Underlying Philosophy

Before we examine the specific features of Microsoft Office and OpenOffice, it may be helpful to step back to compare the philosophical differences between the two packages, and how these differences might impact how you purchase and use them.

With commercially licensed software like Microsoft Office, a product is developed by a single company; sales help fund product testing and development, marketing and sales, as well as salaries and shareholder dividends. In contrast, open-source software like OpenOffice is developed collaboratively, often by volunteers, and freely distributed, allowing anyone to use, redistribute, adapt, or improve the code — all free of charge.

The open-source philosophy is not just limited to software, and can attract loyal adherents who believe that information should be shared freely. Likewise, some consumers feel more comfortable with a for-profit model they feel rewards ingenuity and innovation. If you have deep convictions in either direction, we suspect that we're not going to change your mind here. However, each model does offer tangible advantages:

Open-source applications often cost nothing. OpenOffice is free — and who doesn’t love a bargain? Bear in mind, however, that Microsoft Office 2007 and 2010 are available to eligible U.S.-based nonprofits and libraries for a minimal fee ($20-30 depending on the version and edition through TechSoup, for instance).

Updates to open-source applications also cost nothing. As an open-source product, OpenOffice updates are free; the same is not always true of Microsoft updates. Microsoft, however, gives Office to nonprofits as part of a philanthropic program, meaning that it is possible (although not likely, given the length of Microsoft’s commitment to philanthropy) that if the donation program ended, you would have to pay to update the suite down the road. If you currently hold a valid license of Office with Software Assurance, you may be able to upgrade to the newer versions for no cost.

You can do what you like with open-source code. You can study OpenOffice and adapt it to your needs. You can improve the program or build something completely new with it and release your changes to the public. If this is important to you, Microsoft doesn't offer anything comparable.

Commercially licensed software offers a company behind the code. Microsoft depends on the sales of Office and its other software to remain profitable, giving it a strong incentive to offer the features, support, and interface that will make it attractive to users and competitive in the market. Microsoft has built a vast pool of talented developers, a mature platform, and polished user interfaces, and Office’s success has provided it with a large user and support base. Although OpenOffice has a formal relationship with Oracle, the mandates for open-source applications like OpenOffice are a bit fuzzier and tend to be driven by tech-savvy programmers. In practice, this has resulted in a somewhat less polished interface and more limited documentation.

Open-source has code beyond a company. Because its source code is available to all, OpenOffice is not solely dependent on its current crop of developers and current corporate sponsor. If all these people were to disappear, the code would still exist and other people could pick of the project. The same is not always true for closed-source, commercial projects. That being said, it doesn't appear that Microsoft is in any danger of going bankrupt in the foreseeable future.