Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On 07/02/2012 12:47, e-letter wrote:
On 06/02/2012, Gordon Burgess-Parker<>  wrote:
You are talking about me.
I and many many others have used the same methods of categorising and
storing data in Excel, Lotus 123, Multiplan and various other
spreadsheet applications for a great many years. It's nothing whatsoever
to do with "dispensing with traditional thought processes" at all. It's
all to do with EASE of manipulating the data and what you want
eventually to do with that data.
I think the ability to dispense with concepts conceived when
paper-based accounting was prevalent is required. If decades of using
a fundamentally wrong method is applied to new tools (e.g. "I did this
in m$, therefore this process is the only process), the flexibility of
mind to achieve the same result via a new tool (e.g. relational
database queries) is never realised.

The point about spreadsheets is that the user can manipulate and store
data in the way that THEY WANT TO and in the way that is most useful to
There is NO right way or wrong way to do this.
I think you contradicted yourself, like many m$ fans do: you solved a
problem using a process that was successful using m$ (I think it was a
spreadsheet macro). Personally it would be preferable to ask: "I want
to do X; what is the best tool?" Then knowledgeable users would make
their suggestions (use calc feature X, base feature Y, etc.) and you
(and others, don't forget!) would be able to make an informed choice
of which is most appropriate for each personal preference.

It does not seem apparent that you posted to LO mail-list to ask
whether there was a better/alternative method (e.g. using a different
tool such as base) to achieved your desired result: you asked for the
same process (use a spreadsheet macro) to be applied using calc.

Those m$ users who want LO to be a nothing more than a m$ clone
(instead of being a fundamentally better product, full stop) should
make a financial donation.

You completely miss the point just like the others did.
LO is NOT some "wonder tool" that instantly produces a sea change in the way in which people use OFFICE applications. (Emphasis on Office - i.e. work). Yes LO IS an "MS Office clone" in many many ways. So is Lotus Symphony, so is Lotus Smartsuite. You could also say that MS Office is a "clone" of Lotus Smartsuite etc etc. All Office suits basically borrow and adapt ideas from each other, whether they are proprietary or not. Office suites are designed so people can do a JOB in the best way that SUITS THEM, not necessarily to experiment, neither to bow down to the idea that there is a "best" way of doing the job, dictated by someone who is an evangelist in a different method of data manipulation and that has no insight into the particular user's needs or desires. I don't know your background, but neither do you know mine. I have used almost every single spreadsheet application (with the exception of Quattro Pro) to an advanced level in reasonably large quoted organisations ever since Multiplan first came out on DOS, so I do NOT need you or your evangelistic buddies to tell ME that the way I am doing things is wrong. I would also state that there is not an "MS Office" way of doing things nor an "LO" way of doing things either - the only way that is right is the way the USER decides they want to do things.

For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.