I think its a bad idea to even use the word "Office" because it sounds like a lame rip-off you'd download from CNet. In fact, Im suprised MS doesnt have a legal issue with it. Thats always bugged me about a lot of OSS projects and vegan dishes, they pick a name based on their competitor instead of something original that doesn't constantly remind the user they're not quite getting the "real thing".

OpenOffice uses name 'office' for 30 years, 5 longer than MS does.

Wiki:

> OpenOffice.org originated as StarOffice, a proprietary office suite developed by German company StarDivision from 1985 on.

> MS office 1.0 released : November 19, 1990[1] Office 1.0

Maybe that's the naming solution then.

StarOffice*

* The Open and Libre Office Suite

Everyone could write it as *Office to save typing. Then users would simply say the full name. "AsteriskOffice"

Nevermind....

StarOffice has never been fully free, and it even clashes with other trademarks in Japan and other Asian countries. It also had an image problem even before it was open sourced, to the point where it was literally given away for free (at a time when MS Office, Lotus etc were printing money).

It's a dead brand.

And maybe rewrite it in C# and call it OctothorpOffice...

Coctothorp is how I pronounce C# :) That or C++++ because # looks like 4 overlapping +'s which I've always assumed is what they were hinting at.

If you pronounce it like that, what will the next version be? We don't have a nonathorp. I've always assumed the next version will be C𝄪 (for those of you who are non-musicians, that's a double sharp symbol).

Your description also helps for musicians whose font just doesn't display that symbol...

Well then I was totally wrong in this case :) But there are still a lot of instances of software names like that. All things GNU being the worst example, an entire ecosystem tainted with the label "Not Unix".

That's not the public perception.

I'm going to try and use this comparison as often as possible now.

"One of the things that always bugged me about OSS projects and vegan dishes is the evangelizing of their proponents.

"One of the best things about OSS projects and vegan dishes is their excellent documentation."

I recall that "Office" was ruled too generic a name to really protect some years ago. Because the bundle is just general stuff you'd use in an office.

Also, it's a terrible name that doesn't say anything, except that it's sold for use in an office.

Right, the problem is that the generic term for what you're building is an "office suite." It's almost a cliche for these to have had "office" somewhere in the title; I know "WPS Office" is a thing in some places; I remember WordPerfect being bundled with "Borland Office" which I looked up now and apparently it's "WordPerfect Office" these days... and I have a Zoho account and I believe theirs is also called "Zoho Office." I think there was also something called "EasyOffice" once upon a time.

Apple as usual bucks the trend with iWork, and Google with Docs. There's an active KDE project called Calligra, too, and half of the academic world just uses a piecemeal built around LaTeX. Those names are different, but they don't necessarily say anything, either.

Part of the problem is that there's not a nice simple word to say "simple data-set crunching plus pretty authorship tools for both presentations and long-form documents." These are kind of three very different domains which happen to combine together into reporting information. Perhaps a nice open-source project could be named Rapport due to its community vibe and its linguistic tie to "report", but then again, that sounds like an open-source composition/looping software for anyone looking to spin a sick beat.

That's actually a pretty good description of OpenOffice.

> Thats always bugged me about a lot of OSS projects and vegan dishes

OT: A friend of mine recently called me a "software vegan" because of how much I've started to get passionate about free software. I'm not really sure how to feel about that description yet. :P

Doubt it. I would imagine that many lay users associate "free" with low quality. "Open" on the other hand has positive connotations.

Hell, in a few years' time, Silicon Valley might finally have made "free" an outright bad thing for some significant group of people.

Silicon Valley, where "free" means "don't get used to this because we're selling to google and shutting it down in three months"

Or it means "we're data mining the fuck out of you, your granny, her cat, and the guy who's banging your wife, so we can deliver you 'relevant' ads"

> Average user doesn't care if something is "open" they care if it's free.

The naming "Libre" is important (though maybe we shouldn't be using French as the language to describe the concept of freedom with a single word). It gives the opportunity to explain that not only will Libreoffice not cost you any money, you have freedom while using it. Calling it "Office for Free" is a _very_ bad idea as it will muddy the waters of the meaning of "free software" in the lexicon of people who aren't into technology.