Back to Lotus Symphony page
Lotus Symphony free download for Mac

Lotus Symphony Reviews

3.0.1
02 March 2012

Create, edit, share docs, spreadsheets, presentations.

Petieg
06 November 2008

Most helpful

If I'm not mistaken this is based on the 2.x codebase and not the newer 3.x ... I'd say hang on and wait... IBM has done a good job in 'cleaning up' the interface, polishing it off a bit when I tried this months ago (on Windows) vs. OpenOffice... so ... keep up the good work!!!
Like (4)
Version 1.2b

Read 14 Lotus Symphony User Reviews

Rate this app:

Levelbest
14 February 2016
This is a comment for the Macupdate admin. This software has a bad link to the IBM site. I was curious if in 2016, given Apples partnership with Big Blue, that any viable Mac software has been updated. I have not been able to find any mention of this on the internet. Symphony, which this page is for, appears to be deceased and not viable on modern Mac OS environment. Can anyone prove me wrong on this?
Like (1)
Version 3.0.1
Tsehov
03 March 2012
This could be nice app if there were more spell checkers available. It seems that there are many languages supported in Windows version unlike in Mac version.
Like
Version 3.0.1
3 answer(s)
Mikoi
Mikoi
20 May 2012
And you give half star only because you did'nt find spell checkers?
Like (2)
Sleek
Sleek
11 March 2013
They have spell checkers is so many different languages that you can download and install on Mac from Lotus symphony website. and they have other Add on's there too.
Like
Levelbest
Levelbest
21 April 2016
I came by after watching the video, posted here. IT looks like Mac OS is very much a live at IBM, at least internally. I was just looking for any mention of Lotus on Macupdate. This is the only hit I got. Sadly, I can still find no way in to what IS currently being used - very actively, at IBM for their macs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BK9VokNpgzY
Like
Cattus-Thraex
02 March 2012
After several days of test (I received the IBM info letter last week), I find IBM Lotus Symphony a good work, quite fast, very mac-like style. Seems to better preserve original formatting of .doc and .docx files, imported Nisus rtf files very well, including headers and footers. The problem with this build, as well as the already numerous OO, LibreO, NeoO variants is that we already have TOO MANY offices for mac, to add here iWork and, of course, MS Office for mac. This may prove confusing. I understand Lotus symphony will merge with OO 4. This sounds good, if OO 4 takes this interface, and improves it, then make a jump in speed, then this may be indeed a great step forward.
Like (1)
Version 3.0.1
Ilgaz
28 October 2010
Sad thing is, with every single G5 we purchased, we paid a significant sum to IBM and nobody else. G4 etc. got Motorola involved and you know current status of them so lets not bother with them. IBM Lotus Symphony is Intel only. IBM can't code multiple architecture and yet this is the same company who STILL sells G5 and real POWER machines, some costing millions. Same company also sets up www.power.org . I got great respect for them but every kind of "Intel only" release validates Steve Jobs point even more. In fact, if Console makers go with X86 in next generation, this kind of abandonment will also be part of reason. They just validate non-X86 phobia with such actions. SJobs said really less about their disservice. It wasn't just 3Ghz and performance per watt, it was also lack of support from IBM and their strange developer connections.
Like (1)
Version 3.0
1 answer(s)
Cattus-Thraex
Cattus-Thraex
02 March 2012
PPC is completely out of sight now, the last PPC mac was shipped in August 2006, so any nostalgic analysis is entirely useless. To be clear, I am an old mac user, and—at that time—fond of PPC architecture. G 5 was a great processor. Well, in this field, whosoever remains behind is abandoned, so was PPC. Lotus Symphony 3.0.1 seems OK, well done, stable, very mac-like, unlike OO and LO, still with that ugly Linux-like interface.
Like (1)
Wighta
23 October 2010
This feels like a direct Windows port i.e. fairly horrid to a long time Mac User. From IBM's web site it is clear that though there are Mac & Linux versions it is primarily meant as an alternative to Office for Windows users. It is based on current OpenOffice.org 3.0. I prefer NeoOffice, which is also based on current OpenOffice.org 3.0, which much more Mac friendly. Why bother with such software, even if it is free? I see them as being primarily document conversion utilities i.e. you can open Windows documents and then save them out as PDFs. Alternatively one can transform Mac documents into a form Windows users can readily handle. And why install it if you have already installed NeoOffice? Well, it might just happen to handle a Windows document better than NeoOffice. That's why I have Adobe Reader---I rarely use it except when Skim or Preview or PDFpen cannot successfully print a particular PDF file. Incidentally, before you can download you will have to give your full contact details but can then opt out of being contacted by them. And when you do download, be sure to select the non-default option of download via http as their applet crashed Safari on my 10.5.8 system.
Like
Version 3.0
Franco45
09 November 2009
I downloaded the .dmg file in both ways, through the IBM applet AND by http connection. The dmg file opens up, but when trying to launch the package , the Apple installers opens... and nothing happens. Is there something else to do i missed? When downloading by the IBM applet, the progress bar indicates a 99% completion, whilst the applets say "finished". Mistery. I really would like to try Symphony.
Like
Version 1.3
1 answer(s)
Lvdoc
Lvdoc
12 May 2010
You got further than me. I just tried to download their latest beta, and I got this whole weird dialog box thing that I've never seen in all the years (decades, actually) I've downloaded shareware. Ultimately, no matter which drive I tried to select for downloading it, it did not seem to recognize it. They did, however, manage to successfully gather my e-mail information. I can't say strongly enough that one should STAY FAR FAR AWAY FROM THIS!!
Like
Version 1.3
Y-Guy
09 August 2009
I picked up v1.3 back in June and been running it on my Mac as well as my XP machine at work. I really like the interface compared to OO or Neo, just has a refined clean look. I didn't care for IBM's request to register and their download process is anything but easy, but the program itself is great. I've since removed OO and Neo and only use Symphony for my Mac.
Like (1)
Version 1.2b
Gazman
27 July 2009
I would really like to try this software but the link MacUpdate supplies doesn't work and when you go to IBM's page to download it, instead of using Safari's built-in downloader it insists on using its own 'Download Director' which cannot connect through my work's proxy server. Ridiculous setup.
Like (1)
Version 1.2b
Rampancy
16 June 2009
Version 1.3 of Lotus Symphony is here: http://symphony.lotus.com/software/lotus/symphony/help.nsf/ReleaseNotes Hopefully this resolves the issue where it broke after 10.5.6.
Like
Version 1.2b
Appscout
08 February 2009
The interface indeed looks much, much better than either Neo or OOo. But, that's about it.
Like
Version 1.2b
Wilpon
07 November 2008
This is using the current OpenOffice 1.1.4 code. The response I got from the Symphony Forum was that they will be moving to the 3.0 code in 2009. The interface seems superior to other OO derivatives.
Like (4)
Version 1.2b
Johnnie-Baram
07 November 2008
If you guys could remember the era of DOS, during that time IBM did a great job with their Lotus 1-2-3. It was perfect office application and really unbeatable. After Windows start using 3.1 the user of Lotus get decrease day by day even though IBM lower the price either offer for free BUT it wasn't successful. However, I have download this application and it's really nice. IBM done a nice begin, the interface is clear and easy to use. I'm currently using Office For MAC 2008 and I can feel that this app seems to be better. I hope this App might bring IBM back to their position where they were standing with Lotus 1-2-3
Like (4)
Version 1.2b
1 answer(s)
Anotherscott
Anotherscott
23 December 2009
re: "IBM did a great job with their Lotus 1-2-3" FYI, IBM did not own Lotus at that time. By the time IBM bought them, they were hardly relevant except for Notes.
Like
Version 1.3
libecchio
06 November 2008
I am a keen user of OpenOffice (PC/Linux) and NeoOffice (Mac) and I must say that IBM has done a great job here - all existing files load and save perfectly, including those with macros and/or password protection, and the user interface is a significant improvement over that of the other packages, which is frequently muddled or overwhelming. Everything is just easier to get to - grouping of open files in a single tabbed window, the permanently-visible palette with common options on the right hand side (perhaps borrowed from iWork, but never mind), the rearranged and simplified menus and, in particular, the completely reworked Preferences. Finally, jargon has been stripped out, more important and less important options are physically separated, and those for each subprogram (word processor, spreadsheet, presentation) are available at the same time!
Like (3)
Version 1.2b
Petieg
06 November 2008
If I'm not mistaken this is based on the 2.x codebase and not the newer 3.x ... I'd say hang on and wait... IBM has done a good job in 'cleaning up' the interface, polishing it off a bit when I tried this months ago (on Windows) vs. OpenOffice... so ... keep up the good work!!!
Like (4)
Version 1.2b