OpenOffice.Org in a Corporate Environment? 376
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.
Store the OpenOffice config file on network drive (Score:5, Informative)
Once a user logs on, a logon script mounts his own personal "network drive" from a central file server.
Just configure OpenOffice so that OpenOffice will read (and write) the OO configuration from that personal "network drive".
Yes, a user could still mess up his configuration, but that would only affect himself, not others.
Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri (Score:2, Interesting)
I like AC's thumb drive solution...
Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri (Score:3, Insightful)
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:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri (Score:2)
this is slashdot. i'm sure you'll all rip me a new asshole for being so obviously clueless, and demand that i surrender my firstborn child to the god of stupid sacrifices for asking such an idiotic question, so just save yourselves the effort before you hit 'reply', because i'm not going to read any replies anyway.
Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri (Score:5, Informative)
Boom! Unique settings for each user without roaming profiles
Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri (Score:3, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri (Score:3, Insightful)
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 m
Re:Store the OpenOffice config file on network dri (Score:3, Interesting)
Why not? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why not? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why not? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Why not? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Re:Why not? (Score:2, Insightful)
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
Re:Why not? (Score:3, Interesting)
One issue for that organization, thoughis that the old version will not
read newer MSOfficeversion's files. This is not an issue if
they only deal with internal documents, but if they receive
documents from outside the organization, they will likely have
no control over those external version, and would therefore
be under pressure to upgrade to be able to read the newer
formats.
Re:Why not? (Score:3)
Getting our versions of Office to 2003 is $65k+
Its not going to cost him $65K to keep his current software. The posting says that his company already has Office 97/200/2002.
Re:Why not? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Why not? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Why not? (Score:5, Informative)
Last time I checked, the retail version of MSOffice 2002/2003 doesn't allow the use of transform files which set corporate preferences for the user during profile setup.
Re:Why not? (Score:2, Informative)
Who the hell modded this up?
Re:Why not? (Score:3, Interesting)
From Microsoft's own site:
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/open/d efault.mspx [microsoft.com]
Look at the 'Term' row, it is a two to three year span.
On the certificate that you get in the mail when you purchase an agreement you'll see this line of text:
"...provides you with rights to run the software only during the term of the agreement with Microsoft (nonperpetual)."
hence at the end of the agreement, it becomes illegal to run said software because you no longer have the rights to
Re:Why not? (Score:3, Insightful)
I have been called by an MS VAR (Through Ingram Micro) regarding an MOLP licensing issue with a small business (under 40 desktops) back in the Win2000/Office 2000 era. I had a client that didn't want to renew their license. They were aware that they would have to pay full price if they didn't renew now for future upgrades (big deal, they pai
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Unfair Moderation. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why not just keep Office 2000/XP?
This is a valid question that shouldn't have been modded as flamebait. Sure, its an unpopular question considering the /. crowd but, still
valid.
The first option that is usually overlooked in IT is, "Do Nothing". If any software product is meeting a businesses needs then why replace it without a good enough reason. Will the benefits of switching form product A to product C outweigh the cost.
I love new stuff as much as the next guy but, if a product works, even one made by M$, 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:Unfair Moderation. (Score:5, Informative)
*Employees could 'report' usage to MS anonomously.
Re:Unfair Moderation. (Score:2)
That would require users to 'have a clue' about software licensing, and 'access' to the 'license records.' I've seen 'companies' install copies of XP as soon as the order was placed, without waiting for the physical copies to arrive. As long as you don't type in someone else or some other company's name in the box, there's not much of a way for anyone to notice a copy isn't licensed.
Re:Unfair Moderation. (Score:2)
Perhaps my company went over the top, perhaps not. I've no idea what is required by MS when making the change.
Re:Unfair Moderation. (Score:2)
Keep your old version of MS office for a long as it is convenient for you to do so, once of course it becomes a micro softie created inconvenience to attempt do so, solve the problem that microsoft has created for you by swapping to open office, why would anybody
Re:Unfair Moderation. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Assume that they can no longer purchase copies of their current (older) version of Office, or that they are anticipating an increase in the number of seats.
Admittedly, the cash outlay is less than upgrading to Office 2003 -- unless Microsoft will no longer sell them copies of their current software. Then they are stuck -- unless they opt to make additional copies of their current version of Office witho
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:2)
MS Office does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:2)
Best method: judge for yourself. Go to Microsoft.com, download all their complex Powerpoint presentations from the MS Office center. See if any don't display perfectly in OpenOffice 2.
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:3, Insightful)
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 yo
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:2, Insightful)
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
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:2)
can you define huge and big document?
I mean for me a huge document is let's say 500 pages (technically a book for ne), and I worked on 200 pages myself (not too big I admit) and OO just worked fine. It was 4 years ago and compatibility, processing power was limited, and I had several illustrations and others inserted (about 20 pages of images), and 10 pages of tables/graps.
I really wonder what is the limit when you say : uhh that is unbearably sucky/crashes/etc.... als
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:5, Informative)
No, no, I think you misunderstood.
OOo is just fine on huge, complex documents. It's very stable, predictable and reliable.
OOo has a hard time with rendering large, complex MS Word documents, though. They get all screwed up.
MS Word, on the other hand, also has a hard time with large complex MS Word documents. The formatting is okay, but Word crashes constantly and tends to corrupt your files and lose all of your work.
Does that clear it up?
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:2)
Well I tend to save in OO format, and with that it is just kickass (besides the smaller size many times)
I still wonder how huge is HUGE
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:3, Informative)
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:2)
by the way it covered Linux and it's applications/usability in different company environments, and just to prove a point I did the whole thing (including docs, graps, charts, network maps) on linux apps, mostly in OO, gimp & dia
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:2)
the other big issue is people having a hard time adjust to a different application (macros, how to set layouts, short cuts.. etc).
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:3, Interesting)
Just today, I made a 50 slide presentation, pretty simple, and I exported it to powerpoint. Looks fine on a mac. As a bonus, it also exports perfec
Re:OO.org does not have perfect file compatibility (Score:2)
I tried OO in the work place and I ran into some problems. For myself, it's quite fine as I rarely do anything critical, but some of our sales personel did have some issues. (Honestly, things were fine when they printed even when working with imported objects, but a complaint is a complaint)
It's not out of the book for me or the company. I think when OpenDocument format catches on we can really make a return visit to OO.
In any case, I'm closely watching the releases and I still use it on all my comps.
Re:neither does MS Office (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Use the source, Luke? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Use the source, Luke? (Score:2)
Re:Use the source, Luke? (Score:2)
OpenOffice 1.x checked for an env variable OOO_MS_DEFAULTS=1
This doesn't work for OO2, but I haven't done much research yet to figure out what does.
I've seen something in the GUI, but not for all users.
Re:Use the source, Luke? (Score:2)
Go to Load/Save -> General
There is a "Always save as" field in the lower right.
Re:Use the source, Luke? (Score:2)
8-)
Re:Use the source, Luke? (Score:3, Informative)
You cannot expect a user to do this on every machine.
I either need this globally set or some other elegant solution.
Re:Use the source, Luke? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Use the source, Luke? (Score:3, Informative)
In OOo with multiple user profiles, this is saved PER USER!
So what?
You cannot expect a user to do this on every machine.
No, why would I?
I either need this globally set or some other elegant solution.
If you can't propagate a configuration value like this or even a software installation to all the machines you administer in seconds with minimal user impact you are a very poor system administrator and no amount of advice on /. is going to help you. It's just a file copy operation, no elegance n
Re:Use the source, Luke? (Score:2)
This is where the benefit of having the source code comes in. Not so you can jabber about how you need to look through a hundred megs of source to make sure there are no bugs, but so you can change a line or two of code (at least, I assume so) instead of implementing one of the hairball schemes people a
Use a macro (Score:5, Informative)
TermServer/Citrix/XWindows/whatever (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:TermServer/Citrix/XWindows/whatever (Score:2)
Which does happen.
Today, in fact.
in other news.... (Score:5, Interesting)
MS Office doesn't even work with highly complex objects and docs... even between versions or across different computers.
Re:in other news.... (Score:2)
Re:in other news.... (Score:2)
Remote Folders (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, if you don't already have enough space on your servers; you've got another fight on your hands.
Good luck!
Open Office (Score:5, Informative)
12-15 users all log into a central server running Fedora Core 3 using thin clients. We currently use the excellent LTSP (www.ltsp.org) packages to accomplish this. Through experience we have found that a Pentium 4 server with about 2 gigs of RAM can comfortably handle up to 15 users or so, more than that and the load gets a bit too heavy. The programs that eat up the most memory and CPU cycles are Firefox, Evolution, Open Office, and Adobe Acrobat. We do allow streaming radio with xmms, because it doesn't eat up too much bandwidth or memory, and our users like it. The desktop clients themselves are old Pentium II boxes with 64mb of ram, no hard drives, and no cd-roms.
All our sales reps use OpenOffice every day to type up their quotes, fax cover sheets, etc. My secretary uses OpenOffice Calc to do spreadsheet work for our government contracts. It's easy to set all your clients to default to MS file formats - go into the File > Save settings and set them to always use
You don't need to use thin clients, however, to use Open Office. We just went the thin client route because it was inexpensive and easy to do with existing hardware. We are planning to upgrade soon so that each user has their own desktop machine running local apps, but still mounting the home directories on the server.
I suppose if it can be done with 15 computers running linux, you could also do it with your Windows boxes. Just make sure they all have the same OO settings, and that they are all set to save in the proper file formats before your users even get a chance to work with it. OO works almost like MS Office - but be prepared for lots of complaining from users who will say "But Microsoft Office didn't work this way" . . .
My OO.o tips (Score:4, Interesting)
My first tip is at home or for basic users, you can go into
Tools
Options
Java
Disable the Java, and your startup time is almost certainly going to improve.
[Another Slashdotter showed me this trick, and it apparently disables macros or something I don't use much if ever.]
I install OO.o on a computer, and log into the profile that will run it, hit enter a few times to accept the agreement, and say I've already registered then proceed. This loads the quickstarter into the Startup, and if MS Antispyware is running it might even ask if you want it to run every time.
Since I image computers and roll out a standard image when a machine needs redoing, I don't worry about standard config settings yet. Most machines I put it on don't have Word, so I set OO to automatically open Word files, when I install it.
Re:My OO.o tips (Score:2)
[Another Slashdotter showed me this trick, and it apparently disables macros or something I don't use much if ever.]
It will give problems making database forms, for example. If you have database problems (not being able to edit fields), it's possible Java is disabled.
Be careful about compatibility (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
This is word processing, not desktop publishing (Score:2)
This kind of thing doesn't sound all that severe. I would expect programs like Word and OpenOffice.org Writer to support things like default serif and sans-serif fonts. For example, at least in the old days, Mac users typically didn't have Times New Roman and Arial; those documents, when opened on the Mac, would render in Times and Helvetica.
The
Re:This is word processing, not desktop publishing (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:This is word processing, not desktop publishing (Score:3, Informative)
There's a bug open for OOo to add normal view, and there's been a lot of noise recently on it, but since the bug has been there a couple of years and OOo 2.0 still hasn't implemented it, I'm not sure if we'll ever see a normal view. Which is a shame.
Re:Be careful about compatibility (Score:5, Informative)
And truth be told, MS Office compatibility in MS Office is not all it's cracked up to be. Opening MS Office 97/2000/2002 documents in a different version of MS Office can yield in wildly different results.
Opening an Office 2000 document in Office 2000 can also result in different results, as I noticed yet again with my resume. The bullets are NOT as I left them last week.
And here I am editing a document in Word 2003. I have a bulleted list, and I hit return. MS Word creates a new line with a bullet-- great! But it also automatically changed the font, itallics and spacing for the rest of the bulleted text in the list-- WRONG! This bug has existed since Office 1997--- I hate it!
Roaming Profiles aren't a good solution... (Score:5, Insightful)
You're basically asking for the features of Roaming Profiles without having to actually implement them.
Re:Roaming Profiles aren't a good solution... (Score:2)
Bite the bullet (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Bite the bullet (Score:2)
OO.o support costs? Heck, I'll offer OO.o support myself for just $50,000! Limited time deal, contact me today only!
Re:Bite the bullet (Score:2)
Re:Bite the bullet (Score:5, Interesting)
Where is this magical world people are from in which MS Office works out of the box and doesn't require support? I "tech guy" for about 20 small organizations and as of this last invoice 65% of my time is supporting people on MS Office (90% if you count Outlook) because it freezes / craps out / corrupts their files / won't open older versions / won't open newer versions / does weird things where bullets aren't all the same size / messes up multi-column calculations half the time but not the other half of the time / etc.
Do you really work with MS Office installations that don't require support?
Hosted Desktop anyone? (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't understand (Score:2)
Without roaming profiles, how would this be any different in MS Office land?
Re:I don't understand (Score:2)
Scripting should do it. Failing that, beat the users until they learn to make one extra mouse click for every new document they create. That's what we did, and it seems to be working. The best part is the side effects--more people are using XML files instead of stupid
Better Idea. (Score:2, Interesting)
Have you checked with your Finance department? (Score:5, Insightful)
And guess what? It doesn't work in OpenOffice.
can someone explain what he means by track changes (Score:2)
Is this something like a config file that keeps track of toolbar/font/etc. customization and such? Is OP saying he wants to keep these configs for every user but not use roaming profiles or network shares? If you have your laptop #1 in the field and user Bob logs in and changes default font to Helvetica, you want Bob to have that set as default when he uses laptop #2 on a different day? If not, as another suggested, sto
Perils and Pitfalls (Score:3, Interesting)
Unless someone WAY at the top of the organization drives this, advocating the move is more likely to make you look bad. The first hiccup and the brown-stuff rolls downhill to your door. Present the facts and be done.
If $65K really is an intollerably large chunk of change, then I don't really understand why there's even a question.
Re:Perils and Pitfalls (Score:3, Insightful)
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
For all users, specify default Writer file format (Score:2, Informative)
A real earth-shaking idea (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
here's a cheaper way vs. $65K (Score:2, Funny)
2. buy:
* big whiteboard - $35
* whiteboard marker - $5
3. then write the instructions on the white board on how to configure OO
total expenses: $40
OpenOffice Defaults (Score:2, Informative)
Tip: import MS, convert to OOo, export to MS (Score:5, Informative)
So the trick is this: when you edit a .DOC file with OOo, convert it to the OOo format (.sxw) as soon as you start. Make sure the format is OK. Keep the file in .sxw format inside the company.
When you need to interface with the outside world, publish the .DOC by saving in this format if needed. If you don't need outside people to actually edit the document, export it from OOo as a PDF, which is read-only, and publish the PDF instead of the DOC.
And remember to edit only the .sxw file.
Compatibilty Issues (Score:3, Informative)
These files were edited using the "Track changes" option in MS Office, that allows you to automatically mark changes that you have made to the file. Openoffice simply does not understand such a file and loads it without the accompanying change tracking information.
Admiteddly, I liked OpenOffice at first and thought that MS Office could finally be replaced. However, several experiences (problems with huge loading time, slowing down the PC, OpenDocument format not popular etc.), including the above mentioned one, have forced me back to MS Office, and my personal conclusion is that MS Office has a lot more features and is much better as a regular word processing app. I hate paying Microsoft, but in this case, they take the cake. I'll have to wait for Oo3.
PS : The only OO features that I noticed MS does not have, are the ability to render equations and make PDFs. However, MS Office + MathType + Adobe Acrobat Prof./any free PDF renderer can take care of that.
OOo 2.0 Network Installation Script (Score:5, Informative)
You can Download it at
http://www.pcc-services.com/kixtart/scripts.html [pcc-services.com]
For the default saving into Office filetypes - All of the user settings are saved in XML files and you can edit these files before you roll-out OpenOffice.org. To do this simply adjust the settings on a separate machine, find out what file was modified to see what you need to change in the default installation. For instance I created a menu item for my script to add a "From Gallery" option to the "Insert - Picture" Menu.
Re:OOo 2.0 Network Installation Script (Score:3, Informative)
To redirect folders, simply use Active Directory's Group Policy Objects, or use the older System Policy Editor to create an ntconfig.pol file to place in the netlogon directory of your D
Portable OOo! (Score:4, Interesting)
Despite what the parent says, you DO NOT NEED TO PUT THIS ON A THUMBDRIVE! All it really equates to is a fully preconfigured and compartimentalized "install" of OOo. Need to update it? No worries, roll out a new version (or a diff) of the changed files. Everything is housed under the one directory.
I use the portable version of FireFox and Thunderbird for myself and the inlaws because you can always guarentee that you've got all of the config files and user data (bookmarks and emails in their cases) under the one folder, so backups and updates are 100x easier (least for me). YMMV, but it's worht a look!!
Re:Portable OOo! (Score:2)
Re:is it worth it? (Score:4, Informative)
(one 40 hour per week and 1 20 hour per week).
The network is Novell/Email is Groupwise/Desktops are a mix of 98, 2K and XP.
Existing licenses were purchased
$65k for an office upgrade isn't in the cards, when we're having trouble getting $ budgeted for things we REALLY need, much less upgrading Office.
We're doing mostly real plain jane documents, so complexity is not really an issue.