>>It lacks an enduser database such as Microsoft Access.<<
That's coming in the new release. MySQL or PostgreSQL along with a knowledge of PHP is better and I've used every version of Access since 1.0. Its as easy to learn the free alternatives as it is MS Access, and you have instant scalability, unlike Access.
>>It lacks macro support (which prevents it from loading and using a huge number of corporate documents).<<
It has a macro language much like VBA. Its templates are much easier to create, as I've created most of my firms' templates from fax covers to appellate briefs over the last year. Specifically what macros will it not run?
>>Advanced formatting doesn't convert properly.<<
Give me an example.
>>No grammar checker.<<
Oh, come on. This is just silly. I've never heard one person mention Word's grammer checker in a feature they needed, in a comparison to another Word Processor like WordPerfect, or any other time for that matter. Go to Amazon Word XP reviews and see how many times the grammer checker is mentioned. If I gave you a dollar for each time, you couldn't buy dinner at Chilis.
>>The thesaurus is crap.<<
In what way?
>>Missing reading layout.<<
What exactly does this mean?
>>No Outlook/PIM alternative.<<
So what? Which version of MS Office did Outlook start appearing in? It wasn't before MS Office 2K, if I recall correctly. It wasn't in 97 nor 95 and obviously nothing before that. Besides, you have Outlook Express, which is free, and other free alternatives such as the Mozilla product. While I use Outlook, I probably won't for too much longer.
>>In short, it's the Taiwan rubber-dog-crap version of MS Office.<<
Exactly how much have you used OO? I've used it for over a year and have no plans to go back to MS Word, for one. Word is one of the buggiest programs I've ever had. I've had problems with the outline numbering scheme since 6.0, and they haven't fixed it.
Don't criticize a program you apparantly know little about.