Link]
Every fork has two branches, in this case Apache OpenOffice and LibreOffice. Code continuity is the same for both projects, since they started from the same codebase, although LibreOffice has moved further ahead since the fork. Apache OpenOffice appears to have kept the website, trademarks and branding while LibreOffice has the user base and developers. I'll leave it to you to decide which of the two is more critical to the continuation of the project.
Sometimes branches die out after a fork. Other times they replace the "official" branch--consider X.org vs. XFree86.
As for "bear[ing] the complete cost of development", that's just a matter of network effects. It could easily go either way, depending on which branch get more participation, and right now the balance appear to be in favor of LibreOffice. There is also the fact that anything added to Apache OpenOffice can be merged into LibreOffice, but not vice-versa.
LibreOffice and OpenOffice clash over user numbers (OStatic) Posted Nov 11, 2012 11:34 UTC (Sun) by mjw (subscriber, #16740) [Link]
I think the problem with this reasoning is that both branches got only part of the original. Apache got the trademark and the domain name, but The Document Foundation got the community. So ApacheOffice sees a lot of downloads from users that don't know yet that there is now a more capable branch of the original out there. LibrOffice sees a lot of new development and features, sharing the development cost with a large developer base. Sharing the trademark and downloads/updates sites to give the user choice seems beneficial for both. That way it is also more clear which fork/branch users prefer and hopefully will show how to push a shared vision forward around free software office suites and the ODF standard.
The Next Decade Manifesto of the Document Foundation might provide such a high level vision: http://www.documentfoundation.org/pdf/tdf_manifesto.pdf
LibreOffice and OpenOffice clash over user numbers (OStatic) Posted Nov 7, 2012 18:09 UTC (Wed) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
What strategy of attacking Oracle? Which I haven't noticed (I must admit I haven't been looking, but it hasn't jumped out at me).
I am aware of a lot of things that people aren't happy about with Oracle, but as far as I'm aware they're justified.
The Open Source community isn't happy with copyright assignments ...
What's this about Oracle sueing Google over an API!
Oracle have a reputation for price-gouging ...
Imho their database isn't called Snoracle for nothing ... (imho, ALL relational databases are, by necessity, inefficient and slow! :-)
etc etc.
As I say, I haven't noticed (haven't looked for) any Oracle-bashing by LO, but can you point me to anything that is not justifiable?
Cheers,
|
|||||||||||||