Wine lets Linux users install Microsoft Office

Wine turns Linux into an Office installation machine

Installing Microsoft Office on Linux is as simple as double-clicking a Setup.exe file. That is the claim made by a widely discussed tutorial focused on responsible software consumption. The proposed steps are straightforward: open the package manager, install Wine, Winetricks and Winbind, extract the Office ISO to the desktop, and click Next repeatedly. The author jokingly asks, "Pretty hard, right?" Behind the humor lies a serious issue: the old accusation that Linux is unfit for work because it cannot run Microsoft's office suite.

The method relies on Wine, a compatibility layer that has been running Windows-designed programs for years without needing a virtual machine. The tutorial clarifies that once these three initial packages are installed, any other Windows software—including Photoshop—can be installed just like in its native system, without repeating previous steps. The promise is broad: the application menu eventually displays the entire Office suite, complete with icons.

What native alternatives exist to avoid using Wine?

Wine is not the only option. Three names compete for the same niche: LibreOffice, OnlyOffice and WPS Office. The first comes pre-installed on most distributions and receives the most criticism. Some compare it to Office 2003, while others defend it as sufficient for 90% of users, who allegedly use only 10% of any suite's antiestéticatures.

OnlyOffice presents itself as a near-exact clone of Microsoft's modern interface, antiestéticaturing an integrated PDF editor in version 7.5, and is distributed in multiple formats, including Flatpak. WPS Office enters the conversation endorsed by those who consider it "very professional" compared to what they dismissively call poorly made suites. The debate over which is better intersects with a deeper issue: interoperability. Users editing documents in LibreOffice and opening them in Word find that formats do not always align perfectly, becoming the key argument for installing the original software.

The real problem isn't Linux, it's the closed format

The most common defense of free software targets the file format rather than the interface. The argument is that Microsoft does not release its formats, so any misalignment when opening a .docx in another suite is the responsibility of those who withhold specifications. It is emphasized that Microsoft itself suffers from compatibility issues between versions, while LibreOffice preserves formatting even when recent Word editions distort it. This leads to advocacy for open formats as a guarantee that documents will remain readable in twenty years, something proprietary formats cannot ensure due to dependence on owner decisions.

In practice, the debate intensifies around administration and education. Some argue teachers should request assignments in PDF rather than proprietary formats, while others note that templates and reference managers are where suite differences truly matter. Full compatibility calculations, involving slow macros and spreadsheets with thousands of interdependent cells, remain relevant only for advanced users who genuinely need Excel.

The eternal war: command line versus mouse

The tutorial quickly shifts to the classic clash between penguin supporters and detractors. One side claims using Linux is foolish and life is too short to fight with distros, commands and broken programs. The other responds that this view is outdated by more than a decade, no console access is needed anymore, and free software allows ownership of computer contents rather than being a user without rights. Accusations that Linux wastes time are countered with hardware arguments: ten-year-old computers still function, whereas Windows forces frequent hardware upgrades.

Discussions heat up to insults at several points, with cross-accusations of fanaticism and ignorance. A minority tempered stance suggests keeping all platforms available and stopping debates about superiority. Surprising data points include users claiming never to have paid for legal Windows or Office, and others using Windows apps under Wine for years without a single failure.

The future lies in app stores

The conversation closes looking forward. It notes that distribution futures move toward immutable systems with app stores—Snap in Ubuntu, Flatpak elsewhere—which could become alternatives when some users lose Windows 10 support and cannot upgrade due to hardware incompatibility. With reservations, the prediction states that if developers improve packaging and existing software, Linux will offer value to orphaned machines. No one in the discussion bets on a specific date.