I don't think we need to remove existing features. But I DO think we
need to focus on the "90% of average users". Basically, I think LO
should be making sure it can do everything that MS Office 97
(15-year-old software) could do, and do it just as well and just as
easily. If LO could do THAT, it would eat Microsoft's lunch.
-- Tim Deaton
On 10/2/2012 2:45 AM, Marcello Romani wrote:
Il 24/09/2012 17:15, Mirosław Zalewski ha scritto:
On 24/09/2012 at 16:48, "webmaster-Kracked_P_P"
We need to keep it with the
needed options for the 90% "average" users and not for those that
the last 10% or even those in the last 1% or less users that do so
complex work that the "average" user could not figure out why this is
being done or even how to do such a thing even with the needed
I totally disagree.
If user is unable to do something he wants with open documentation,
is documentation fault. It should be fixed (made clear, verbose, use
screenshots or anything), not feature should be disabled.
There are many ways to speed up opening of programs. Some features
delayed or loaded on request. Application can be modularized - core
are loaded by default, other are loaded only if user wants them (take
at LaTeX, GNU R, Miranda (instant messenger), even Mozilla Firefox to
*Removing* features is total no-go, because it will drive away these
need them. And I don't think that LO is application only for 90% of it's
As much as I hate "me too!" e-mails...
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: email@example.com
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Impressum (Legal Info)
: 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