OpenOffice: Worth $21 Million Per Day, If It Were Microsoft Office 361
rbowen of SourceForge writes with an interesting way to look at the value of certain free software options: "Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 has averaged 138,928 downloads per day. That is an average value to the public of $21 million per day, as calculated by savings over buying the competing product. Or $7.61 billion (7.61 thousand million) per year." (That works out to about $150 per copy of MS Office. There are some holes in the argument, but it holds true for everyone who but for a free office suite would have paid that much for Microsoft's. The numbers are even bigger if you toss in LibreOffice, too.)
potentially worth... (Score:5, Insightful)
...people are downloading it for free so they're not necessarily paying customers...
Not as good. (Score:1, Insightful)
Except that saying OpenOffice or LibreOffice are as good as Microsoft Office is false.
This is a story? (Score:1, Insightful)
A download is not a sale says Slashdot when the RIAA uses it for damage assessments. This "story" is nothing more than a calculation that a liberal arts major could do (with a calculator) in a minute or two. Why is this on Slashdot?
Re:potentially worth... (Score:1, Insightful)
This.
How many people in this list would pirate instead of pay. How many of these downloads represent aborted downloads that are retried (it is a large download). How many of these would have been covered by the home license (I believe you get up to three computers with the normal licensed product -- as opposed to Student edition or other licenses). etc.
The numbers are important, but probably misleading.
And while the free Office products are sufficient for most people's normal use (i.e. homework), MS Office is still a superior product. If you need more complex features on a semi-regular basis, it's worth paying the price (but if all you do is type in text and change the font, stick with free).
.
What? (Score:4, Insightful)
How many people would download OpenOffice if Microsoft Office was free?
Interesting analogy to the BSA's piracy figures (Score:5, Insightful)
Every year or so Microsoft and the BSA roll out an updated report on the financial cost of software piracy. They make a similar argument, that someone who uses a pirated copy of MS Office would have otherwise bought an MS Office license. So they estimate the loss to the economy as # pirated copies * retail price of MS Office.
So it is interesting, and a bit of poetic justice, to apply that same logic to show the value of open source in the economy.
Certainly one could quibble with the exact figures, but it does show that the impact of open source is huge. But we already knew that, right?
Re:Not as good. (Score:4, Insightful)
As for TFA, you're using RIAA math here, guys. That's just stupid. Downloader != potentially-paying-customer. At least get that part right.
It is a good alternative to Microsoft Office (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:potentially worth... (Score:4, Insightful)
How many people in this list would pirate instead of pay. How many of these downloads represent aborted downloads that are retried (it is a large download). How many of these would have been covered by the home license (I believe you get up to three computers with the normal licensed product -- as opposed to Student edition or other licenses). etc.
You missed the most important question. Out of those 138,928 downloads per day, how many people actually continued to use Open Office and how many used it briefly, discovered that it is crap and downloaded a pirated copy of Microsoft Office.
Not quite... $150 hides the true costs. (Score:4, Insightful)
How many people download or use Open Office because it is free?
Probably a large percentage of them since that's one of it's redeeming features. Now if OO had the same price as MSOffice, I bet that number would drop dramatically.
If you take the product acquisition cost out of the equation you're now left with acquisition costs which might not be in OO's favor.
Cost to retrain people
Cost to migrate existing systems/processes/applications to OO
Support costs (IT, support vendors etc..)
$150/seat might not be much if you have business critical applications like telephony/voice/chat that are integrated in with your office suite.
Re:potentially worth... (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, the biggest assumption being that anyone would use OpenOffice or LibreOffice if they had to pay the same price as MS Office.
Re:potentially worth... (Score:4, Insightful)
...people are downloading it for free so they're not necessarily paying customers...
And, more importantly, the number of downloads has no real correlation to the number of users -- which is what the paid products are based on. I've downloaded OpenOffice probably fifty times since its inception. I've bought Microsoft Office once.
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
How many people would download OpenOffice if Microsoft Office was free?
How many people would download OpenOffice if it wasn't free?
Re:It is a good alternative to Microsoft Office (Score:5, Insightful)
So to each their own, if you need the features of Microsoft Office, more power to you. I'm sure many here though will chime in that for the majority of users, Open or Libre Office have 99% of what the typical user needs.
Home user, yes. Office? I'd say yes, if you leave out Outlook. And, you could probably use some sort of web-based or other mail client and some other mail server if in some cases, but there's more to Exchange/Outlook than a simple mail program. IMO, the thing that most makes Microsoft Office "sticky" in corporate environments isn't Word or Excel, its Outlook.
Re:What? (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree lack of marketing is a huge problem, that is what you meant right?
Troll... (Score:5, Insightful)
And while the free Office products are sufficient for most people's normal use (i.e. homework),
That's a subtle troll. Well done.
I love how you dismiss everyone who doesn't need vastly complex features (LO has some pretty involved ones) and their work by comparing it to nothing more than schoolwork.
If you need more complex features on a semi-regular basis, it's worth paying the price (but if all you do is type in text and change the font, stick with free).
I'll clue you in on something from the world of "real work"(tm) where people do "real things" for "money" which makes it much more important than "schoolwork": almost noone knows how to use word beyond changing fonts and typing text.
Actually this is one of the things that aggravates me about people who refuse to conemplate the idea of moving to another system because "they know word": almost always they don't even know how to use it beyond the absolute basics.
Re:Not as good. (Score:0, Insightful)
One of those very specific use cases is called a "spreadsheet", which Calc handles with the grace of a drunk puppy.
Re:potentially worth... (Score:4, Insightful)
Most OO or LO users would switch to something like Google Docs or AbiWord if they had to pay the same price as they would for MS Office. Personal observation, yadda yadda, but the majority of Office users don't actually need Office, they just need Word, and for *most* of us, AbiWord will quite happily serve their needs.
Re:Not quite... $150 hides the true costs. (Score:4, Insightful)
How many people download or use Open Office because it is free?
I bet that even if it was $5, the numbers would be much lower. How many people will download it several times after re-installing or on different computers just because they can't be arsed to find the installer? Or just to try it out for ten minutes before going back to MS Office? Take for example the TPB AFK movie that was featured here on slashdot, I got it because it's free and legal. I haven't watched it yet, haven't even decided if I will but what the hell, I grabbed it anyway because I didn't need to make any cost/benefit decision, I could just put it on download now and decide if I want it later. The whole question of "Why should I spend money on that?" becomes "Why not, it's free..."
Re:Troll... (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed. In my office we've standardized on OpenOffice (or LibreOffice). We write reports, produce spreadsheets and give presentations without problem. The only time I ever need access to MS Office is when somebody sends me an Office document that for whatever reason doesn't render correctly. It's not because the information isn't available. It's always a disagreement between the two programs as to how to render. OO and LO interchange nicely. The Apple iWork suite works as well. In my experience Office is the odd-man out.
At this stage of the game Office productivity is mostly a solved problem. The feature set is known. Now we're dickering over file formats and presentation.
Re:Troll... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:potentially worth... (Score:2, Insightful)
Or, how many of those people purchased Microsoft Office and found out it was complete crap, so they had to install some alternative? They already gave money to Microsoft, so they shouldn't be included either.
Most Microsoft Office users don't even pay for office. They get it free with their jobs.
Re:Troll... (Score:2, Insightful)
...Actually this is one of the things that aggravates me about people who refuse to conemplate the idea of moving to another system because "they know word": almost always they don't even know how to use it beyond the absolute basics.
Couldn't have said it better myself. It is frustrating to watch a corporation blow hundreds of thousands of dollars on licenses because it would be too expensive to retrain the masses when 95% of them don't even know how to use more than 5% of the features in any given MS Office application.
Re:potentially worth... (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate the new style of Office, but from the perspective of people looking for an office-like suite of tools, MS Office is damned good compared to what I've seen as alternatives.
I'm certain that there are a few tasks which would result in Word/Excel/Powerpoint being complete crap, but for the general tasks of 'edit document', 'use spreadsheet', 'generate slides', I don't think that any honest person could call Office complete crap.
I've not encountered any alternative which beats Office at those tasks, and even the best of the alternatives only just meets the capabilities of Office.
I'm not shilling for MS here, as I think that there is a lot that is wrong with Office, and I actually use Google Docs when it's an option, and unless I have no choice I install and use Open Office for more serious document editing. I just think that no rational person could describe Office as complete crap with respect to it's main functions.
Re:potentially worth... (Score:2, Insightful)
Microsoft Office may be a lot of things, but comparing it to LibreOffice/OpenOffice and calling MS Office crap in comparison is ridiculous. I actually ended up buying MS Office (for my mac) because Open/LibreOffice is so shit. I've tried to love it for a long, long time, but it's slow, it's bloated, it's buggy as hell and I just got tired of trying to overlook its blemishes.
MS Office's blemishes are much more bearable, in my opinion. The price isn't cheap but not having to screw around and waste my time is worth something, too.
Re:Troll... (Score:0, Insightful)
LMAO - I think that this might be the first time that I've ever seen someone whine about/troll MS Office because it empowered their users too much!!
-AC
Re:Troll... (Score:4, Insightful)
For God's sake.
Re:potentially worth... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:potentially worth... (Score:5, Insightful)
To look at the analogy another way, MS Office charges you a higher rate so that it can turn up in a gay robe and wig, whereas Open Office rocks up in jeans and t-shirt but does 99% of the same things for far less money.