Recent searches
Search options
It’s really really embarrassing that @TheASF still distributes OpenOffice, leaving people like this schoolteacher (name omitted to spare them spam) to think it’s a maintained or viable alternative.
My casual count suggests LibreOffice has done 40+ releases since OOo last did a release.
It seems clear to me that the embarrassment lands squarely on the tech media, who should be far better at communicating "#OpenOffice is not what you're looking for, use #LibreOffice @libreoffice instead". That's firmly within the tech media's job.
The job of @TheASF lies primarily in maintaining software. Let them maintain whatever software, for as long as people want it maintained.
@bignose @libreoffice @TheASF No, ASF has the domain and the Google/SEO juice, so they have the primary responsibility.
And to be clear they’re not actually maintaining it, since it regularly has security vulnerabilities that go unpatched for months at a time.
@bignose @libreoffice @TheASF Eg, the OpenOffice website could say “please don’t download this, we just do it for fun and as a result this often has security vulnerabilities. If you want an free office suite that is maintained to a high level of professionalism and security, please go to libreoffice.org”. But instead it not only encourages downloads, it misleads a banner stating “380M downloads”, giving the impression that it is an active (and presumably secure) project.
@luis_in_brief @bignose @libreoffice @TheASF something needs to be done about this. It's unethical to distribute insecure software. If there's corporate association here they could find themselves in a law suit, too, though most likely victims wouldn't have the wherewithal to initiate one. Where is sense of responsibility to one's community?
@bluetea Please contact press@apache.org and ask them why they're still distributing OpenOffice despite multiple unfixed security issues over a year old. The more people that do this, the more chance there is of finally putting it in the Attic...