OpenOffice.Org in a Corporate Environment?

robpoe asks: "I've been working on a rollout plan for OpenOffice.org 2.0 for a medium sized network. This network runs a number of different MS Office versions, and we absolutely must retain the Microsoft Office 97/2000/2002 file formats (for interoperability with the public and other entities). Getting our versions of Office to 2003 is $65k+, so we're looking closely at OOo. The problem is, since OOo keeps track of changes per user, and we have users that move around (and no, Roaming Profiles are not an option for us), and you cannot expect a user to change those preferences on every computer they log in to. Let's hear some great deployment plans for keeping the default file type, and even general rollout plans. How are you doing it?"

"It seems that nobody has done this (or documented it) that I've found. Let's see if we can get a good thing going by documenting a good, easy to manage rollout plan. Oh, and the default for saving files has to remain in Office 97/2k/xp format.

What are you using to deploy OOo automatically on your network. Assume that we have capability of login script (batch files / registry changes), but no SMS/ZenWorks/etc.

Why not?

[ZiakII]

Why not just keep Office 2000/XP?

OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility

[vijayiyer]

While this doesn't address your question, you mention the necessity of using MS office files. Be absolutely sure you are aware of the limitations of importing/exporting MS office documents. Contrary to what a lot of slashdotters imply, the document compatibility is only so-so when working with complex Word and Powerpoint files, which forced me back away from OO.org. Don't get me wrong - I don't like MS Office myself. But when forced to work with MS Office files, it's incredibly difficult to use any other tool.

TermServer/Citrix/XWindows/whatever

[Gothmolly]

Since you're going to make a fairly large paradigm shift anyway, why not go all the way and centrally host it? Running it over your favorite remote protocol might work fine, it wont bloat or slow down the clients, you can insta-upgrade people to new versions, and the roaming profile requirement evaporates.
If people save to some network share, and their PCs can access that, then there's no problem. Map some printers back to local clients (depends on how you do the remote session, might be LPD, share, or LPT redirect), and people might not ever know they're NOT on the local machine.

Be careful about compatibility

[mferrare]

I used to run my own consultancy and I used OpenOffice (well StarOffice back then) as my office suite. I found it more useful to send documents around in PDF format instead of sending word documents to my clients. Most of my clients could read PDF back then (this was '99/2000) - even more should be able to now.

Be careful about compatibility. The MS Office compatibility in OpenOffice is not all it's cracked up to be - even things like bullets and headings change fonts and spacings during conversions. IMHO it's better for you to work in native formats and send PDF files around.

Roaming Profiles aren't a good solution...

[Anonymous Coward]

They only solve this problem for EVERY app on your network.

You're basically asking for the features of Roaming Profiles without having to actually implement them.

Bite the bullet

[GWBasic]

Consider biting the bullet and spending the money. $65k, depending on where you're located, could be much cheaper then the amount of money you'll have to spend on supporting Open Office. Microsoft Sharepoint allows people to easily move between computers, yet still have access to documents in a central repository.

Unfair Moderation.

[Doc Squidly]

Why not just keep Office 2000/XP?

This is a valid question that shouldn't have been modded as flamebait. Sure, its an unpopular question considering the /. crowd but, still valid.

The first option that is usually overlooked in IT is, "Do Nothing". If any software product is meeting a businesses needs then why replace it without a good enough reason. Will the benefits of switching form product A to product C outweigh the cost.

I love new stuff as much as the next guy but, if a product works, even one made by M$, then asking if your company should continue to use it is a question any IT Pro should ask.

There plenty of good reasons to switch to OOo but, don't do it just because it's not a M$ product.

[Gets off soap box]

Re:Why not?

[Fallingcow]

Just send PDFs to those outside the company. 99% of the time you're not sending stuff to people outside the company that needs to be edited, anyway. Printed and filled out or signed, maybe, and usually just read, but not often edited.

Keep one copy of MS Office around for the rare occasions when you need to send something to the outside that needs to be edited, or the rare occasions when you recieve a doc from the outside that's completely unusable in OpenOffice.

Sure, some shops do need to send out easily editable documents to others frequently, and it might not work for them, but for most small- to medium-sized places this would be fine.

I agree on the "don't fix it if it's already working" thing, though. Unless they've got some truly ancient copies of Office floating around, I'd think that it'd still be less of an inconvenience to deal with what they've got than to switch to OpenOffice, assuming they deal with very many documents from the outside world.

Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility

[penguin-collective]

create their own one-page CV, and who have concluded from that OO.org is fine to use even on huge documents where problems in conversion to the MS formats might make your firm look stupid, zealotish and perhaps even lead to loss of business.

Being a card carrying OSS fanatic, I can tell you truthfully that OO.org is not fine to use on huge documents. But being a suffering MS Office user, I can tell you that MS Office is just as bad for huge documents.

The professional way of writing huge documents is with a markup language and a revision control system.

Have you checked with your Finance department?

[winkydink]

Especially the really heavy users of Excel? The ones who build "models"? Don't tell them, but all that "macro" stuff they build? It's essentially a furball of VB. Furball? Yes, because it's been written by somebody who doesn't know how to program. They just keep whacking at it until it works.

And guess what? It doesn't work in OpenOffice.

Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility

[killjoe]

And as long as MS makes it hard to exchange your documents with other people you should rule them out as a vendor.

Your point is exactly why somebody should dump office, not why they should keep it. You should not let your vendors dictate the products you use.

A real earth-shaking idea

[adolf]

Here's a thought:

Pay someone else to do it. You're saving $65k, right? Give a (small) portion of that cash to someone familiar with OOo, and have them code the changes that you're after.

Just because it's free software doesn't mean that it's afraid of money. Go ahead and buy the features you need.

Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri

[alc6379]

Just run the entire thing off of a thumb drive or live distribution that they can use anywhere they go that mounts your netdrive ;)

Are you nuts? Do you really think you're going to get a whole organization to run in that fashion? Do you think end users are going to keep up with thumb drives and live CDs?

I'm not going to belittle you, but that has to be the least feasible idea that I've ever run across as a suggestion for something like this. If the poster really wanted to do it properly, they'd implement roaming profiles, or at the very least, a mounted network share that synchronized at logout. If that was configured correctly, the operation of such a setup would be transparent to any program that accesses files from those directories.

Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri

[buck_wild]

If you're at a customer site with your own (normal) laptop then you already have the appropriate settings, unless it's your first use of the laptop.

Perhaps for those folks that roam natively (CEOs, sales folks, etc.) the thumb drive solution may work well. For everyone else, it's a way to carry porn home from your super-fast work connection, and something else to lose or break.

Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility

[Mr. Hankey]

But when forced to work with MS Office files, it's incredibly difficult to use any other tool.

That's probably the number one reason to get rid of office. That, and the fact that it can be difficult to use different versions of Office in the same environment. When older versions of office are phased out, and no longer for sale or supported by Microsoft, it becomes necessary to upgrade everyone at what can be an inconvenient time due to version compatibility problems. Better IMO to work with something that you can add to any system without having to worry about the software being available.

In any case, for any planned upgrade such as this it's often a good idea to solicit a group where in the company that would like to function as a test case for the software. Ask, don't force. There are plenty of people who like to try new things, as well as those who are afraid of change. Better to work with the former first if possible. You may well find out that there really isn't anything to worry about, but at least you'll know.

OO in Corporate Enviroment

[vux984]

It probably depends on the level of dependancy on 'advanced' features of MS Office... most companies I think have much less dependancy than they might think. For us, we simply phased OO in. 100% of the desktops had OO installed. 98% had Office uninstalled. Sure we could have left existing Office installs intact indefinately, but by standardizing we ensured that internally everyone was on the same version of OO. (getting rid of the myriad of various office version conflicts and also ensuring there wasn't any silliness where users with Office refused to use OO and users with OO felt like second class citizens or some other nonsense. For all internal documents we use OO. People adapted pretty quick. A few of our internal documents had issues, We cleaned them up, and there hasn't been an issue in months. We do get significant inbound correspondance in Excel/Word and even PP, but these are simple documents that OO handles flawlessly. And even if there were the odd formatting hiccup it wouldn't matter, we're not 'publishing' them, just getting information from them. (Purchase Orders, reports, etc). For outbound correspondance where we might want to send someone a word or excel document... we just don't... we settled on PDF a long time ago. Our pdf requirements are simple and easily met by free pdf creation software (ie not Acrobat). We do not require our customers have proprietary software. This has worked very well for us. Very occasionally we *are* required to deal with a large complex MS office file from a customer that OO just chokes on. No biggie, we have a couple units with MS Office on them, for just that purpose. So we only need 2 licenses of MS Office vs 150. Most of the use they see is for 'powerpoint' crap that vendors will send as 'training materials'... we just blast these through one of the "MS office" stations into pdf and distribute the pdf version. (Alternatively we could install the free powerpoint viewer from MS, but I don't see an advantage to that. Overall, for us, stability (by getting rid of the multiple versions of MS Office) has actually improved. Occasionally

Re:neither does MS Office

[hey!]

No, the parent post is right. I've had some very bad experiences with inconsistent Word rendering of long complex documents too. You can close a document and immediately reopen it on the same machine and it would be messed up.

The only reliable and feasible answer I've found is to stick to simple layout when I'm using word processing program. If you want to get fancy, you should use a page layout program.

Re:Why not?

[Ucklak]

The parent post states that he 'Owns' the license which is never a possibilty with Microsoft. Their license is the right to run their software on their terms, period.
I have been called by an MS VAR (Through Ingram Micro) regarding an MOLP licensing issue with a small business (under 40 desktops) back in the Win2000/Office 2000 era. I had a client that didn't want to renew their license. They were aware that they would have to pay full price if they didn't renew now for future upgrades (big deal, they paid full price the first time and the cost savings mattered at the time.)

Needless to say, they said we had to remove the software from their computers if we didn't renew, we got a letter from the BSA, yada yada, they renewed, I started to hate Microsoft at that point.

Even recently, I had a deployment of Server 2000 (before 2003 came out and needed a stable environment for a project), project 2002, office 2002, visio 2002. We let it lapse in 2004 and I got a call and a letter stating I had to remove the software. The project was over anyway so it was a moot point.

I have seen the BSA goons do an audit for a multimedia company (company that a friend that just hired as their admin) and fine them for $150,000. Don't tell me I don't have battle experience with Microsoft Licensing.

Re:Perils and Pitfalls

[robpoe]

Government entity (county level)

The elected official has approved the move.

The convincing has been done. We like the direct export PDF, we like the compatibility (and direct use of same product on Linux), might even be doing some linux stuff on the desktop in the future..

Think of this as a first step ..

Re:Why not?

[19thNervousBreakdown]

You do realize how trivial it is to unlock a read-only Word / Excel doc, right? Might as well just tell people to not change it and go by the honor system.

If you're just trying to prevent accidental modifications, use the file system's read-only attribute. If you want a secure read-only version of the file, don't give the users write permission to it. If you're going to be copying the file to people, who cares if they change it? You have the original. Honestly, I think it's a stupid feature, Is this something you just have to do because the PHB said so, or is there a valid reason for doing this that I haven't thought of?

Re:Distributing stuff in Word format is crazy

[dchallender]

Have to agree, I prefer pdf or html where I know I have software that can render it. I used to have an old version of word "for emergencies" but over time I noticed that corporate docs always seem to be sent in one of the latest versions rather than the company using a lowest common denominator .doc format. Increasingly I use OpenOffice to open .doc files - odd formatting quirks aside at least it means I can read information - if anyone wants to guarantee a certain look and feel then pdf is the only viable option imho.

95% of users don't need Excel sounds right

[dedded]

"By my estimates, OO 2.0 is probably a suitable MS-Office replacement for about 95-98% of users out there" Well, that's a reflection of your experience.

And a reflection of mine as well. I reckon about 70-80% of the Excel spreadsheets I see are purely documentation--without a single formula containing more than a single number or date. I recently received directions to a hotel in a spreadsheet! There are those for whom Excel is the right tool, but most can do all their spreadsheeting in any spreadsheet program at all.

Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri

[Jonny_eh]

Don't forget to make it hidden!

We don't want users seeing a directory and saying: "I don't use that! DELETE! Hey, why doesn't openoffice work?"

Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri

[somersault]

when their car is stolen they'll soon learn ;)

Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri

[alc6379]

I understand what he said-- it's still really unfeasible. What are they going to do-- restart a machine every time they sit down at it, or have to change seats? With a live distro, that can take a while.

...and then taking into account that not all systems in an organization will be USB bootable, or even have USB 2.0, making it fast enough to run a live distro.

With the USB keys, I can see loads of broken USB ports in an entire organization as people plug and unplug those guys daily. Not only that, but many organizations have banned USB keys because of concerns such as industrial espionage. And considering the price of one needed to hold a decent live distro, that's not something I, were I an IT manager, would even consider handing out to everyone in an org.