The Document Foundation Clarifies LibreOffice 7.0's "Personal Edition" Branding

[wswartzendruber]

Well well well, if "personal" is to be taken into account, corporations that wont pay are not going to be allowed to use it? That would be a big failure of a free (libre) office suite that was born to have no strings attached to corporates(Oracle).

If that's not the case, the wording choice is a big failure by its own.

LibreOffice is already MPL-2.0, and that license doesn't permit what you're talking about.

[wizard69]

Good luck them with their efforts. Marketing is something FOSS really need.

Isn't that the case. However they have zero chance of making in roads with corporate America.

[wizard69]

I read the statement, and the slide deck. (Well, eventually I did. The Documentfoundation website took longer to open than Libreoffice itself does. ) It's still a bit unclear what they intend exactly, but I'm getting:

1. There is infighting in the project as to future changes, identified in the materials as a 'community'/'ecosytem partner' split.

I hope that this isn't some thin skinned FOSS developer getting but hurt over somebody trying to improve the code base.

2. TDF intends to target several groups that they believe should be using LibreOffice and aren't with a marketing/education push. 'Use LibreOffice instead of pirating software.' Or paying for proprietary software, of course.

The mountain is huge and they need to get to the top to have any impact. This is sort of like the trouble we have trying to get people to try Linux. All the promotion in the world will not overcome the games and corporate software that runs on Windows. That corporate software is ofte used as a game anyways so you are struggling against a bunch of gamers.

3. For corporations and NGOs, TDF will enable separate versions of software based on today's LibreOffice, insulating them from changes in the 'Personal Edition' which they may not like.

That is an aberrant statement. I suspect that they want some sort of income from people with money. That could easily result in 100's of LibreOffice versions. It would make more sense to simply roll the rational updates into the community code base.

4. Even current users of LibreOffice don't give much back, so TDF intends to educate on how doing so is in a group's interest, dangling the ability to have their own version of LibreOffice as bait.

Yeah but who is asking for such? It isn't something I've heard that is for sure.

A 'marketing' campaign aimed at educational, NGO, and groups who currently pirate software sounds like a solid idea. And I can understand how corporate users would refuse to be subject to decisions from some 'community' members. Look at mixed reaction to developments in Gnome and KDE over time to see how divisive that can be. Getting groups to pay or contribute, best of luck. I just hope the separate Enterprise version doesn't lead to the project's destruction. My guess is a good portion of the users will actually want that version instead of whatever has them worried that the 'community' will do to the Personal Edition.

Again it is often the FOSS developers that hold Linux and software suites back. This has happened with Python, systemD, LLVM/Clang and some other stuff. It is unfortunate and the drive we see almost every where for more inclusiveness will just make things worse for FOSS. If we have even more people easily but hurt over moving forward, FOSS is going to suffer horribly and never move forward.

[yoshi314]

Isn't that the case. However they have zero chance of making in roads with corporate America.

if they offer paid support - they might achieve something. for many companies this is a significant aspect of vendor choice. and this is also why redhat is so successful.

[eidolon]

if they offer paid support - they might achieve something. for many companies this is a significant aspect of vendor choice. and this is also why redhat is so successful.

Isn't that what Collabora, IceWarp, CIB, and Kopano are already doing?
---
I didn't consider there to be an ecosystem messaging problem, but if this branding change is what the stakeholders want, go for it. Can I get the icon in cornflower blue?

[gabber]

I hope that this isn't some thin skinned FOSS developer getting but hurt over somebody trying to improve the code base.

The mountain is huge and they need to get to the top to have any impact. This is sort of like the trouble we have trying to get people to try Linux. All the promotion in the world will not overcome the games and corporate software that runs on Windows. That corporate software is ofte used as a game anyways so you are struggling against a bunch of gamers.

That is an aberrant statement. I suspect that they want some sort of income from people with money. That could easily result in 100's of LibreOffice versions. It would make more sense to simply roll the rational updates into the community code base.

Yeah but who is asking for such? It isn't something I've heard that is for sure.


Again it is often the FOSS developers that hold Linux and software suites back. This has happened with Python, systemD, LLVM/Clang and some other stuff. It is unfortunate and the drive we see almost every where for more inclusiveness will just make things worse for FOSS. If we have even more people easily but hurt over moving forward, FOSS is going to suffer horribly and never move forward.

Thinskinned devs? Because they object to their work being made more bureaucratic and taken over for political virtue signalling. I'd call that having a backbone and not falling for the new original sin.

Fordward? The trouble with 'arguments' like this is: everybody has a different forward. See the "great leap forward"

[kpedersen]

This completely undermines the FOSS community trying to get open-source productivity tools into the enterprise arena (and replacing Microsoft Office).

To then turn around and call the open-source version "Personal" is utterly disloyal and almost ensures that middle managers will look down upon it as "non-enterprise ready".

Libreoffice has done some work to port it to run on a web browser. Obviously they are seeing some potential cash coming there way by milking "Cloud idiots" and are letting greed pave the way.

[Guest]

Well well well, if "personal" is to be taken into account, corporations that wont pay are not going to be allowed to use it? That would be a big failure of a free (libre) office suite that was born to have no strings attached to corporates(Oracle).

If that's not the case, the wording choice is a big failure by its own.

IMO, it's about ability to offer warranty and paid support with some SLA(s). Corporations prefer paid products, because they can push strings easily, and get it fixed ASAP, if something critical pops-up. With plain FOSS, corporations can just fill the issue report, and wait months to get it fixed. And, that's the primary reason, why corporations avoid FOSS.

[pal666]

Why not call it "community edition"? What if I have a family computer and the whole family uses LibreOffice? That's not too "personal"...

but if someone is using it alone, that's not too "community", right?

[pal666]

Well well well, if "personal" is to be taken into account, corporations that wont pay are not going to be allowed to use it?

how is that even possible? corporations just wouldn't get support contract for free

If that's not the case, the wording choice is a big failure by its own.

i find wording perfect, it's like personal(free)/business/enterprise tariff plans for any service