On 06/07/2013 01:30 PM, Girvin R. Herr wrote:
I was talking to a professor a few days ago. He does not like the
newer versions due in part to "the way they keep changing the
interface and how to do things". I made sure he know about LO. He
loved the multi language part as well.
I have been using the OO/LO office suite since OO.o 1.x and now I am
using LO 3.6.6. (I have not tried LO 4.0.x, since I am still waiting
for that less-buggy 4.1.5+ version to be released.) However, I have
found the incremental changes to the user interface refreshing. OO.o
and now LO, have made great improvements in this area with each
release. Nothing to make me go back to school to get my degree on how
to use it, but the changes made the functions much easier to use and
more intuitive. To me, that is a big plus. I want to be productive,
not have to re-learn user interfaces with each new release. Although
I am a retired electronics engineer, I am _not_ a techno-geek who has
to have the latest and greatest all the time. You won't find me
waiting for hours outside an Apple store to buy the latest iPhone. If
it works, don't "fix" it is my motto.
I did not like the "ribbon" menu system either. Sure, the type of
interface that LO uses has been around for years, but that does not
mean you need to change it. "Refreshing" or redesigning the
interface, just because you can, is not a reason to. One of the good
things about LO as it went from 3.3 though 4.0 is the way the
interface does not change, or has a slow change so it does not "stand
up and slap your face" with the changes. Once you learn "what is
where" and how to do things, changing that will cause problems. Sure
the interface could use some enhancements, like the "persona"
addition, but to keep our users happy, you must not make the users
relearn how to do things or where are the menu options are now located.
My last version of MSO was 2003.
I ran OOo back in those early days as well, and went to LO back just
before they switched from the first RC version to the first "full
release" version back in late winter 2011. I currently use 4.0.3 on
both Ubuntu and Win7 systems.
I like the fact that the LO interface, as a whole, has not changed. Yes,
there are some added things, like the 1 or 2 page view and some other
things. But it looks mostly like it has been for that past year or
two. No need to relearn where the needed menu option has been
relocated. No need to figure out how to do needed options, since the
process has not changes or the change is slow slight is seem like no
change at all.
The one big complaint I have heard about MSO is the fact they seem to
change how you do things, after you get use to doing it their "new" way
after the last change. I know many business people have stated that
every time a new MSO is "bought" [or now rented] for their company
users, they have to spend time and money while the users learn how to do
the things they need to do with the changes that MSO has made in the
interface and the steps to do the needed options.
I need to relearn the interface for Paint Shop Pro X5, when I used
version 5 since the XP days. But since I can not get v5 to install on
Win7 Home Premium that my laptop has, I had to upgrade it and relearn
the new interface. Same with PSP 5 or X5 vs. GIMP. The time it takes
to relearn how to do the things that comes very easily to me with the
old interface, well it is very frustrating to say the least and has
taken 2 to 5 times longer to do the things I want/need to do.
So if people feel that way about the MSO interface changes, and want to
use one that is easier use and clearer to understand, then they need to
use a package - like LO - that does not have major interface changes. I
hope no one decides to revamp/refresh LO's interface to the point where
our users will have the same frustrations as they did with the constant
changes that MSO seems to relish in.
To unsubscribe 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO · Gordon Burgess-Parker
- Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO (continued)
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