> The problem with OnlyOffice is non-community-oriented development and the predatory licensing model where they hold all copyrights and dual-license their code AGPL+proprietary, while forbidding others do the same (since they hold the copyrights), therefore putting themselves at the centre of their universe.

> Compare that with the healthy community around LibreOffice where nobody holds copyrights for all of it, so the copyleft actually protects all involved parties from unfair competition and makes them cooperate for the common good.

This is a very good point, and very well said! I agree completely - from activist point of view. It really does benefit users the most.

BUT! It doesn't benefit developers and maintainers at all, which leads to the common problem of "it works for me" attitude. This is an understandable though regrettable situation. To put software to another level it takes lots of additional effort in areas which are usually not fun. Why would someone do it?

LibreOffice is a great case in point. While I use it regularly, it lacks in two important areas:

- 100% compatibility with MS Office

- UI is ugly and in places unintuitive

I can imagine that the first problem is not fun, and the second is difficult to solve with so many people involved. I don't believe LibreOffice will ever solve these two problems. Incentives matter.