digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Why Don't More People Use OpenOffice?

linuxinsider.com — Why don't more people use OpenOffice, the free and open source alternative to Microsoft Office? Microsoft has spent years and dollars engineering creative ways to keep people using its costly software and preventing them from switching to OpenOffice -- that's one explanation, writes Lou Dolinar.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • rubbers0ul, on 07/06/2008, -39/+333Because it still lacks a large amount of the polish that alternatives have, i.e. MS Office, and Apples iWork to a lesser extent. People will pay a premium not to have to tinker with something to make it function correctly, the same reason people will buy OS X or Windows instead of using free Linux.
    • TheInformer, on 07/07/2008, -15/+89It's too easy to pirate Microsoft's Office program, either from friends or from the internet.
    • cheezintern, on 07/07/2008, -10/+41I recently used the new office version and was very impressed. They moved a few buttons around, but overall it's way nicer than open office. I do have open office on my 2 gig flash drive though, which is also very cool.
    • geneticlemon, on 07/07/2008, -11/+27Yeah, OpenOffice is not the most user-friendly interface. OpenOffice Draw is definitely not an equal alternative to MS Office Publisher, which is something I found out the hard way ...
      • fsweep, on 07/07/2008, -11/+12User-friendly? The only reason MS Office seems "user-friendly" is that we have all grown so accustomed to its quirks. Have you used the new version of MS Office? I hate it--- can't find anything I need.

        OpenOffice has a nice (free) tool for converting to PDF that creates much smaller files than the plug-in I use with MS Office.

        (Still, I generally use MS Office for everything else)
    • paradexes, on 07/07/2008, -12/+31DISCLAIMER: This is flamebait,

      Because it sucks...If they added an email client that works with exchange, then sun has something to work with. Take a page out of the MS playbook. Embrace and extend. That is the sole killer feature that the whole MS office suite has going for it in the enterprise space. And why people are willing to pay out the nose (that and MS deceptive sales practices that you need them all).

      Open Office adds an email client that works with exchange hell ANY office suite adds that functionality along with the ability to modify the code or add plugins (ala Thunderbird) and they will have the outlook killer. Until then OpenOffice and it's like are just second stringers.

      Abiword for word processors is just as good and in some cases better than OO Writer and Word 2003/2007
      • Fergy, on 07/07/2008, -5/+15Only a small minority uses MS Office because of Outlook. Most people just want to write a letter with spell/grammar check.
      • trueshadow21, on 07/07/2008, -0/+7Fergy is thinking in terms of home users, where the post by paradexes is more directed towards a corporate environment, which often (but not always) use Outlook.
      • Cambo, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2I agree with this whole heartedly, I use linux on the desktop and use Virtual Box and Windows XP just so I can run office. I do this only because I need outlook to operate in my corporate environment. If sun could make a good reliable feature rich outlook clone then i would switch until then I will still virtualize.


      • GrantTLC, on 07/07/2008, -2/+4"Take a page out of the MS playbook. Embrace and extend"

        Really? I thought MS used the Decepticon playbook: "To Conquer and Enslave".

        Props for the Abiword mention though. It's a great little word processor.
      • mrtrevin, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Fair enough. Evolution can be a bitch to setup with exchange. But once properly configured, it works pretty flawlessly.
      • clith, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Ya, avoid OpenOffice bloatware. AbiWord + Gnumeric FTW.
    • byronne, on 07/07/2008, -16/+30Hmm...polish?
      I've been using it under Windows for quite some time and actually prefer it.
      Tinkering?
      Haven't had a need to. But then, I'm just using it as a word processor and spreadsheet program.
      • Sabin, on 07/07/2008, -23/+7And I have been using word for quite some time and actually prefer it. The open office interface needs a lot of work before your typical business admin will even be able to do something as simple as print a document.
      • norman619, on 07/07/2008, -7/+8Why would I change from MS Office, which I have been using for many years, and try to learn a new application? Unless they pay me I will not leave an application I know well and works fine.
      • cesclaveria, on 07/07/2008, -1/+17@Sabin,

        there is a freaking "print" button and a menu entry for printing, and Ctrl+P, I don't think (at least hope) the business admins are not that dumb, as to not find a way.
      • Ajajadude, on 07/07/2008, -0/+11@norman619

        I understand what you mean, but the fact is that if you're just using MS Office for nothing more than word processing and spreadsheets, Open Office isn't that different. The only noticeable difference is the cost and given my budget, I'll take a few extra moments to get comfortable with a new program if it means paying nothing.
      • stoanhart, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1I tend to prefer OO to Office as well. Even though I MS Office is definitely more "polished", especially 2007, I find that OO is less annoying to use.

        In Office I am always afraid to mess with advanced formatting, because I end up screwing up the document in a way that adding further content becomes difficult due to formatting glitches. I never have that problem with OO.
    • sarge96, on 07/07/2008, -1/+12Of course, the nice thing about open office is that you don't have to pay 80$ for a MS Word upgrade on your PC. I have it, and while it sucks sometimes, it WAS free. The nice thing is that it can also open all MS Words/ Powwerpoint/whatever files.
      • lacronicus, on 07/07/2008, -5/+8That's the thing: many of us, myself included, find 80 dollars to be perfectly reasonable for software that *never* sucks. I've never had office 07 fail on me, and ive used it for countless projects. I can't say the same for OO.
      • Ajajadude, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3And that's why they charge as much as they do: people find it perfectly "reasonable" to pay out the nose for something that's marked up beyond reason. I love the stability of MS Office, too, but when it comes time to upgrade, that kind of money is unreasonable to someone who wants to type the occasional letter or update their resume.
    • mal1964, on 07/07/2008, -3/+1Only 12 down diggs so far, I'm surprised how few with this topic and your honest answer.
    • cadmiumpaint, on 07/07/2008, -9/+17I can't use Linux. I use my computer to make a living. Tell Adobe to make the Creative Suite in Linux and we'll talk.
      • sims5487, on 07/07/2008, -7/+12Agreed. As great as it is to get everything on your machine for free, the software compatibility is still too much of a problem for me to use Linux as well, or even go through the pain of having to dual-boot.
      • TeagueSterling, on 07/07/2008, -9/+7If you're willing to try, give WINE a look. If I recall, Google invested a bunch in it to get CS2 working correctly (note that is just hear-say). I use it to run most all of my needed Windows programs. Adobe (Macromedia) Fireworks, which I use almost daily, runs near flawlessly now. You can also install an old copy of XP in a virtual machine to run the ones that don't yet work with WINE.
        It is more work than the average person will want to do, but if you are serious about trying out Linux, it's worth a look; they are not nearly as difficult to work with as one may think.
      • cadmiumpaint, on 07/07/2008, -8/+3In the creative industry you don't want to be the odd man out using an OS that nobody uses. Even if there was some remote way to get CS3 to work on a linux machine it would not help you getting jobs. It might actually hurt you. Design studios want people who know how to work in their environment....and that usually is a mac based one.
      • BlueTide, on 07/07/2008, -4/+5@cadmiumpaint:

        I don't think many offices will actually care, one way or the other. Some do, of course, but for freelancing and at least the in-house teams over here are free to use (mostly) what they want as long as the job gets done and it does not harm others. Linux would be just fine. It's just that money is not /that/ big of an issue and it is the timely results that matter, not if the applications are free or proprietary.
      • Aitese, on 07/07/2008, -1/+9People...this has nothing to do with Linux...OpenOffice is availiable in Windows.
      • mooninite, on 07/07/2008, -4/+4I use Linux, and I make my living from it. (I'm not BSing.)

        What's wrong with you?
      • vagrantradio, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3In a production environment, I don't have time to "tinker" with making ***** work with Linux or Windows.
    • haikuFU, on 07/07/2008, -6/+0I've tried using it, it works with about 10% of my documents. The stuff I get sent, and the stuff I create has formatting errors when opened in the other program.
      • Tenoq, on 07/07/2008, -0/+5WTF? Which version did you try? 0.5? OO2 is very good at converting about 90% of Office documents in my experience - the only time it struggles is when people implement crappy/proprietary VB scripts and Jet databases.
      • niczar, on 07/07/2008, -0/+5I call BS, the only time I've had problem opening an Office doc in OOo was an Excel spreadsheet with /really/ brain dead macros.
      • earlycj5, on 07/07/2008, -3/+2So you blame the software for not being able to read a closed format from a monopolistic corporation? Nice argument you've got there.
      • FKnight, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3@earlycj5:
        "So you blame the software for not being able to read a closed format from a monopolistic corporation?"

        When you're telling me that I can replace the software that reads that closed format with OO and then I find out that I can't, then yes, blaming OO is perfectly reasonable.

        If you don't want OO blamed for not being able to read proprietary formats, don't tell people they can replace the software they use presently to read those formats with OO.


    • Pake, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1Would have to agree. On my home computer, I only use OpenOffice when I need a few things done, but when it comes to serious work, I still log into my school account through remote desktop and use MS Office.
    • Neverclear, on 07/07/2008, -4/+4As said many times : Because it's barely usable (writer is a complete mess and calc just shoots itself in the head trying to load any complex Excel sheet) and anybody that's a student or has a job depending on Office can get it for $20 if not for free. Like it or not MS Office is the best software suite for doing what it does and Microsoft makes the barrier to getting office so low anybody that actually uses the software out of necessity just buys it and doesn't ***** around with half-assed attempts at cloning it.

      If you're running a Linux system it works but you're probably not in the business of using Office to keep your job. Even then there's a good chance you have Office installed on a VM/WinXP build somewhere because seriously, Open Office is not something people should be championing as a 'good' open source alternative.
      • gaucho4, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Not my school. We have to pay about $75 for a copy of Office 2008 Standard.
    • Ortheos, on 07/07/2008, -7/+2So what you're saying is, the more computer literate someone is, the less they are dependant on expensive closed software, and the more options they have in regards to free alternatives?

      So the answer is to educate the public on free alternatives that are almost as good as the holy ***** thats expensive software, and see microsoft and other commercial software vendors die terrible terrible deaths.

      So in the end it all boils down to DEATH TO MICROSOFT!

      Hmm, indeed. I see where you're coming from.

      I am glad my son.

      Aw jeez thanks alternate personality.

      We are one and the same my child.

      Yes Chucky. You are me and I am you....chucky, my favoritest person in the whole wide world.

      Lets kill something my friend.

      Yes chucky. Lets.

      • Ravatar, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1Office isn't "too expensive" to most people, especially those in business ranging from the tiny indie to the enterprise. Get it through your head that quality software is usually, if not always, worth the money.
      • Ortheos, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Well last I heard Vista costs money. And thats right down there with windows millennium...a failed experiment. So much for quality software.

    • Zwartbaard, on 07/07/2008, -3/+0I use it, but I don't really like it. Sure it works but it's not really fast, it installs a gay quick launch thingy (down in the right corner don't know what that's officially called) Above all It feels bloated just like Microsoft office. I want something fast and lightweight.
    • crldietmar, on 07/07/2008, -0/+0I didn't have time to read all the posts but I did not see NeOffice mentioned which we use in our office of 12 Macs. Very polished and frequent updates.
    • proverbs17, on 07/07/2008, -3/+0Personally, I don't notice that much difference between MS Office and Open Office. Maybe I'm just special, but I have no problem switching from Windows to Mac to Linux, and I like applications like Firefox and Open Office that work on all three.

      At work, I use Open Office 3.0 Beta on a Mac, and works pretty well (with a few bugs, but it is a beta so I accept those).
    • Vektuz, on 07/07/2008, -2/+2Tried it, and it sucked, that's why.

      Sorry, its just nowhere near as good and productive as the actual Office suite. And this is coming from someone (me) who really wants the whole linux thing to succeed. But I'm not going to blind myself and pretend something isnt a steaming heap when it actually is.
  • BennyGreenberg, on 07/06/2008, -15/+115I believe that people still think "you get what you pay for" and if it is free - it can't be all that good.
    • illt, on 07/07/2008, -15/+45while true i think in this case, at least for me, open office can't even hold a candle to Office 2007.
      Then again, I can't really sympathize with the monetary aspect, as i haven't paid for office
      • norman619, on 07/07/2008, -1/+11Most of the large software vendors like Adobe and MS make their money from business licenses not from the basic user like you and I. And they don't really care to gain more single users hence the insanely huge price tags for their applications.
    • benologist, on 07/07/2008, -9/+26I think the problem is FOSS people want to believe free is this huge, awesome feature of what they're offering, and they can't imagine why people aren't jumping at the opportunity to have something for nothing. We've always had free stuff, I can remember buying magazines with 3.5" disks full of free stuff way back when.

      Free is just a bonus, it's getting the job done that matters. And as good as OpenOffice is MSO is better.
      • fuxxx, on 07/07/2008, -13/+2You've hit the nail on the head.

        Except that Microsoft Office isn't good, it's terrible. And through a monumental act of *****, OpenOffice manages to be even worse.
      • soapyeyejoe, on 07/07/2008, -2/+8@ fuxxx

        Then what exactly IS good?
      • trueshadow21, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3I wouldn't expect anything posted by someone under the username of "fuxxx" to be credible.
      • Tenoq, on 07/07/2008, -1/+4soapyeyejoe:

        Cake. Cake is good.
    • vibrokatana, on 07/07/2008, -1/+16I think people are tired of the shareware crap that some developers shovel out. They think that if they like it and use it then a switch will flip somewhere and they will have to pay for it. In order for people to recognize open source the mentality that free is bad needs to be broken by putting out quality applications that improve people's lives (Firefox and OpenOffice are pretty good and have come a long way) and to teach people that their might be a FOSS application that suits their needs if they just look for it.

      The other side is brand recognition. People will fork out money to pick a box off the shelf under the assumption that it will increase their productivity somehow. Downloading something is seen as a last resort as it might contain a virus or hose the system (most people barely know how to flip the switch to turn the damn thing on).
      • ritter99, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1"if you don´t like it then don´t use it" is their credo. Many free/shareware authors create marvelous functionality, but the software looks like utter crap and is totally unusable to others.
    • deadlyfluvirus, on 07/07/2008, -9/+11In this case it's true, OO sucks compared to Microsoft Office. Microsoft doesn't have to spend tons of money to prevent people from using OO, Microsoft Office is already a thousand times better, and all they have to do is just continue on improving it.

      The whole "Microsoft has spent years and dollars engineering creative ways to keep people using its costly software and preventing them from switching to OpenOffice", is just a really load of crap.

      Should we say the same about Adobe Photoshop? Is Adobe spending millions of dollars trying to prevent people from using Gimp? Please... Stop making excuses for crappy applications. These articles don't really help the situation and just try to put blame on .
      • Giga, on 07/07/2008, -6/+1"The whole "Microsoft has spent years and dollars engineering creative ways to keep people using its costly software and preventing them from switching to OpenOffice", is just a really load of crap."

        No, it's not. It is obvious that MS has spent tons of money on maintaining and developing the product, making it better. Having the better product is a valid way to keep customers using your product.
      • FairDinkumMate, on 07/07/2008, -0/+10"Is Adobe spending millions of dollars trying to prevent people from using Gimp?"
        You missed the point entirely! Has Adobe spent millions of dollars trying to make sure jpg, bmp & tiff files don't become standard & that the only option is PSD files? NO. With regard to Photoshop at least, Adobe compete solely on the QUALITY(or not) of their product. If Microsoft would do the same, there wouldn't be a problem.

        Another problem is that a company like Adobe is now learning from Microsoft, hence it's ridiculous efforts to attempt to control PDF.
    • ryancalderoni, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2you DO get what you pay for
  • Civil44, on 07/06/2008, -36/+2Because everytime I install it and I finish a paper, goto save it, and print it at school its saved as a file those computers cant open.
    • zman14321, on 07/06/2008, -0/+45In the save menu you can change it to a .doc instead of a .odt.
    • 3242130193, on 07/06/2008, -2/+22Export it to pdf.
    • fissionignition, on 07/06/2008, -6/+36Learn how to use it.
    • Fozefy, on 07/06/2008, -15/+4My gf just got a new computer and didn't have MS Office, so I got her to download Open Office. She eventually gave up on it because she didn't understand how to make MS Office able to open her OP files. So her roommate pirated MS Office for her. Whatever works I guess.
      • Ajajadude, on 07/07/2008, -0/+6Wow. Your "girlfriend" doesn't sound very bright.
    • life036, on 07/07/2008, -11/+1This guy's comment is a perfect example of what they're doing wrong. People obviously want it to replace or be interchangeable with MS Office, so what do they do? They make the default save format incompatible, therefore turning away all non-techies. Way to lose business, OOo-developer jackasses.
      • trueshadow21, on 07/07/2008, -0/+7The program is opensource so some in the open source community would find it hypocritical to make the default save format a closed source and proprietary format. You still that the option to change the default save format in the options, which I do every time I install open office for a client/friend/relative who doesn't want to pay for Microsoft Office.
      • life036, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Understandable, but if they want to steal non-techies away from MS, that is a concession they are going to have to make. These people just want to download something that "works".

        If the techies want to use the OpenDocument format so badly, -they- should have to drill through the preferences and turn it on, not the other way around. Non-techies can't find that ***** on their own.
      • zman14321, on 07/28/2008, -0/+1They have no interest in 'stealing' anyone away from anyone else. They exist to provide a solution to the audience that wants it, an audience that appreciates having freedom with their software.
    • unitedatheism, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Had you ever used it before saying so?
      Do your school's compies have that underground "adobe acrobat" program installed?
  • vats, on 07/06/2008, -14/+108I think because most of the people are not aware from the OpenOffice and they are comfortable with MS Office.
    • AquaOSX, on 07/07/2008, -3/+5But look at large enterprises. The people that manage technical operations for an enterprise are professional geeks... they're well aware of software like Open Office.

      Large enterprises would jump all over a viable free alternative, even if it came with a minor learning curve. They wouldn't have to spend a ton of money. Moreover, they'd be able to avoid the bureaucratic lag surrounding purchase orders and licenses.

      However, OpenOffice is not 100% compatible. At the end of the day, that could cost an organization more money then some Office licenses.

      • mooninite, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1"they're well aware of software like Open Office."

        You are way out of touch with the enterprise environment. Most companies are run by Microsoft employees, or at least you would think so. They are so infatuated (for a lack of a better word) with using Microsoft products, they don't even know that anything other than Mac or PC (Windows, not Linux) exist. "SCO UNIX? What's that?" They'd say. I'm not joking.
      • clockdist, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1As the article suggests, IT standardizes on MS Office so they can keep their jobs.
    • person425, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2*****. Maybe that was true 5 years ago, but I have a large number of friends who tried to get away from msoffice, but openoffice is just *****. I use linux so I don't really have a choice, but they seriously need to hire some good HCI people to clean the UI up a bit.

      Microsoft office is expensive as hell, but it works.
  • zman14321, on 07/06/2008, -4/+14I don't think open office is the only solution, abi word is more lightweight and also free. For Mac I find Bean to be the best word processor and Neo Office useful for powerpoint presentations. I think openoffice is very capable and that more people aren't using it because they just don't know about it. Nearly all computer users have heard of or used Word, so when they purchase a computer of their own they probably assume they need word, and the salesman certainly does not point out that there is a free/open source alternative. I think that if the sales people did point that out or if OEMs shipped with openoffice installed you'd see everyone begin to use it. I also think that some schools are beginning to use it.
  • dmcbride6, on 07/06/2008, -35/+203I'm all for opensource and whatnot...but there are ways to do it and ways not to do it.

    OpenOffice sucks. I'm sorry but it does not feel like a finished product. It still feels like I'm using a 1998 word processor (for example).
    • kraetos, on 07/06/2008, -13/+63Agreed. OpenOffice's UI is awful, even when compared to Office.

      Most open source projects lack a good UI. Exceptions include Firefox and Ubuntu, but there's still a LOT of room for improvement.
      • triad203, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4You do know that Ubuntu is not a UI? It's a meta-distro. Gnome is probably your UI if you have Ubuntu installed.
    • Tenlow, on 07/07/2008, -14/+14That's what happens when it's a free project. I hate to say it, but there is a noticeable difference in user experience when someone has spent $200,000,000 on making sure everything looks right after spending ten times that making the software work vs a group collaboration of people working in their spare time for the most part.

      You get what you pay for. Both as an end user and as a developer.
      • sirhomer, on 07/07/2008, -5/+15Actually OpenOffice is sponsored by Sun Microsystems, and has paid developers. Microsoft spent billions to make Windows Vista, and look how great that turned out. Personally I use Linux (Ubuntu mostly) and I as well as many others find it vastly superior then Windows or OS X. Didn't cost me a dime, and legally too.
      • Tenlow, on 07/07/2008, -4/+6I was making a comparison between Proprietary software vs FOSS rather than just Office to Open Office.

        However, Microsoft has obviously outspent Sun on that front, and will continue to do so. I agree, vista is crap, but not for lack of fit and finish. It's crap because the lawyers got into it and made too many "protections" from things I didn't need to be protected from. Most of the flaws with vista were intentional, but somehow nobody looked at it from the end user's perspective. I'm looking at it as a transitional phase. Like ME. You would have been a fool to go from 98 to ME, but you would have been a fool to stay with 98 instead of XP. Hopefully my theory pans out, and while it would be a fool's move to "upgrade" from XP to Vista, I'm betting that the next version will be the killer app vista should have been. Genius skips a generation, you know?
      • Fergy, on 07/07/2008, -7/+2Tenlow, you really are a MS apologist. Lawyers didn't define Vista. The protections in Vista are one of the few positive things about it(the kernel and memory manager are great too). Where Vista screws up is it doesn't solve the problems people had with Winxp. Vista uses more harddrive space, cpu and memory for no reason. The speed of Vista is heavily dependent on the slowest part of any computer: the harddrive.
      • DarkShroud, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3@Fergy, Superfetch is not a "no reason" for memory usage. If you have the memory use it.
    • AngelaQ, on 07/07/2008, -2/+7I tried to use the database product, and it was useless. I do have the spreadsheet and word processor on a laptop that I use when I'm on the road.
      • trueshadow21, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3I too had a hell of a time trying to use Open Office Base in place of Access on a machine I was working with. It took me about an hour and a half to do everything that would have taken me 15 minutes on a copy of Access. It depends on what your used to using, but also some of the options just aren't there, and the ones that are there are harder to find than in Access.
    • paradexes, on 07/07/2008, -11/+11It feels bloated. It's like going from a supermodel (MS Office) to an old fat woman who farts alot.

      If all you do is word processing then Abiword is a much better alternative to either OO Writer or MS Word. The other apps have decent alternatives on Linux. Gnumeric, is a great alternative to Excel. Here is a site with some more stuff.

      http://www.msboycott.com/thealt/alts/powerpoint.sh ...
    • Pegritz, on 07/07/2008, -2/+2You said it best.
    • Technohamster, on 07/07/2008, -4/+2I use Linux because it's good. I use Firefox because it's great. I don't use OpenOffice.
    • earlycj5, on 07/07/2008, -1/+3So what features has MS Office added since 1998 that you need? I mean really. If I use Office on my Windows machine at work it's Office 2000. I still prefer to use OpenOffice, especially for documents due to better handling of styles.
    • Forma, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Suck?
      At work, i have to use MS office and i get random inexplicable automated changes to my documents. At home, i use Openoffice and the documents dance to my tune.
      Openoffice makes it so, so much easier to write a neatly formatted document, especially if it's a big one. Its greatest failure in that department is the lack of templates included by default.
  • ElBeh, on 07/06/2008, -26/+35Because it's fully possible to pirate software published by Microsoft, and because MS Office 2001 is better than OpenOffice, much less MS Office 2007.
  • Jerg3726, on 07/06/2008, -5/+32Not a lot of people actually know what Open Office is... when people think word processing they think Microsoft word.
    • blindmelon1, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1For every computer I build, I install OO, I even set it to default save as a microsoft document, spreadsheet etc...

      A lot of my customers are happy I saved them the money, and less than 50% end up buying MS Office.
  • mcool119, on 07/06/2008, -17/+152Because I "acquired" Microsoft Office for free anyway...

    *cough*
  • Kevin108, on 07/06/2008, -17/+6Because the default file format is OpenOffice documents. If it automatically saved as MS format files, I know lots of people who need to create documents but aren't savvy enough to properly save AS the files. Instead they run pirated copies of Office 2000.
    • KyjL, on 07/07/2008, -1/+6Do realize that you can automatically save documents as Word format
    • trueshadow21, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1Damn, KyjL beat me to it.
    • Kevin108, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1You and I might know that, but they don't.
  • erranttv, on 07/06/2008, -24/+27I uninstalled MS Office a few months ago. It was wreaking havoc with my laptop (Vista--I know). Anyway, since installing OpenOffice, I've had absolutely no trouble. There are only a few things I've found you can't do. For instance, if I create an Excel spreadsheet at work and hide rows or columns, I can't unhide them at home with OpenOffice. Big Whoop. OpenOffice is FREE and robust enough for my needs. It just needs more templates--love to find some more small business templates.
    • newl, on 07/07/2008, -1/+11If you'd bother to read the help, you would be able to find out how to unhide. Granted it isn't as intuitive as MS Office to do but the functionality you suggest is not there, actually is.
      • erranttv, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Uh, did, didn't work. I'm not a beginner--shouldn't assume. If I was, I wouldn't uninstall MS Office and go with OpenOffice like I did.
    • aussieNickuss, on 07/07/2008, -4/+9What sort of "havoc" was Office wreaking on your laptop?
    • Genma, on 07/07/2008, -1/+8[nonms.doc/]

      I uninstalled [ms product] recently. It was [negative experience - if not Vista reenforce with Vista]. Anyway, since installing [non ms product] I've had [positive experience].
      [brief case study, be vague]
      [reenforce non ms product name] is [compelling feature].
      [reenforce non ms product name] is good enough for me.
      It can [essential feature]. It just needs [non essential feature].

      [/eof]
  • EdCenter, on 07/06/2008, -12/+37for home users, OpenOffice would make sense. But in my office, where we have VERY complicated excel sheets calculating financials, it doesn't make any sense. I guess we can replace Word and PowerPoint, but the thing is, Excel is irreplaceable. And it comes with Office, so why switch?
    • pjkli, on 07/07/2008, -7/+5I hear that. I work with 50,000 lines of raw data in 2 ~ 15 columns. Try writing a macro to handle all that with OO that is as easy and intuitive as VB.( Or just recording your macro, depending on your skill.) I have OO on my flash drive but I NEVER use it.
      • boobsbr, on 07/07/2008, -1/+2use a sql database. much better to handle a huge amount of data.
    • MoneyShot, on 07/07/2008, -9/+13I wish I had a nickel for every Excel "application" I've seen that was sewn together with toothpicks, bubble gum, duct tape and a little Comic Sans. Just because you can perform enough floating operations to render 3D graphics in realtime using Excel (it's been done), doesn't mean that you *should*.

      Do your users (and IT support staff!) a huge favor and migrate that crap off of Excel and onto something written using an actual programming language. It will be a lot faster, flexible, and an order of magnitude easier to support/maintain. As kinda a bonus, maybe then you could then do a pilot program of rolling out OO Calc. The right tool for the right job.
      • reformation, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3Pivot Tables.
      • Rotzooi, on 07/07/2008, -1/+4I love that you are getting dugg down. Shows the level of understanding of the average Digger...
      • realnowhereman, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2> Just because you can perform enough floating operations to render 3D graphics in realtime using Excel (it's been done), doesn't mean that you *should*.

        Well, this still it's not demonstrating that Calc is as good as Excel, though. It's just the usual "you don't need that anyway" argument...
    • realnowhereman, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2actually I DID try to replace PowerPoint with Impress, and guess what, I was not impressed



      (ok kill me now)
  • Dustin00, on 07/06/2008, -21/+6After downloading it, it gets half way through the install and says the 7th cabinet file is corrupted.
  • Wakers, on 07/06/2008, -18/+119I'll tell you why, it's not as good! that's why.

    It's a decent piece of kit, but if you can afford to buy Office (2007 particularly is a big step forward) then you probably should.

    Going from Office 2007 back to Open Office is like going from Xp back to 3.1 - painful.
    • PullingTeeth, on 07/07/2008, -2/+15I'm still rockin' 3.1. Don't hate.
    • LMN8R, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3Amen. 2007 is such a tremendous step up that going back even to Office 2003 is absolutely awful. The fact that you can get a 3-user license for Home and Student (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote) for something like $120 (split it between friends, $40 per person), and saving that $40 for a *****, outdated alternative is just a joke.
    • Ajajadude, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4Between upgrading to Vista/XP and Office 2007, it'd cost me $400-$500+. I could rebuild my computer for that kind of money and still have enough left over for spare parts. And I guarantee you the people running Microsoft wonder why people like me pirate their software. Office is too expensive to justify the purchase for the average person. Unless you're working from home/running your own business, there's no reason to buy MS Office. Yeah, it looks good and runs great, but Open Office gets the job done for what people like me need it for.
      • FKnight, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1@Ajajadude
        "Yeah, it looks good and runs great, but Open Office gets the job done for what people like me need it for."

        Open Office gets the job done for what people like you need it for, yet you pirated MS Office 3 sentences before that, then justified it in the sentence after that.

        You use Microsoft Office for all of your serious office productivity stuff. Admit it.
  • tsupersonic, on 07/06/2008, -12/+48It's slow. 'nuff said
    • jmichaelg, on 07/07/2008, -7/+7It's piss-slow. It takes forever to load. It's written in Java which is a flag that no matter what the developers do short or re-writing it, it's always going to be sluggish.
      • iofthestorm, on 07/07/2008, -4/+9It's not written in Java but some plugins or some portions are. I believe you can disable the Java portions, but even then it's still slow. And the UI is pretty bad, around the level of Office 2k but 2007 blows it out of the water. For once, MS decided to innovate with Office 2007 and it was actually a really good idea.
    • punkcat, on 07/07/2008, -4/+4used it years ago, was painfully slow.

  • socialwebtools, on 07/07/2008, -19/+7Because I never heard of it....
  • shadeOfGrey, on 07/07/2008, -13/+6Because ctrl-w tends to close the an entire program instead of just a document.
  • Subcranium, on 07/07/2008, -15/+72Because it's ugly. I grabbed the latest beta, hoping to switch, and the kerning was a disaster. The same document, side by side, showed that OOo3b has real problems.

    Some letters were too close and some were too far from each other. Some vertical lines looked normal and some looked bold.

    I can't imagine staring at a jumble like that all day. Maybe it's OK for light users (although I saw the flaws immediately).

    I'm stunned that this hasn't been fixed in all these years.

    On the other hand, the spreadsheet is quite nice (for cases where I'm just bringing in and sorting a lot of data and I don't need all Excel's features). I'm able to open wide csv and tsv (>256 columns) that Excel can't touch--normally you need to load those into a database.

    The word processor, though--unbelievable crap visually. I wonder if Apple and Microsoft have font display patents or technology that OO doesn't have. Or if it's just a matter of sloppiness.

    Try them side by side on the same document--you'll see what I mean.
    • xchino, on 07/07/2008, -8/+6Kerning is handled by information in the font data. Fixed width fonts do not have kerning enabled by default by design. You can still enable kerning for selected text, the entire text, or by font. Funny that you'll download and install a several hundred megabyte application suite but won't take half a second to do a google search to find out how to customize it to your personal preferences.
      • aussieNickuss, on 07/07/2008, -3/+14That's a bit of a mean jab at Subcranium.......who expects to have to do a google search to find a setting in Oo that enables it to display fonts PROPERLY?
      • KingCritter, on 07/07/2008, -5/+3It's a *beta.* Of course some things aren't going to work properly!
      • AZRoboto, on 07/07/2008, -1/+7The average person is supposed to know that "fixed width fonts do not have kerning enabled by default by design"? Really?
      • Subcranium, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3I was not using fixed width fonts. I was using the same fonts I used in Word. xchino, you missed my point completely.

        KingCritter, it's been this way for years--every time I try it. Every version.
    • iofthestorm, on 07/07/2008, -2/+4I've noticed that too, that must be part of the reason looking at OOo bugs the hell out of me. It doesn't make any sense either, because it seems like such a basic issue.
    • aberrati0n, on 07/07/2008, -2/+4Personally, their spreadsheet app is the one thing I really can't stand in the suite. Maybe it's because I'm too used to Excel from using it for 10 years, but lots of little differences add up to immense frustration.
    • bradleyland, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1This is a problem with Linux in general, but believe it or not, it's actually gotten a lot better in recent years. The root of the problem is fonts. The fonts you're used to seeing on Windows and OS X are proprietary. You must license them if you wish to include them in your distribution, and people who provide free (as in freedom) software are opposed to this for many reasons.

      If you "obtain" the standard Microsoft font library and install it on your Linux computer, the font rendering will improve greatly.
      • Subcranium, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2No, I'm talking about looking at OOo in Windows. Butt ugly.
  • Darkhacker, on 07/07/2008, -4/+20I think the key is to do like Firefox and allow have a quality API for user extensions. I know that development builds of OpenOffice 3.0 are making strides in this area and I think that once there is a good API for building on top of OpenOffice, you'll see developers writing extensions to add capabilities that aren't there by default and will be able to do some pretty innovative stuff that even MS Office lacks.
    • person425, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1The problem with ooffice isn't the lack of features, it the lack of cleanliness. Yes, they need to modularize the code for their own sake, but once they clean the API, then clean the UI, then they should worry about allowing user extensions.
  • tufftugg, on 07/07/2008, -1/+12 Open office is great for the home, for those who can't afford MS Office. Open office has made great strides in the last five years, but it's not as robust as MS Office overall. One good thing, is with Open office you can save you projects in a format that is cross platform. I had downloaded Star Office when you still could, and it was great. I used Star Office and saved it in Power Point format for CS class, the Prof did not know till I told him at the end of the year.
  • MacTyler, on 07/07/2008, -11/+38I know, because the UI sucks.
  • dm33, on 07/07/2008, -3/+6I don't use it because I need outline view for Word documents. Office has it buried on a todo list someday.
  • Sam6644, on 07/07/2008, -5/+23Its because nobody pays for MS Office in the first place.
    • skcoder, on 07/07/2008, -6/+1Its because I downloaded Office 2007 off pirate bay. Yarr!
  • slonrgjon, on 07/07/2008, -9/+2I thought Microsoft was free
  • Retrospekt, on 07/07/2008, -8/+13It's slightly ugly, it lacks those specific tools that come in handy every once in a while, and it loads semi slow for me. Office 07 may look bloated, but it's quick as a whistle for me and I love it.
  • nizzy1115, on 07/07/2008, -6/+10Got a bunch of macs at work (bout 75) basically for internet surfing and wont really even need office software...waste of money getting the macs. Anyways, the lady in charge said she saved thousands on buying iWorks instead of Microsoft Office for each of the macs. I said why not just use open office and save many more thousands. I got a blank stare as if she was thinking wtf is open office.

    That is why it is not used.
    • fuxxx, on 07/07/2008, -10/+1No, no, no, no, no

      Open office isn't disused because nobody knows about it.
      It's because it's a piece of crap software, that's slow, ugly and impossible to use.

      My company installed openoffice on every computer, and everybody complained. Not because they were used to MS Office, but because everything that's annoying about MS Office is worse on Openoffice.

      It's in no way better to MS office, and that's a real effort considering MS office is ***** itself.
    • colincornaby, on 07/07/2008, -2/+4You do realize OpenOffice on the Mac runs in X11 and is a pile of crap? OpenOffice on the Mac is no good because it doesn't render using the native platform text rendering, it's save dialogs have no clue about the native Mac directory layouts, it's slow, and it runs in X11.

      OpenOffice 3 is supposed to ship with a Mac native interface, but it's still extremely slow, and terribly buggy.

      The lady in charge was smart to choose iWork. It's very polished and fast (we benched it at work when deciding whether or not to choose iWork or OpenOffice). Numbers is not great, but Pages and Keynote are excellent.
      • WoollyMittens, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3Neo Office is the variant of Open Office that runs native on a mac. But maybe it didn't fit in your well thought out rant.
      • Ratteler, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3http://www.neooffice.org/neojava/en/index.php

      • colincornaby, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2To the two above, yes, we did also try NeoOffice. Yes it has a native Mac interface. But it is still not as good as iWork for the same reasons that OpenOffice 3 is not great. We did a pilot test of it on 2000 machines (so you can't say we didn't try), it would flake out over time on many machines, for no apparent reason, requiring a reinstall (yes, I tried trashing preferences, no, that didn't work). In addition, a lot of users complained about the speed and the interface.
    • colincornaby, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1wrong parent...
  • tuX0r01, on 07/07/2008, -9/+27I use OpenOffice over Ms Office every day.
  • microview2007, on 07/07/2008, -26/+36Because its written in Java and runs like snot on a cold day.
    • iofthestorm, on 07/07/2008, -1/+17FFS, it's not written in Java, just some parts are, which you can disable. But it's still slow.
    • gdehms, on 07/07/2008, -4/+14For me at least, the snot can run pretty damn fast out my nose on a cold day. I'd say it runs like a booger. It doesn't move unless I pick at it.
  • fugazied, on 07/07/2008, -7/+6A bit slow loading on OS X, no where near the polish that I have come to expect from other apps on my mac. I now use iwork and Office 2008.
  • zlemonz, on 07/07/2008, -12/+4because it's ugly and slow. TextEdit ftw.
  • TheMachine1, on 07/07/2008, -3/+4Maybe because the people most likely to use free open source software like myself are also not likely to use office software anyway. I'm just another cog in the machine not some office manager.
  • svensko, on 07/07/2008, -3/+32I've used OpenOffice for the past few years with minor issues and no major complaints. I guess I just don't expect a word processor to sexually please me while walking my dog or put on a fireworks show while spinning plates on its feet.
    • KingGorilla, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4Well I do. Someones got to spin those plates
    • FKnight, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2And what's really sad is that most people on Digg would rather use Open Office even if Office 2007 *did* sexually please them.
    • Fubarepublic, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Can the plates have stuff on them?
      Can you walk my dog for me?
  • bigdogap83, on 07/07/2008, -5/+13I use Google Docs for all of my spreadsheet and word processor needs and Keynote for presentations.

    I've never bothered to look at OpenOffice because Google Docs is good enough for me.
    • WoollyMittens, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4You're right about that. I think Microsoft fears Google's web-apps more than any conventional software package.

      It'll be easier for Google to adapt a web-app to work on Linux, iPhones or any other device with a decent web browser, than it would for Microsoft to coerce the makers of those devices to supply the device with a gimped version of MS Office.

      Yes, Windows Mobile. I'm talking to you.
    • blackjack75, on 07/07/2008, -0/+0I used to use openoffice regularly (and still do sometimes), but sharing and versioning is so easy with google docs that I nearly never use anyhting else nowaday.

      Of course if your excel document is very large google docs might not be the solution (not sure, I only do it with rather small tables with at best a few hundred rows). But for texts such as offers, or small documentations, I find gdocs perfect.

      If I want a print document that looks good, I'll usually go for Pages, because the default templates are stylish and simple.
    • shinkou, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Yes, Google's web based office tools are just fine for regular daily use. I used to have OpenOffice for personal use, but since Google Docs and SpreadSheet came out, I haven't even bothered to install it on my computer!
  • lupka, on 07/07/2008, -3/+10It needs features that make it superior to MS Office, rather than being a free clone. Something to get people's attention.
    • ThirdPrize, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2The problem with Open Source software is that it is a lot of different groups working on a lot of different projects. M$ know that to really succeed in business, your Office software needs to work with your DB and your web server and your CMS and your programming language/framework needs to tie the lot together. Which, not suprisingly, theirs does. Out the box.
    • Forma, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1It has, its implementation of styles is far better than Microsoft's.
  • Farmer77, on 07/07/2008, -6/+13I use OpenOffice often and I can see why it's not catching on. It is bloated. Takes more time to load with each upgrade and leaves a mess of files behind after an installation.
    • svensko, on 07/07/2008, -4/+11Yeah, Microsoft has never released bloated software.
    • newl, on 07/07/2008, -3/+11Nor have they ever left behind a mess of files.
    • estvir, on 07/07/2008, -9/+12Oh look, someone points out a flaw in an FOSS product and the first response is "But Microsoft.." -- grow up, make better software.
      • Ajajadude, on 07/07/2008, -4/+1You can't criticize a program for things that another program also does.
      • estvir, on 07/07/2008, -2/+4Yes you can, you're a complete idiot if you think otherwise.

        Actually, how the hell can you say such a thing? Do you not realise how incredibly stupid that is? My goodness.. sometimes I wonder how people like you managed to turn your computer on.
      • mrtrevin, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Goddamn, you're an angry person.
      • sirhomer, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1@mrtrevin
        The man is on Digg 20 hours a day defending Microsoft and his favorite video games and consoles (Besides a Microsoft supporter, he is some kind of intense video game nut, I don't see how he has enough time to play any games). The few times I decided to attack him personally like he seems to do to everyone else here on Digg I have this sudden urge not to. I guess I feel sorry for him.

        But hey, there needs to be people like him talking ***** about open source to balance all the praise. Some criticisms, even blind or stupid criticism, is better then nothing.
    • Farmer77, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Guys, I was being objective. And if anyone of you actually used both MS office and open office, you can tell there is a noticeable speed difference.

      Here is a performance breakdown from ZDnet if you don't believe me.
      http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=120
  • Slacker1031, on 07/07/2008, -9/+9Because It has more functionality. Maybe from where you are standing open office is good enough, but from where I'm standing I have a licensed copy that efficiently gets everything done and syncs it to Groove where my team members can all access it, make necessary edits, and sync all of our calendars according to what is done and what still needs to be accomplished all without having to go through multiple third party programs. Last time I looked into open office it did not have those features readily available.

    As a side note, Microsoft Excel 2007 is not a program that can be mimicked. There is a lot of functionality there that is missing from the open office version.
  • bizsumpark182, on 07/07/2008, -5/+20I love Open Office and have been using it for well over a year now. And anytime I get the chance to I always tell others about and try to get them to try it out.
    • reformation, on 07/07/2008, -3/+4But it's slightly pointless if they already have Office installed.

  • nemojonze, on 07/07/2008, -9/+1Because open office is not metal. Not metal at all.
  • DaedalusX, on 07/07/2008, -15/+10Because Windows users will simply pirate/get Office.
    Macfags will use Ms Office 2004/2008, Neo Office or iWork.
    And most linux users I've known can't stand Open Office so they usually go with Abiword + Numeric.

    Open Office deserves A+ for the effort (Free Open Cross-platform suite). And D- for execution.
    • estvir, on 07/07/2008, -7/+4> Open Office deserves A+ for the effort (Free Open Cross-platform suite). And D- for execution.

      Like so many other FOSS applications. Hello GIMP.
      • Karmavs, on 07/07/2008, -0/+5I'd say GIMP was above par for execution. I'm thinking audacity, inkscape, firefox on OS X…
      • trueshadow21, on 07/07/2008, -1/+3I actually like audacity, although I've never used anything else besides audacity for audio editing, so I don't know what I'm missing, just like a lot of people who endorse OpenOffice saying that its on par with MS Office.
    • maehem, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3Heheheh.... NeoOffice == OpenOffice (just tweaked for Mac).
  • pantalapampa, on 07/07/2008, -11/+2MS Office is free (www.isohunt.com) and it's a much better product.
  • dougbarrett, on 07/07/2008, -6/+3I would use Open Office if Impress used accelerated graphics to display presentations. Oo.org 3 is better, but all of the animations are processed by the CPU and not the GPU.

    Accelerated graphics is actually the reason I haven't switched to Linux full time. The other software that has that problem is Flash, but that is Adobe's problem for not implementing it which makes videos in full screen look like *****.
  • bootle, on 07/07/2008, -5/+10I've always thought that the reason is that it's not BETTER than Office, to the average user. Look at firefox, it had to up the ante with features like tabs in order to get switchers from IE. If firefox was just a "safer" IE clone, would anyone ever bother?

    OpenOffice needs to LEAPFROG microsoft, and that is tough for such a mature type of app
  • tucktan, on 07/07/2008, -20/+20because openoffice sucks?
    • Six7Six7, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2i agree with this assessment.
    • Fubarepublic, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Its better at messing with CSV files.
  • Lazybones, on 07/07/2008, -14/+211. It is not as compatible with .doc files as MS Office. Hell it failed to load the basic formatting of my resume correctly or consistently. Same goes for other office docs.
    2. It is slow, recent tests have shown it is getting SLOWER with each version.
    3. People just have not heard of it.
    • nblsavage, on 07/07/2008, -4/+14Hell, different versions of MS Office aren't always compatible between each other.
      • Ravatar, on 07/07/2008, -3/+4Almost totally false. Microsoft goes through GREAT PAINS to ensure backward compatibility.
      • Soxxers, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4Really? I work in an environment in which I have to open Office docs created by other people multiple times a day...I have different versions of Office running on both Macs and PCs...and it's still a crapshoot as to whether or not the Office doc will open correctly.
    • DarkShroud, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3The only one I actually remember being a problem were Office 2000 word docs. There is a compatibility tool for 2003 to read the .docx format.
  • GeniusXYZ, on 07/07/2008, -5/+1I use Openoffice on my laptop and MS office at office and i can clearly see the difference between the both..
    1. Word documents created in MS office dont get rendered exactly the same in Open office which prevents organizations to switch to Openoffice. (a new organization can probably use the OpenOffice)
    2. MS Excel has macros for various operations/calculations which is very useful.
    • farberio, on 07/07/2008, -3/+1No a new company cannot use Open Office because they will deal with other companies or clients that probably use MS Office. OpenOffice is not usable in the business world until it becomes a polished system that is 100% compatible with MS Office.
      • hakz, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1It is 100% compatible with Ms Office. Just choose the option to do with Ms Office when you do save as
    • boobsbr, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2@ 1
      that's because ms uses a ***** closed proprietary standard to store their data, thus making you ***** in the ass if it decides to move on to a new format.
  • specialK16, on 07/07/2008, -18/+23Because it sucks. I don't need an article to tell me that.
  • xevidentx, on 07/07/2008, -14/+8because open office sucks???? seriously it is inferior in every way( except price) to MS office. and if you can get an employee discount or academic discount for ms office, forget using anything else
  • DaveClarkOne, on 07/07/2008, -10/+12Simple. I have invested many hours of learning Excel and Word. I'm comfortable with both. Why would I save a few bucks (or even more than a few bucks) to learn something else, particularly if it isn't as good. My time is worth something.
    • waydee, on 07/07/2008, -1/+4Its a productivity suite, what the hell is there to learn? Everything is where you'd expect it to be, i've never understood this sort of attitude that software like this needs to be learned.

      • nicko68, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1People take courses for credit in Excel and Word. It's kinda crazy.
      • queenstarsha, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1functions are moved around and called different things. it isn't hard to learn for people who love computers, but people already know where everything is and what it's called in ms office. i don't understand why people would rather spend $150+ for ms office than learn where things are in openoffice, either, but there are differences between the two that make it daunting for secretaries who constantly have viruses and are just mystified about it.
  • jerrycurley, on 07/07/2008, -11/+16Because it is not as good.
    • Ortheos, on 07/07/2008, -4/+2But is the alternative which costs so much more THAT much better?
      • Ravatar, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Yes.

        Yes it is.
      • Ortheos, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Spoken like a true linux virgin. And it was a rhetorical question. And the true answer is; No, no it's not.
  • chaos7, on 07/07/2008, -7/+26i use it!
    • SolidSnak, on 07/07/2008, -0/+12me too!
      • Smegzor, on 07/07/2008, -0/+5Me three! I have Office 2003 and 2007 at work, but as soon as the boss looked away I installed Open Office. I just prefer it over Office.
      • Ortheos, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1!
      • Fubarepublic, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 157 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.