The Document Foundation has released a strongly worded open letter criticizing Euro-Office, the forthcoming European open-source office suite backed by major technology organizations, one day before its public launch.
Euro-Office is a new office suite based on a fork of ONLYOFFICE, supported by organizations such as Nextcloud, IONOS, Eurostack, XWiki, OpenProject, Soverin, Abilian, and BTactic. It is positioned as a European, open-source alternative to Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace, supplying tools for documents, spreadsheets, and presentations.
However, The Document Foundation, which develops LibreOffice, states that Euro-Office’s presentation is misleading. In its open letter, TDF disputes claims that Euro-Office is the first European open-source office suite, citing OpenOffice.org, launched in 2001 from StarOffice’s European codebase, and LibreOffice, introduced in 2010.
The letter is notably direct. TDF asserts that Euro-Office is not the start of European open-source office software, but rather the latest in a long history. It also criticizes Euro-Office’s document format strategy, stating that defaulting to Microsoft’s OOXML format does not support true digital sovereignty as claimed.
The disagreement focuses on a long-running document format divide: ODF versus OOXML. Let me explain briefly.
ODF, or OpenDocument Format, is the native format for LibreOffice and other open-source office suites. Created as an open standard for text documents, spreadsheets, and presentations, it guarantees documents are not tied to a single vendor and facilitates long-term interoperability for organizations.
At the same time, OOXML, or Office Open XML, is Microsoft Office’s document format used for files such as DOCX, XLSX, and PPTX. While OOXML is an ISO standard, critics maintain that Microsoft’s implementation and market dominance create user dependency on Microsoft Office. TDF therefore views OOXML as both a file format and a lock-in issue.
And this is central to TDF’s criticism. While Euro-Office promotes itself as sovereignty-focused, TDF argues that defaulting to Microsoft’s formats reinforces Microsoft’s dominance. Which, to be honest, makes a lot of sense. TDF maintains that digital sovereignty depends not only on software development and governance, but also on control over document formats for public and private data.
TDF also argues that this renewed focus ought not overshadow over two decades of European open-source office suite development. LibreOffice is still a leading Microsoft Office alternative and keeps advocating for ODF as the standard for vendor-neutral document storage.
On the other hand, Euro-Office’s supporters focus on a different challenge: delivering a Microsoft-compatible office suite with a familiar interface, collaborative editing, and integration with European platforms such as Nextcloud. For organizations that rely on DOCX, XLSX, and PPTX files, this functionality is a key selling point.
This is where the conflict intensifies. On one hand, strong Microsoft Office compatibility is essential for adoption. On the other, defaulting to Microsoft’s formats may perpetuate the dependency that digital sovereignty initiatives seek to address.
In the end, a product’s success will be decided by users, their needs, and whether it gains real adoption. What is clear, however, is that Euro-Office adds another player to the open-source office suite space, making it more competitive. And in that scenario, the real winner is the end user. After all, open source has always been about choice.
They are 100% right to slam it.
Euro-office is just some leftist boomer reactionaries spur of the moment stupidity.