There is a new open source office suite. It’s called Euro-Office.
As the name suggests, it is a European effort and is primarily meant for European organizations and governments.
Before you get too excited, let me clarify that it is not your typical office suite like LibreOffice that you install on desktop systems. It is designed more for providing collaborative document portals for organizations.
In other words, it’s an online office suite that can be deployed within an organization and accessed via the web. It can also be integrated into other products, like Nextcloud to provide document editing capabilities.
The project has been initiated by Nextcloud and IONOS. Nextcloud is a well-known open source collaboration platform, and IONOS is primarily a server infrastructure provider.
What's the issue with ONLYOFFICE?
Well, Euro-Office is a fork of ONLYOFFICE, and they are not happy about it.
You see, open source ONLYOFFICE’s main business revolves around offering its collaborative product to enterprises and organizations. They do provide offline desktop applications for individuals, but their primary focus remains on the enterprise segment.
And to be fair, they have built a solid product. It works very well with Microsoft Office file formats, which is often the biggest pain point for many users.
Another similar open source project is Collabora Online, which offers an online collaborative version of LibreOffice. However, ONLYOFFICE’s better compatibility with popular formats like DOCX, PPTX, and XLSX makes it a compelling choice.
The issue arises from the fact that ONLYOFFICE originated in Russia and is largely developed by Russian developers. Due to the geopolitical situation, the company has moved operations to Latvia. A European fork could potentially push them to the sidelines.
ONLYOFFICE is a Russian company (despite many attempts to hide this), and nearly all developers reside in Russia. Open Source is a global effort, but current political situation makes collaboration hard and trust difficult to earn. Especially when development is not transparent and open. A lot of users and customers require software that is not potentially influenced or controlled by the Russian government.
So, Euro-Office aims to offer the same base software but with a “Made in Europe” label.
ONLYOFFICE is understandably unhappy with this fork. A European alternative offering essentially the same product could impact their business significantly.
Any argument that a modified or derivative version of the software may be distributed under a “pure” AGPLv3 license, excluding the additional conditions imposed pursuant to Section 7, is legally unfounded.
The right to create and distribute derivative works arises solely from the license grant. Such a grant is conditional and indivisible. Accordingly, any derivative work based on the original ONLYOFFICE code may be created and distributed only in compliance with all applicable license terms, including the additional conditions.
The creation of a derivative work does not give rise to an independent licensing regime free from the conditions under which the original code was obtained.
Conclusion
ONLYOFFICE integration is already available in Nextcloud and many other collaboration platforms. These platforms want to offer an office suite that works seamlessly with popular Microsoft file formats.
By forking ONLYOFFICE, they no longer have to rely on it. Instead, they can build and control their own “Made in Europe” solution. This could make it easier for them to offer their platforms to government administrations and organizations with strict data sovereignty requirements.
So, who's side are you on? ONLYOFFICE or Euro-Office?
When it comes to open-source office suites, we're not short on options, despite what it may seem at first glance. Yet, without a doubt, two names stand head and shoulders above all others. LibreOffice and ONLYOFFICE sit unchallenged as the most popular office solutions built and distributed on open principles. Both are solid in their own rights, and both have loyal communities that swear by them and no others. But between the two, which one is right for you?
In this article, we'll have a closer look at both office suites, with a friendly comparison of their strengths and weaknesses and what makes them truly unique, especially compared to each other. By the end, you'll be better equipped to choose which one you'd prefer, if you so desire.
A note on testing methodology
For the sake of fairness, both office suites were tested on the same system running Ubuntu 25.10, and represent the latest available release of either suite at the time of writing. For LibreOffice, that's 25.8.4.2, and for ONLYOFFICE, 9.3.1.8.
My test system is fairly powerful, though no longer cutting-edge: an MSI GE76 Raider with an 11th Gen Intel Core i7, 64GB of RAM, and NVIDIA RTX 3060 graphics. Most of the screenshots and hands-on impressions in this article were taken in a KDE Plasma 6 (on Wayland). However, GNOME is my usual desktop environment, so some real-world impressions described here also reflect longer-term use there.
I'll briefly touch on online/self-hosting availability, since both office suites have web-based solutions available, but a full review of either suite's web versions isn't covered in this article.
🗒️
As always with software like this, your experience may differ depending on your hardware, desktop environment, graphics stack, and workflow.
Meet the "contenders"
No office suites were hurt in the making of this "showdown"
It's highly likely that you're already familiar with either one of these two, but even so, it's still good to get a little insight and history of each one. LibreOffice is technically the older of the two, though the office suite that became ONLYOFFICE was in fact first released in the same year that LibreOffice was forked.
LibreOffice: the unbeatable survivor
LibreOffice 25.8.4.2 running on Ubuntu 25.10
Consisting of 6 major applications, Writer, Impress, Calc, Draw, Base, and Math, LibreOffice is the phoenix that arose from the ashes of the once famous OpenOffice.org (now Apache OpenOffice), after Oracle's acquisition of Sun Microsystems in January 2010 put OpenOffice.org development in danger of being discontinued.
The Document Foundation chose the name LibreOffice after they were unable to acquire the OpenOffice.org trademark, and the organization took over the mission to continue developing OpenOffice.org as an open-source effort (itself born out of the StarOffice source code, released on October 13, 2000).
LibreOffice and The Document Foundation continue on today as more than a legacy, but a living legend among the wider open-source community, constantly adding new features, improving compatibility with other office suites, and even bringing new life to older file formats, through the Document Liberation Project.
Technically the younger of the two, ONLYOFFICE began life in 2010 as TeamLab, a platform for internal collaboration, before its evolution into the broader office suite that was later rebranded as ONLYOFFICE in 2014. On the desktop, ONLYOFFICE is built around four main editors: Documents, Spreadsheets, Presentations, and PDFs.
With this background in mind, it's easy to see why ONLYOFFICE stands out as the chief of online collaboration among open-source office suites.
ONLYOFFICE handily puts cloud connectivity right at your fingertips
Its robust sharing and interoperability features make it a perfect solution for collaborative work in distributed teams, or for one individual working across multiple devices and locations.
File formats are not just a matter of taste. They can define the limits of what a document can store and preserve, affecting everything from formatting and formulas to comments, transitions, and animation compatibility between office suites. While there is real value in choosing open, well-documented formats, there is still a critical need for compatibility with the dominant player in the field: Microsoft Office.
Both LibreOffice and ONLYOFFICE offer strong support for Microsoft Office document formats, but there are some notable differences in the breadth and consistency of that support. If cross-platform compatibility is important to you, or you work in an environment where Microsoft formats are a requirement, those differences can easily become a deciding factor.
Beyond this, these suites differ significantly in their format focus, with ONLYOFFICE focusing on more traditional, modern formats, while LibreOffice preserves support for numerous legacy formats from many other office suites and applications.
LibreOffice: All-in on ODF, with growing support for other formats
LibreOffice lets you choose the default format for its main editors
Being developed under The Document Foundation, one of the strongest champions of the Open Document Format (ODF), it should come as no surprise that LibreOffice uses these formats natively across all of its applications. Writer uses Open Document Text (ODT), Impress uses Open Document Presentation (ODP), Calc uses Open Document Spreadsheet (ODS), and so on. In theory, these formats can be opened in any office suite that supports this open standard and preserve full functionality.
Unfortunately, the reality tends to be disappointing in practice. Even though ODF is an open standard and well documented, many office suites still lack full support for its more complex features. The result is that increased data loss in other applications is real — from broken formatting, to altered layouts, to wholly unsupported features.
Ironically, because LibreOffice also offers broad support for both the Office Open XML (OOXML) formats, and older Microsoft document formats, these can sometimes provide a smoother experience for collaboration across different office suites. You can even make these formats the default for some LibreOffice applications. In other words, LibreOffice may be most faithful to ODF, but Microsoft’s formats often remain the practical choice for interoperability.
💡
Special note: With Microsoft Publisher going defunct in October, it's good to know LibreOffice supports these files as well.
ONLYOFFICE: Native support for Microsoft Office formats
ONLYOFFICE was designed from the ground up around Microsoft formats
Unlike LibreOffice, ONLYOFFICE was deliberately built around the Office Open XML (OOXML) format, the standard used by Microsoft Office. ONLYOFFICE not only uses DOCX, XLSX, and PPTX for its default outputs, but also as the internal translation of other formats. In practice, this typically translates to ONLYOFFICE having strong compatibility with documents generated in Microsoft Office, especially text documents.
Yet, while this deeper compatibility is a plus on one end, it does come with an unexpected tradeoff. Particularly, ODF documents, while supported, do sometimes fail to convert cleanly, which I've found to result in a loss of formatting or other issues. So, while it's nice to have greater interoperability with Microsoft Office, you might want to reconsider if you're planning to exchange complex documents between ONLYOFFICE and LibreOffice.
Another difference between the two is that ONLYOFFICE doesn't offer the depth of legacy format support available with LibreOffice. To be fair, this won't matter much to the average user, since most documents created in the last twenty years or so were likely saved in formats that are well supported across modern office suites. However, if you're trying to recover or work with files from older or less common apps, such as AbiWord or Microsoft Publisher, you'll be out to sea. ONLYOFFICE specifically targets widely used formats and a narrower set of alternatives.
User interface comparison
No doubt, this is one area where these two office suites couldn't be more different. For starters, ONLYOFFICE is designed to more closely resemble the more popular and familiar Microsoft Office-style "Ribbon" interface, which was first introduced in Office 2007. LibreOffice on the other hand, has long defaulted to a more traditional interface of toolbars and sidebars, before introducing its own "Ribbon-like" interface, along with a selection of others that sit somewhere in between.
Beyond this superficial difference, they use different toolkits for their interfaces, with LibreOffice using its own "VCL" toolkit, and ONLYOFFICE being built on Qt5 and web technologies.
LibreOffice: Highly versatile, unfairly maligned
The home screen in LibreOffice
LibreOffice is notorious for its interface, but unfortunately it's because many find it to be somewhat "outdated". To be fair, this is really a mostly matter of taste. LibreOffice interface paradigm emphasises practicality, functionality, and reliability over visual appeal, and its interface is a reflection of this. It hails from a time when applications were judged equally by how much they could do, versus how easily you could get it done.
As a result, the interface can seem a little crowded to some users and perhaps even a little confusing, but LibreOffice overcomes this challenge by presenting users with even more functionality:
Switching interface styles in LibreOffice Writer
Not only does LibreOffice let you choose between interface styles, it lets you choose styles on as per-application or global basis, so you have the most appropriate UI for your individual needs.
ONLYOFFICE: Familiar for Microsoft Office denizens
Unlike LibreOffice, which has largely retained the more traditional UI or earlier iterations, ONLYOFFICE aims to more closely resemble MS Office in both appearance and functionality. The first thing you'll notice when you open ONLYOFFICE is its modern aesthetic, which extends to the use of the interface style that was introduced and popularized with Microsoft Office.
Despite being the more "modern" choice, the ONLYOFFICE UI can be a little confusing if you're more used to the "classic", "traditional" interfaces common in office suites of the past. For instance, you might find yourself wondering whether to choose "Home", "File" or "ONLYOFFICE" from the toolbar when trying to open a file. Granted, once you're used to it, any interface becomes second nature, but I personally did find this redundancy to be a minor source of confusion.
Handling documents (word processing)
No office suite is worth even mentioning without a solid word processor, so it makes sense this component is arguably the most mature between these two.
LibreOffice Writer: The underrated juggernaut
LibreOffice Writer running in KDE Plasma 6
As the subtitle suggests, LibreOffice Writer is often overlooked for just how powerful it really is. Perhaps my bias is showing here, since Writer is by far my word processor of choice whether for business or writing sci-fi novels. Writer comes with features you probably never knew you needed, and even more potential thanks to its extensibility.
Beyond the standard formatting features, Writer features spell-checking with custom dictionaries, grammar checking, a highly intuitive and versatile styling system, collaborative editing features (including comments, change tracking) and support for complex layouts. Writer also allows you to set a printable background image for your document's pages, something which both Microsoft Office and ONLYOFFICE lack.
As someone who sometimes needs to produce branded documents for clients, this is must-have feature that I have yet to find in any other document/word processor. This feature differs from the watermark feature found in other similar applications, a feature writer also possesses.
ONLYOFFICE Documents: Familiar, focused, and collaboration-friendly
As the "new kid on the block," ONLYOFFICE Documents may not feel quite as deep or immediately distinctive as LibreOffice Writer at first glance, but it makes up for this with its own slew of helpful features. It supports real-time collaboration, plugins for additional functionality, including spellchecking options, fillable forms, and a range of export and conversion options, including Markdown and HTML.
Beyond the expected formatting, styling, and layout tools, ONLYOFFICE Documents puts a strong emphasis on practical compatibility and teamwork. Its featureset and styling choices, even down to the decision not to include the aforementioned page background image support, are all choices to ensure fidelity of OOXML documents.
Its design suits writers who prefer a more focused writing space, with muted icons and tools that only activate when you need them. Where LibreOffice Writer often feels like everything plus the kitchen sink, ONLYOFFICE Documents feels quite streamlined. It doesn't try to overwhelm you with too many paths to the same result, and for many users that simplicity can be a strength.
The presentation experience
LibreOffice Impress (background) and ONLYOFFICE Presentations (foreground) running side by side. Two very different approaches to a common goal: building beautiful presentations with open-source tools.
Between the two suites, their approach to presentations is roughly similar, but each edges the other out in different ways, depending on what your priority is. To put it simple, if you're looking for an interface closer to what you'll get in Microsoft's PowerPoint, ONLYOFFICE Presentations is definitely the winner here. However, if you're looking for a more featureful experience, then LibreOffice Impress is arguably the stronger contender. Let's take a closer look below.
LibreOffice Impress: Mature, robust, yet a little rough
LibreOffice Impress lives up to its name, with animpressiveset of features
As far as presentation tools go, LibreOffice Impress stands out as one of the more mature options available, featuring much of the standard functionality you'd expect, including complex animations, transitions, and support for multiple master slides and layouts. It's quite comparable to the more well known Powerpoint, but it has long stood out on its own merits, even offering features other presentation editors still don't have. Additionally, it features a polished Presenter Console, and smooth, live presentation editing, two features crucial for professional presenation work.
One example is its impressive 3D transitions, which remain a distinctive and surprisingly effective way to add a little more visual life to a presentation. Impress also supports rich text editing, embedded spreadsheets and charts, videos, and other additions on top of the standard, basic featureset. In my experience over many years of usage, Impress handles both PPT and PPTX files quite well, even up to and including most animations and transitions. Even rich media tends to translate well both on import and export.
The LibreOffice Impress presenter console
Despite its maturity, Impress can still feel held back in two important ways: familiarity and responsiveness. Users who prefer a more traditional interface may feel right at home, but those more familiar with Microsoft's PowerPoint or similar editors may find the layout a little overwhelming at first. While the learning curve isn't severe, it can take some adjustment for newcomers.
The other issue that some users may encounter with Impress is its performance. In my own experience using LibreOffice across different operating systems and hardware over many years, Impress has consistently been a little sluggish when editing text, or working with larger presentations. Its 3D transitions have also historically not always fared as well on certain graphics drivers.
ONLYOFFICE Presentations: Effectively interesting
It's like looking at an open-source PowerPoint, but better
As the newer player of the two, ONLYOFFICE Presentations is not quite as mature as LibreOffice Impress, but it's still quite impressive in its own right. Designed to more closely resemble PowerPoint in both appearance and functionality, it offers a more familiar interface for users who are already accustomed to Microsoft’s presentation workflow. It supports animations, slide transitions, embedded GIFs, and other rich media content, while Slide Master support was added more recently in version 8.1.
Where ONLYOFFICE Presentations truly stands apart is in its real-time collaborative editing features. From comments to chatting, these features standout front and center in the editor, and make sense for modern workflows where multiple individuals may often be tasked with working together in distributed teams. Additionally, its Presenter View features an intuitive annotation menu. This is a standout feature that even Impress lacks, and for anyone who regularly gives presentations, it could be the decision maker overall. Unfortunately, there's no live presentation editing, unlike with Impress and PowerPoint.
The dedicated annotation menu in ONLYOFFICE Presentations is a must-have feature for interactive presentations
In general, ONLYOFFICE Presentations keeps things simple. Its tools are laid out in a way that feels approachable and easy to understand, which is ideal for users who want to work quickly without digging through layers of controls. Power users may still notice the absence of some of the deeper animation and transition options available in editors like Impress, but for many people, that trade-off will feel perfectly reasonable.
Spreadsheets
Test file opened and rendered in Microsoft Excel (365)
Both these office suites provide robust spreadsheet editors, though their differences are notable when working with complex files. Personally, my rule of thumb with just about any app is to work within its constraints, but when you're working with files that you don't control or you need certain advanced features, certain differences become non-negotiables.
The test file in Excel 365, showing the charts
In testing these two with a complex spreadsheet, certain non-negotiables do begin to surface quite quickly. If you're someone who works heavily with spreadsheets, this is one area where the comparison could be "make or break".
LibreOffice Calc: The underrated workhorse
Calc rendered my test file relatively well, but dropped some background colours
LibreOffice Calc handled the test file reasonably well overall. Both of the charts rendered almost correctly, plotting along the axes accurately. That said, the chart colours weren't preserved, instead defaulting to a generic blue.
The test file in Calc, showing the charts
In the lookup sheet, the atomic mass field was displayed with an extra decimal place, and some cell background colours were lost, with cells that appeared blue in Excel and ONLYOFFICE showing up with a white background instead.
Individually, these may seem like fairly small issues. In larger spreadsheets, however, especially those with multiple charts, visual cues, or more elaborate lookup tables, they can begin to add up. Even so, Calc still came across as the more dependable of the two in this particular test.
ONLYOFFICE Spreadsheets: Still has some ways to go
ONLYOFFICE Spreadsheets also managed to open the test file, but with more noticeable rendering problems. Some cells were stretched vertically because the editor chose to wrap overflowing text, which affected the overall layout. The lookup table itself worked correctly, aside from a small rendering bug in the horizontal dividing line beneath the fourth cell.
The bigger problem was chart fidelity. The first chart rendered with badly skewed axes, while the second failed to display any data at all. Formula results, however, remained consistent, and the more complex calculations I tested still worked as expected.
🗒️
A note on macros: It wasn't possible to test macros in this hands-on review. However, LibreOffice does offer limited support for Microsoft VBA macros, while ONLYOFFICE takes a totally different approach, relying on its own JavaScript-based macro system.
If you depend heavily on VBA-driven spreadsheets, it's best to test your own files carefully before settling on either suite.
PDF editing
Full disclosure: I generally use Inkscape and LibreOffice to produce my PDFs. When I need to edit, I just export and replace the original file most of the time. This is probably what most of us do. However, there's still a very real need for editing PDFs for which you don't have the source files, and in that case, you need something more purpose-built for the cause.
So how do these two stack up? Well, while both office suites support PDF editing out the box, the experience between the two couldn't be more different. I'll touch on both of these experiences in more detail below.
LibreOffice Draw: The odd child in the family
Editing a PDF in LibreOffice Draw
LibreOffice's PDF editing solution is Draw, an interesting blend of a lightweight desktop publishing solution, a diagramming tool, and a vector drawing editor. It doesn't fit neatly into any one category, but this is perhaps its greatest strength.
It can be used for creating and editing PDF documents with complex graphics, flowcharts, and simple illustrations, and is great for handling page layouts. It's one of the most flexible tools in the suite, but its development pace tends to be slower.
Unlike some other PDF editors, Draw isn't well suited for creating or editing long-form text, so if you're authoring such documents, I'd recommend using Writer and exporting to PDF over attempting to edit directly in Draw. Also, while this may be a matter of opinion, its interface and workflow can feel a little clunky when compared to more specialised software in this field, such as Inkscape, but once you get past the differences, Draw makes up for it with a breadth of utility that can sometimes be underestimated.
ONLYOFFICE PDF: "Just right" – at least for text
At first glance, ONLYOFFICE PDF appears to be just another word processor, which, I have to say, I found to be a major plus, as there is distinctive lack of Adobe Acrobat-style PDF editors, not only on Linux, but generally.
Where things get even more interesting is the inclusion of different "modes", which automatically activate depending on the nature of the PDF document. If you start a new file in ONLYOFFICE PDF, it functions solely like a word processor. However, if you open a PDF generated in another application, like Inkscape for example, it functions like a more traditional PDF editor, presenting the PDF's contents as objects rather than a flowing text document.
I found this versatility refreshing compared to LibreOffice Draw, but with no clear way to manually switch between these modes on the fly, it leaves a bit to be desired. Perhaps this functionality will improve with time, but for now, it can be a source of some minor confusion.
Unique features and apps between the suites
It's true that both these office suites are comprehensive in their own rights, but each one has unique features that set them apart from each other and even above other free and open-source office suites in some respects. After all, it's not just familiar interfaces and file format support that users care about.
LibreOffice: Base, Math
LibreOffice includes two additional applications not typically found in most office suites: Base and Math. They don't get nearly as much attention as the main three (or Draw, for that matter), but they're still an important part of what establishes LibreOffice as one of the of the most popular office suites (open-source or not).
Of the two, LibreOffice Math is least associated with traditional office work at first glance. Even so, all these apps help set LibreOffice apart, not just from ONLYOFFICE, but from office suites as a whole.
LibreOffice Base
LibreOffice Base running in KDE Plasma 6
Base is LibreOffice’s database application, and while desktop database tools aren't as visible as they once were, it remains surprisingly relevant. What makes Base truly interesting is its flexibility. It can create embedded databases using HSQLDB or Firebird, or connect to a range of external database systems, including MySQL, Postgres, and others, through standard connectors. Unlike Microsoft Access, Base also a cross-platform tool, and not tied to any Windows-centric libraries or engines.
In practical terms, this means that Base can work equally well as a small, standalone database tool, or as a graphical frontend for other, external data sources. It can even use spreadsheets and other file-based sources, adding to its versatility and usefulness in mixed office environments.
LibreOffice Math
I will leave the more complex Maths to the experts
Math is LibreOffice’s formula editor, designed for writing mathematical and scientific expressions. It's perhaps the most specialised of the core LibreOffice apps, it's extremely useful for students, educators, researchers, and anyone working with technical documents. Math is best understood as a dedicated tool for building clean, properly formatted equations that can then be inserted into other LibreOffice documents. It isn't flashy, but it fills an important role that many office suites either overlook or handle less directly.
ONLYOFFICE: Complex AI Integration
ONLYOFFICE AI integration is flexible enough to let you use your own locally installed models
A recent addition but still quite notable, ONLYOFFICE is the only free, open-source office suite currently available for the desktop with built-in AI integration. While this may not be for everyone, it is quite a useful feature to have on hand. Not only can be used for generating documents, but it can serve as an alternative spelling and grammar checker.
Online Availability & self-hosting
This is one area where these two office suites differ quite a bit in strategy and direction. ONLYOFFICE is built with the web as a core concept, but LibreOffice started, and is still best understood, as a desktop-first office suite. Still, both have solutions for online use, including self-hosted options, but they achieve these ends through very different means.
LibreOffice: A mixture of efforts
Collabora Office for the desktop is the same interface as Collabora Online
LibreOffice is a huge beast, and the effort to bring it to the web took years of engineering work. Today, the most mature browser-based deployment built on LibreOffice remains a third-party product, Collabora Online (which also powers Nextcloud Office).
That said, The Document Foundation has recently reopened work on LibreOffice Online after several years of dormancy. Interestingly, this decision has caused a bit of controversy, so it remains to be seen what will become of LibreOffice online in the future.
Between the two, ONLYOFFICE most certainly takes the crown in this arena, because its online editors are very much a central part of the product line, and it offers both self-hosted community options and commercial server offerings for individuals, teams, and businesses. In other words, online editing isn't a side quest or afterthought for ONLYOFFICE as a project; it's pretty much the gold standard.
With this being the case, ONLYOFFICE online feels more like what the product is meant to be, and switching between the online and desktop editors is about as close to seamless as you can get. Being designed from the beginning to operate by this modality, ONLYOFFICE doesn't have the same disparity between versions that is evident in LibreOffice's situation.
Mobile availability
ONLYOFFICE (foreground) and Collabora Office (background) on Waydroid
It could be argued that no modern office suite feels complete without some kind of mobile counterpart, at least for Android if not on iOS as well. Both LibreOffice and ONLYOFFICE have a presence on mobile, but the experience differs in both maturity and approach. ONLYOFFICE offers dedicated mobile apps for Android and iOS as a direct part of its wider platform, while LibreOffice’s again serves up a duality of experiences, including an editor built by Collabora.
💡
Note: for the purposes of this article, we won't go into a full review of either app on mobile. This section just serves to give a general overview of what's available for either suite.
LibreOffice: A little here, a little there
Editing a document in Collabora Office (running on Waydroid)
LibreOffice does have a meaningful mobile presence, but it is less direct than ONLYOFFICE’s. Rather than a first-party LibreOffice mobile app in the same sense, mobile editing is most visibly represented through Collabora Office for Android and iOS, which is built on LibreOffice technology and supports document, spreadsheet, and presentation editing on the go.
ONLYOFFICE: Cohesion preserved throughout
ONLYOFFICE editing a text document on Waydroid
ONLYOFFICE takes a more straightforward route here. It offers free mobile apps for both Android and iOS, positioning them as part of the same broader product family as its desktop and online editors. That makes its mobile story feel more unified, especially for users who want a more seamless experience across devices.
Of course, no app is without its own quirks and challenges. While both these suites are powerhouses in their own right, shortcomings, unusual behaviours and other issues are to be expected. To be fair, these quirks don't completely take away from the usefulness of either app; they're just things to be aware of that may help you decide which one you'd prefer to use full-time.
LibreOffice: held back by its toolkit
LibreOffice can occasionally feel a little less polished than its feature set deserves. Its interface can feel a little out of place on some platforms due to the VCL toolkit emulating native widgets as opposed using the native toolkit to draw them directly. Some users also report VCL choosing the wrong interface for their platform. This can be particularly jarring on Linux, especially when using custom themes, dark mode, or when certain rendering glitches occur.
ONLYOFFICE: Clean, but still maturing
While ONLYOFFICE generally feels cleaner and more streamlined, it's not without its own rough edges. On Linux, some users have reported issues around Wayland performance, rendering behaviour, and font handling, which can make the desktop editors feel a little less predictable than their polished interface suggests. Furthermore, despite using Qt for some aspects of the interface, most of the ONLYOFFICE UI is built using web technologies, so the "native look" is notably missing.
Final thoughts: which should you choose?
As with any comparison like this, the answer depends on your needs. LibreOffice and ONLYOFFICE are both strong open-source office suites, but they excel in different areas.
LibreOffice offers a broader and more traditional suite, with deeper functionality, more specialised tools, and a stronger connection to open formats. ONLYOFFICE feels more streamlined, more familiar to Microsoft Office users, and often more comfortable in collaboration-heavy workflows built around Microsoft's file formats.
If you value breadth, flexibility, and open standards, LibreOffice is the stronger choice. If you value familiarity, simplicity, and smoother Office-style compatibility, ONLYOFFICE may be the one for you. Of course, these are just my recommendations, but ultimately, the choice is really yours.
Ubuntu MATE creator Martin Wimpress has announced that he no longer has the passion he once had, nor the time, to work on the project:
As another development cycle passes, I find myself lacking the time I once had to work on Ubuntu MATE. And, to be frank, I don’t have the passion for the project that I once had. When I have time to tinker, my interests are elsewhere.
He is now looking to handover the project:
I’m interested in handing over the reins to contributors who do have the time and energy to work on Ubuntu MATE.
What happened?
Martin Wimpress created Ubuntu MATE back in 2014. A fork of the classic GNOME 2, MATE was preferred by people who liked the traditional desktop layout and disliked the newer GNOME 3 design.
Ubuntu MATE was made an official Ubuntu flavor in 2015 and soon gained a fairly decent sized user base.
Things were going well until they were not. Like many side projects created as a hobby, the passion can fade over time or the work may no longer feel challenging enough.
Eventually, Martin decided to step away.
Back then, Martin was working at Canonical as an Engineering Director. He no longer works at Canonical, the parent company of Ubuntu.
He has also switched to NixOS, which is clearly more interesting and challenging for someone with his technical skills.
Martin still makes cool stuff when he gets time. His GitHub repo is a proof of that.
Maintaining a distro takes more effort than most think
Lubuntu has struggled with a lack of contributors. The Ubuntu Unity lead also stepped away.
Not all distros are just a custom-themed desktop environment on top of a base distro. A well-established project like Ubuntu MATE requires significant time and effort. There is upstream code to track, features to test, and much more.
The complexity increases when it is associated as an official flavor of a larger project like Ubuntu. There are standards to follow, quality to maintain, meetings with other Ubuntu flavor developers, strict release schedules, and more.
Then there are additional responsibilities like maintaining documentation and managing the community. It may not seem obvious, but these tasks also take a considerable amount of time. I can relate, as we have to do the same for our forum and nearly ten social channels.
Another thing is that the MATE desktop itself has not seen as much active development as other mainstream desktop environments like KDE and GNOME. The last MATE release came out two years ago.
This could have resulted in a dwindling userbase for Ubuntu MATE. And if that's the case, then it is surely a demotivating factor for any project.
Tired of AI fluff and misinformation in your Google feed? Get real, trusted Linux content. Add It’s FOSS as your preferred source and see our reliable Linux and open-source stories highlighted in your Discover feed and search results.
For now, there will be no Ubuntu MATE 26.04 LTS release. Ubuntu 24.04 will be here till April 2027. So we still have a year left before the distro actually becomes unsuable, if it comes to that.
Hopefully, someone will step in. As long as MATE desktop is being developed, no matter how slowly, Ubuntu MATE should live on. I mean it's not the first time it has happened that a project lead moved away and someone else filled the spot.
PINE64 has built a reputation for delivering open source hardware to people who actually care about what runs on their devices. From single-board computers like the ROCKPro64 and the RISC-V powered STAR64 to Linux smartphones like the PinePhone, the company has been pretty consistent.
One of their offerings is the PineTime, which is a compact, inexpensive open source smartwatch that has been around since 2019. It started as a community side project, inspired partly by the simplicity of the old Pebble, and is priced at around $26.99.
Years later, PINE64 has revealed what comes next. Announced at FOSDEM 2026 and detailed in a new blog post, the PineTime Pro is the open source smartwatch's next step up.
PineTime Pro is Coming
Pics courtesy of the PINE64 team.
The PineTime Pro is a significant hardware upgrade over the original, and the spec sheet makes that known right away.
At its core is a dual-core Cortex-M33 SoC, with an application core running at up to 200 MHz and a separate dedicated Bluetooth core. RAM goes up from the original's 64 KB of SRAM to 800 KB of SRAM plus 8 MB of PSRAM. The display jumps from a 240x240 pixel 1.3-inch LCD to a 410x502 pixel 2.13-inch AMOLED panel with touch support.
Beyond that, the Pro comes with GPS, a heart rate sensor with blood oxygen measurement, a 6D IMU, Bluetooth 5.2 with both Classic and Low Energy support, a microphone, a speaker, and a vibration motor. It also has a digital crown that doubles as a button.
External storage is delivered via 8 MB of QSPI flash, and there is a 4-pin connector for power, debugging, and programming purposes.
Additionally, PINE64 is calling this one the PineTime Pro and not the PineTime 2 for a deliberate reason. The original is not being discontinued as it is still doing well.
The Pro is meant to sit alongside it as a more capable option, not replace it. If the original PineTime was built to be approachable, the Pro is built for those who want to push things further.
On the software side, developers from both InfiniTime and Wasp-OS are involved, with the groundwork for it already being laid. The extra hardware headroom also means features that were never realistic on the original could actually happen here.
When to expect?
As for where things stand right now, it is early. The first two watch prototypes arrived toward the end of 2025, but a non-functional SWD port made loading and debugging software harder than expected.
A second batch showed up just before FOSDEM 2026 but ran into a flash memory issue, which meant the demo at the event had to run on a development board rather than the actual watch hardware.
A third hardware revision is expected in early April, and the team is optimistic this one will finally clear the remaining hurdles.
There is no release date yet, and PINE64 is not claiming otherwise. But after years of hardware iteration, the PineTime Pro is finally starting to feel like something we might actually one day wear on our wrists.
Ubuntu 26.04 LTS "Resolute Raccoon" is not out yet, but its release notes have an unexpected change that missed my eyes completely. Canonical has bumped the minimum RAM requirement for Ubuntu Desktop to 6 GB for this upcoming LTS release.
While it is a major shift for desktop users, on the server side, things remain far more flexible. Ubuntu Server's documentation lists a minimum of 1.5 GB for ISO installs, with a suggested minimum of 3 GB to account for real-world workloads.
Ubuntu 26.04 LTS system requirements on the left, Ubuntu 24.04 LTS' on the right.
Ubuntu 24.04 LTS, the current long-term support release, lists 4 GB of RAM alongside a 2 GHz dual-core processor and 25 GB of storage as its minimum requirements. Those requirements were carried over to Ubuntu 25.10 as well. So the jump to 6 GB in 26.04 marks the first time Canonical has raised the desktop RAM ceiling in a while.
But Windows requires less?
Microsoft lists 4GB as the minimum required RAM for Windows 11, which on paper looks more generous than what Ubuntu 26.04 is asking for. But that number is worth looking at a little more closely, though.
I say that because it is also mandatory to have Trusted Platform Module (TPM) version 2.0 to run Windows 11. If you didn't know (or care about), TPM is a dedicated security chip built into your motherboard that handles cryptographic keys used by features like Windows Hello and BitLocker.
The thing is, most computers that have shipped with TPM in the past few years (at least the Windows-focused ones) come with at least 8 GB of RAM, and if you draw a parallel with how badly 4 GB of RAM performs (check the comments) on a Windows 11 install, you will see that the claim sounds sloppy.
Canonical appears to be taking the more straightforward approach here. Ubuntu with GNOME has been known to be fairly hungry on RAM once you start actually using it.
Open a browser, load a handful of tabs, and the available memory starts to disappear quickly. The 4 GB figure that covered Ubuntu 24.04 seems closer to a technical floor than a practical ceiling, and moving it to 6 GB in 26.04 reflects that reality more honestly.
The TLDR is that both operating systems need headroom well above their listed minimums the moment you start doing anything beyond light use; one lists in clearly, while the other doesn't.
What about systems with 4 GB of RAM?
If your machine has 4 GB of RAM, Ubuntu 26.04 LTS should still be a decent fit, but if you are a power user who likes to multitask, then Lubuntu, the official Ubuntu flavor can be a better fit for you. It is built on the LXQt desktop environment, runs relatively comfortably with a minimum of 1 GB of RAM and 2 GB recommended. Xubuntu is also a good candidate here.
For systems where even that is a stretch, opting for a window manager like i3 or bspwm instead of a full desktop environment will give you a functional Linux setup on hardware that a standard Ubuntu install would likely struggle with.
You try to perform a basic task, like adding a custom script to /usr/bin or creating a global configuration directory, and the terminal throws an error: Read-only file system.
It’s a frustrating moment. You chose an immutable OS for the stability, the atomic updates, and the "unbreakable" nature of the system. But now you feel like a guest in your own house.
The traditional fixes, manually mounting an overlay filesystem or using rpm-ostree to layer packages, either require a reboot or complex manual management.
systemd-sysext was built specifically to solve this problem. This often-overlooked utility uses OverlayFS under the hood but adds compatibility checking, systemd integration, and a standardized format, allowing you to dynamically merge binaries and libraries into /usr at runtime, without touching the underlying read-only image and without a reboot.
Quick Look at Immutability
To understand why we need sysext, you first have to understand why the Linux world is moving toward immutability. In a traditional "mutable" distribution like Ubuntu or Arch, the root filesystem is a giant, writable scratchpad. Any process with root privileges can modify any file in /usr or /bin.
While this gives us total freedom, it’s also a major source of system drift. Over time, manual changes, conflicting libraries, and failed package installations make the system unpredictable.
Immutable distributions solve this by treating the operating system as a read-only image. When you update the system, you aren't just changing individual files; you are switching to a completely new, pre-verified version of the OS. This makes the system "atomic", it either works perfectly, or it rolls back to the previous version.
The Problem: Seeing the "Read-Only" Barrier
While immutability is great for stability, it’s a nightmare for "on-the-fly" troubleshooting. On a standard system, if I need to see why a network port is blocked, I might quickly install nmap or tcpdump. On an immutable system, I’m stuck.
You can see this in action by trying to manually add a file to your system binaries:
sudo touch /usr/bin/test_file
Instead of creating a file, you’ll get a rejection message: touch: cannot touch '/usr/bin/test_file': Read-only file system. This proves that even with sudo, the core of your OS is locked.
To add a tool "the official way" (layering), you’d have to run a command like rpm-ostree install and then restart your computer. For a quick task, that's a massive interruption. And this "rpm-ostree" is more of a Fedora Silverblue thing, it won't work on non-Fedora atomic distros.
How System Extensions Actually Work
I'd like to think of systemd-sysext as a digital "overlay." Instead of fighting the read-only filesystem, we are going to build a small directory structure that contains our tools and tell the system to virtually "merge" it on top of the existing /usr.
This uses a kernel feature called OverlayFS. It takes your base (read-only) system as the "Lower" layer and your extension as the "Upper" layer. The result is a "Merged" view that the user interacts with. To your applications, it looks like the files were there all along.
Step 1: Building Your First System Extension
You don't need complex build systems to create a system extension. At its simplest, a sysext is just a directory structure that mirrors the Linux root. Let's build a workspace for a custom tool.
Next, let's create a simple test tool. In a real-world scenario, you could drop a compiled binary like ncdu or htop here, but for this guide, a script works perfectly:
echo -e '#!/bin/sh\necho "Sysext is active on Fedora!"' > my-tool-ext/usr/bin/foss-tool
chmod +x my-tool-ext/usr/bin/foss-tool
Step 2: The Metadata "Passport"
This is the most critical step and where you can get stuck. systemd-sysext acts as a gatekeeper. It will not merge an extension unless it knows exactly which OS version the extension is built for. To find out what your system expects, run:
cat /etc/os-release | grep -E '^ID=|^VERSION_ID='
On my setup, this returns ID=fedora and VERSION_ID=43. If you are following along, make sure to replace these values with whatever your specific system reports. If you are on Silverblue 39, use those numbers.
Before we merge anything into the live system, it’s worth double-checking our work. A systemd-sysext image is essentially a mirror of your root directory, so the file hierarchy must be exact. You can verify your layout by running:
ls -R my-tool-ext
You should see your binary sitting in usr/bin and your metadata 'passport' tucked away in usr/lib/extension-release.d/. If these aren't in the right place, the system simply won't know how to 'map' them during the merge.
Step 3: The "Merge" Moment
Now that our extension has its "passport" ready, we move it to the system's extension path and trigger the merge. This is the moment where the read-only barrier is bypassed:
Next, confirm the binary location. The system should see it as a standard system tool:
ls -l /usr/bin/foss-tool
foss-tool
You can verify the status and run your new tool:
systemd-sysext status
Your system is still technically read-only, but you’ve successfully injected new functionality into it without a single reboot.
Troubleshooting: When the Merge Fails
One of the most common frustrations is seeing the error: No suitable extensions found (1 ignored due to incompatible image). This isn't a bug; it's a safety feature.
If your extension-release file says you are on Fedora 42 but you actually just upgraded to Fedora 43, systemd will block the merge.
It does this because libraries often change between versions, and merging an incompatible binary could cause system instability. If you hit this error, simply update your metadata to match your current os-release and re-run the merge.
Reverting Without a Trace
The most powerful feature of systemd-sysext isn't just how easily it adds tools, it’s how cleanly it removes them. Traditional package management often leaves behind config files or libraries that clutter your system over time.
With sysext, unmerging is a clean break:
sudo systemd-sysext unmerge
If you try to run your tool now, the shell will return a No such file or directory error. The overlay has been lifted, and your /usr directory is exactly as it was when you first installed the OS.
Why This Beats the Container Approach
A common question is: "Why not just use Distrobox?" Containers are amazing for general applications, but they run in an isolated namespace. If you are trying to debug a kernel issue or analyze hardware peripherals, that isolation can get in the way.
systemd-sysext puts the tool directly on the host. It has the same permissions and visibility as a tool shipped with the OS itself. If you need a tool to "be" the system rather than just "run on" the system, sysext is the surgical choice.
Conclusion
The move toward immutable Linux shouldn't feel like a move toward a "locked-down" experience. Tools like systemd-sysext prove that we can have our cake and eat it too. We get the security of a read-only core and the flexibility to inject any tool we need instantly.
