Marc,
I am talking about the average user here, not enterprises. It is obvious
that companies require different treatment, and it is also obvious that
users will have a choice.
I'm still saying we need to push such a feature and make sure it is benefit
to a lot of users, making sure that those updates won't break anything.
This is a development challenge, testing and stuff and we should not see it
as a problem.
When it comes to branches, I believe it is up to us to come up with a
solution like the Ubuntu one: a piece of program designed to launch a major
update.
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Marc Paré <marc@marcpare.com> wrote:
Hi Florian,
Le 2012-12-29 05:24, Florian Monfort a écrit :
Hi Marc,
I think in this case you... Think too much haha.
Let's describe the average user here and think about it:
- When the average user downloads, he just ... Downloads... Mostly
because
it's free and he needs an Office Suite ASAP.
Meaning : The average user downloads always the last one unless the
download is marked in Red or with a big "UNSTABLE" mention.
- When having the last version the feel like this is all done. They
don't
really think about updates, nor they actually care.
Meaning : Don't think the average user spends time reading the
specifications before choosing a version. They are not advanced users
and
they choose the most simple hint "unstable"/"stable".
- When some months later another guy comes up with a better version
with
latest features this one will say "How did I not come to have the last
one?? :O" Although he had a notification since ages telling him to
upgrade.
Meaning : Auto-updates is a way for people to have the latest version
and
making their life easier, just what they ask for...
Sorry, hit enter and the mail was gone, so continuing:
You can put a pop up on first install saying "do you want us to update
automatically" or not, something like this.
This is OK with me AND preferred.
But we're also talking about Cloud Computing now, and the truth is,
LibreOffice is ages behind it... And you know very well that there is a
big
advantage to Cloud Computing : You don't have to make an update to get
it,
the service is being upgraded by someone else, just like with Google
Docs.
We need that kind of "simple way to go".
But if you are talking of a LibreOffice "Cloud" version, then yes,
updates
can be pushed through. We do not have cloud services as yet, so this
point
does not really apply.
And for the last "security" part : isn't a last version supposed to be
more
secure than an old one? What you say sound so weird, and yes, we make
mistakes, like pretty every software editor, and yet, the option is
here...
Maybe we are talking about different things, and, this is my fault. I was
talking more of releases. You may find the explanation behind our
suggestion of which release to use on our website here:
http://www.libreoffice.org/**download/release-policy/<
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/release-policy/>
.
Oh, and about being arrogant and better-knowing : Actually Marc, in this
case, we know better than the average user. And this is not us being
arrogant, this is us taking responsibility for the fact that we're
building
an Office Suite that is going to be used by millions of users, and that
for
the most part, as builders, we know how it is built and what can be best
for them with the feedback from the community.
If you see arrogance in every decision-making, don't be surprised not to
move forward ;).
I am not sure an enterprise would agree with you if it had gotten a
pushed
update that borked their network. Our IT staff at my schoolboard does not
install/update any software without proper testing as it has found that
newly updated software will often cause problems with their installed
software.
I am not sure I would agree with you as well. I am a small office home
business (as well as teacher) and if a pushed update caused me wasted
time,
I would remove the software. IMO, there is a fine line that is crossed
when
you insist on automatic updates without the consent of the user.
I do not see arrogance in every decision making, nor have I ever said
that
I thought this way. However, I would see arrogance in a group that thinks
it knows better than the users. That group would be doomed to failure.
You
only need to look to KDE and Gnome projects, KDE backtracked when it
realized that it was more prudent to listen to users; Gnome is still
trying
to backtrack but in the process got forked a couple of times by groups
willing to listen to users.
Anyway, from a marketing point of view, I would hope that I would not
have
market such a feature as a silent pushed auto-updates without users'
consent. I don't think that such a feature would be too popular unless
there was an option to turn it off.
Cheers,
Marc
--
Marc Paré
Marc@MarcPare.com
http://www.parEntreprise.com
parEntreprise.com Supports OpenDocument Formats (ODF)
parEntreprise.com Supports http://www.LibreOffice.org
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+help@global.**
libreoffice.org <marketing%2Bhelp@global.libreoffice.org>
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/**get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-**
unsubscribe/<
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/>
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.**documentfoundation.org/**
Netiquette <http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette>
List archive: http://listarchives.**libreoffice.org/global/**marketing/<
http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/>
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted
--
*Monfort Florian*
BM2 Student at France Business School
Marketing Apprentice at Red Hat
Marketing Team Member at The Document Foundation
florian.monfort@gmail.com
Mobile : +33 6 58 97 15 61
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted