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.
At this point, it’s just exhausting behavior from The Document Foundation. Sure, on paper, ODF might be objectively better—it features a cleaner format and has solid ISO backing.
But reality doesn’t work that way. People won’t switch their entire document base to ODF just because it’s the ideologically superior format—especially when the tools for seamless migration don’t exist. Google Docs defaults to exporting as OOXML, and almost every enterprise in the world standardizes on it.
TDF is simply not in a strong enough position to dictate ideological choices. If they truly cared about mass adoption, they should have channeled their energy into a bulletproof compatibility layer to seamlessly migrate OOXML to ODF. Instead, TDF continuously ignores user reality—falling behind on UI modernizations, collaborative cloud features, and the plain fact that they are the office underdogs.
There is at least couple problems with OOXML. First it is not open format, at least how the dictator uses it. Second it is forced as open standard by the dictator because it there is multiple standards, there is no standard.
I know @Old Guy, once a person or demographic is truly out of the picture they become scapegoats for everything.
But, also, blaming the left (e.g. @VoltaFlake – how interesting) for choosing Microsoft’s format makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The left could care less about supporting MS? Since when has the left supported MS? On the other hand, the right has done nothing to go up against MS. Absolutely nothing. They’ve encouraged and supported them in fact. How many times has the right tried to break up MS? Who came to MS’s rescue after they were beaten in court – BY the left?
The TDF forgets one extremely important issue: compatibility. Though probably not impossibe to convert them into TDF formats, the sheer volume of documents, and, more important, the legal status of these documents and legal archival requirements renders conversion of these documents unacceptable.
TDF’s constant complaints about other office suites sure are annoying (“How dare you not use ours!”). So when my brother asked if an old copy of MS Office 2000 was usable with Windows 11 (his needs are modest) I directed him to install OnlyOffice instead. A drop in the ocean, yes, since most likely may have to help him on occasions, l rather not have to deal with LibreOffice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ooxml
Since March 2026 the German government mandates ODF and PDF/UA as file formats for documents in Deutschland-Stack, phasing out OOXML from all levels of government.[9][10][11]
In the end, a product’s success will be decided by users,
Not in the EU, where you have a group of corrupt US-vassals with absolutely no democratic legitimacy called commissioners.
Microsoft doesn’t even stick to the ISO with its own OOXML implementation. Ironically MS Office does a better job with ISO/IEC 26300
They are 100% right to slam it.
Euro-office is just some leftist boomer reactionaries spur of the moment stupidity.
So everything that happens for the rest of history is all Boomers fault? LOL most of them are already retired and enjoying their retirement not coding word processing software.