Agreed. In terms of word processor features, performance probably doesn't make it into my top five.
LO still has enough compatibility problems to stop it being a mainstream replacement for MSO. It is much better than it used to be, particularly for .docs, but there are still major issues with .docxs that are showstoppers for most businesses.
If you can keep to .docs or mandate LO/OO use in your organization, then I think LO is actually BETTER than MSO for your average user - MSO '97 was the high point IMHO, every release since then has just added bloat. For most places, however, dealing with .docxs is mandatory.
I certainly don't blame the LO developers for this, as the 'OpenXML' (LOL) standards are completely hideous and clearly designed expressly to PREVENT anyone making a decently-compatible MSO replacement - but the situation is what it is.
LO still has enough compatibility problems to stop it being a mainstream replacement for MSO. It is much better than it used to be, particularly for .docs, but there are still major issues with .docxs that are showstoppers for most businesses.
If you can keep to .docs or mandate LO/OO use in your organization, then I think LO is actually BETTER than MSO for your average user - MSO '97 was the high point IMHO, every release since then has just added bloat. For most places, however, dealing with .docxs is mandatory.
I certainly don't blame the LO developers for this, as the 'OpenXML' (LOL) standards are completely hideous and clearly designed expressly to PREVENT anyone making a decently-compatible MSO replacement - but the situation is what it is.