COMMENTARY--Yes, you do have alternatives. But the differences between WordPerfect, OpenOffice.org's Writer, and MS Word are very minor. Let me explain why you might--or might not--want to switch.
Spring has sprung (the roses are blooming, at least where I live) and the betas are popping out all over. So I'm writing today's column in not one, not two, but three different word processors, all currently in beta.
Right now, I've got beta versions of Microsoft Office 2003, OpenOffice.org 1.1, and Corel's WordPerfect Office 11 loaded on my system. My summary judgment: There are things to like and dislike about the word processors in each of these suites, but they really vary only by small degrees.
All are mature enough that the major problems have long since been solved. All are fully compatible with the Word .doc files you probably need to read and write in every day. All are fine products that probably do more than any of us really need. The main differences between the three: Word comes with a tightly integrated e-mail client, the others don't. And OpenOffice.org is free, while the other two cost a few hundred dollars each.
Let me switch over to Openoffice.Org now and write a bit about/with it.
OpenOffice.org 1.1 is the latest beta of the free, open-source, MS Office-compatible suite that began life as StarOffice (which is sold by Sun); you can download it from OpenOffice.org. (Yes, the name of the product is officially the same as the Web site.)
Of the three suites, OpenOffice looks the geekiest. It's also the plainest in terms of user interface and appears to have the lightest feature set. Not that these are necessarily problems: "Plain" and "geeky" could also be "spare" and "efficient."
The feature you're most likely to notice is the way Writer (the word processor component of the suite) tries to auto-complete words. As you type, the program guesses the word you're trying to spell, and the extra letters appear in white text on a blue background. If the program has guessed correctly, which it very often does, you can hit the Enter key to accept the completed word.
As for sending documents by e-mail, OpenOffice.org is perfectly happy to send my documents from inside the word processor, but first it has to fire up Outlook. According to the folks at OpenOffice.org, the suite will also integrate with Eudora, Mozilla, and pretty much all the main open- source mail clients
If you'd like to find out more about OpenOffice.org 1.1, my colleague Pat Houston recently sat down with Louis Suarez-Potts, community manager at OpenOffice.org, to go over some of its new features. The video of that conversation is available here.
The most telling question in the interview is when Pat asks why he'd want to switch from MS Office to OpenOffice.org, and the answer is all about the wonders of standard XML schemas. Do average users really care? Like I said, OpenOffice.org is geeky, but a fine word processor nonetheless.
Now let me pause a minute while I switch word processors. OK, all set.
As the number after the name suggests, WordPerfect 11 has been around long enough to evolve into a complete word processor. In fact, it's probably the descendant of the first (or second) word processing program you ever used.
Corel says WP's core audience continues to be government agencies and legal practices that have standardized on WordPerfect over the years and remain loyal (and happy) users. The package also shows up preloaded on some new PCs. And I don't have any problem recommending it to small business and SOHO users.
I like WP11 a lot. It has a nice user interface and an excellent feature set. If there is something Word does that WordPerfect doesn't, I haven't needed to do it yet.
One thing that WP does better than Word: outlining. If you create particularly long or structured documents, this could be a crucial feature for you. As for e-mailing your documents, WordPerfect (like OpenOffice.org) integrates with Outlook. But unlike the other suite, it choked on the 2003 beta version of the mail program that I'm currently using.
Switching back to Word now. OK.
I've already talked about Word 2003 in a previous column, at least a little, and there's not much in the beta that's likely to surprise you, at least as far as general word processing is concerned.
Word has one advantage over these two competitors that I really care about: word count. Now you may not care about word counts, but we professional writers care a whole lot. We sometimes get paid by the word and, even if we don't, always have to be concerned with the length of our work. (For me, a short column is 600 words; I aim for 800 and sometimes hit 1,400 if I am really wound up).
In Word, it's easy to get a word count from the Tools menu. But in the other two, it's much harder to access. Why does this matter to you (assuming you don't carefully calculate your own word counts)? Because writers must have been telling both OpenOffice.org and WordPerfect about this defect for quite a while, and it still hasn't been made easier. You'd think the developers would have responded by now. If they aren't responsive to things I care about, how are they handling the things you care about?
(The best program as it relates to word counts is Word for Mac, which displays it on a status line at the bottom of the document window. That's how it should be done.)
My conclusion? The two Office alternatives are both excellent programs, with WP being the more excellent of the two. On the other hand, it's not going to be free when it ships later this spring. At $299, WP Office 11 Professional will be less expensive than Microsoft Office, but $299 more than OpenOffice.org. That's an important consideration.
I have nothing against Microsoft Office and hope to benefit from the new collaboration features that the 2003 version will offer. But I also think that--as with Apple's Macintosh--you should consider the alternatives before defaulting to Microsoft simply because that's what everyone else does.
One final note: When I brought this story back into Word for a final edit, Word thought it was written in German and, lacking a German-language spelling checker, wouldn't spell-check the document. WordPerfect did the same thing, so I'm placing tentative blame on OpenOffice.org. I have, however, used shipping versions of all these products in the past and have never previously had this or a similar problem. Must be a beta thing.
What do you think? Would you ever give up Microsoft Word? Do you trust the claims that the alternative suites are file-compatible with Office? Let us know at edit@zdnet.com.au
3%
2%
