I think some very whimsical and uninformed comments from the author.
Unfortunately, that information makes users distrust LibreOffice not
want to test their virtues. I would say that LibreOffice is in its best
and still much more to do.
Some articles with facts showing quality and low error that has
LibreOffice:
-http://www.coverity.com/press-releases/libreoffice-makes-strides-in-software-quality-with-coverity-scan/
-http://www.infoworld.com/article/2687117/open-source-software/libreoffice-code-ten-times-better-than-proprietary.html
-https://colonelqubit.wordpress.com/2015/10/15/libreoffice-qa-over-1000-bibisects-served/
-https://mmohrhard.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/short-update-about-the-performance-testing/
Cheers
---
BASTIÁN DÍAZ
https://telegram.me/diazbastian
El 04-11-2015 17:58, CVAlkan escribió:
For what it's worth...
In a review of Microsoft Office 2016 in the November 2015 of PC
Magazine,
long time reviewer Edward Mendelson gives the new version of
Microsoft's
suite 4.5 of 5 stars. As is typical of such reviews, the main
discussion is
followed by a short section - in this case titled "Office Alternatives"
-
describing other competitive offerings, such as Google Apps, Corel
WordPerfect Office, Apple's iWorks, etc.. He had the following to say
about
LibreOffice:
"Although Office 2016 as a whole towers over its competition, it isn't
the
best at everything. LibreOffice 5 is a free and open-source suite, so
governments and security-conscious organizations can use it without
worrying
about what might be hidden inside Microsoft's code - but it's also
clumsy
and unstable."
"Clumsy" seems to me to be a matter of what one is used to (i.e. de
gustibus
non disputandum as Horace said), and Mr. Mendelson doesn't explain what
he
means by "unstable" (it's of course easy to find "bugs," but I consider
"unstable" to suggest frequent crashes, which I haven't experienced or
heard
about).
There are a variety of use cases for which LibreOffice is simply
inadequate
for serious work of course, but these are not the sort of things that
the
average user would run across. Given that LibreOffice is FREE, and
coded
mostly by volunteers with a wide range of programming skills and
experience,
it seems to me that the author's characterization misses the whole
value
proposition of LibreOffice.
--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/PC-Magazine-Comments-about-LibreOffice-tp4165317.html
[1]
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Links:
------
[1]
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/PC-Magazine-Comments-about-LibreOffice-tp4165317.html
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted