Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2013 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On 11/11/13 1:18 PM, Paul wrote:
On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 11:33:43 -0700
Ken Springer <> wrote:

What I didn't like was being told my issues were not important.  BS!
It's important to me.
If it's important to you, you can fund a developer to work on it for
you, or work on it yourself. If not, then unfortunately the developer is
doing this for his own reasons, and gets to choose what he wants to
work on. Obviously it makes sense for developers to listen to the users
and work on what the majority of users think is important, but a) they
are not actually obligated to do so, and b) don't assume your issues are
everybody's issues.

True, but it also goes back to the question of "What do you want LO to be?" You'll read where people want LO to be a "viable alternative to MSO". From the dictionary program that comes with OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion...

viable |ˈvīəbəl|
capable of working successfully; feasible:

"capable of working successfully"... Does that not mean things work, and work correctly? I'm not speaking of more complicated and sophisticated features, such as master documents with 500 pages. For that, IMO you should use a DTP program, that's what they are for.

But, basic things should work right. In my list I have here, but have not tested in 4.x.x, PNG graphics did not print correctly, label printing was messed up, graphics resizing didn't seem to make logical sense (related to but not the same as the aspect ratio question I posted about in another thread). Sometimes, just simple useability issues, boiling down to having to redo things over and over when you reorganized/reformatted. I've got a note here about the "mailto: subject line" that I honestly don't remember what that note is about.

One note about table borders not behaving properly. After you start out with a table of X by Y cells, and you then added, deleted, merged, split cells, borders no longer were aligned. You could end up, as I did, with a border that looked something like this"

|_____________|----------|=========|_____________| <------ The "=" signs should be sitting on the baseline for a better idea, but I hope you get the idea. In the equals example, border thickness was not the same, even though the dialog reported the thickness was the same. I never had Word give me that border result in a table.

15 years ago, those would be cutting edge features. Today, they are standard features that should work.

True, it's open source, developers can do what they want. But, if that is the desired perspective, then drop the word viable and any hint you are "equal". Simply say LO is an option that "may" work for you.

Let's say you have a car, and every 4th time you go to use it, it
won't start.  You take it to your mechanic, and each time you do, he
tells you "it's not important, he's got bigger problems to solve".
Are you going to continue to take it to that mechanic, or are you
going to find a different mechanic?
What if the mechanic has too much work just dealing with peoples cars
that won't start at all? Should he drop all that and deal with your
issue? Why?

No, but the quality mechanic says "I'm booked up for a month, if you can wait that long." Then he'll fix it, he won't ignore you. That gives you the option of waiting or finding a new mechanic. In LO's case, you wait for the bug(s) to be squashed, or you go elsewhere.

I really do like the idea of open source software, but things have to work. I have things I want/need to do with the computer, as do others. As I said, I only expected to be put in the queue, like the quality mechanic, and have the bugs fixed. But going on two years? I don't think so. :-) I'm only still here because I've not found a complete replacement. And LO has lost a supporter, as you can tell.

This depends on the severity of the issues you are bringing up, and as
I don't know the issues you have raised, I cannot speak to that, I'm
just pointing out that so far you are not making a strong case for why
your issues were important, only that you don't like being told your
issues are not pressing. Nobody likes that, but sometimes it's true.

I think the hard question to answer from the developer side is, what are the ramifications of taking that view? How many possible users have you lost/do you possibly lose because the issue the developers think is minimal results in that user telling others to not use/consider LO?

If they aren't asking that question, they should be.

Regardless of product, if the vendor/supplier/developer tells you
that your issue is not important, will you use that product in the
I would just like to point out here that people love to complain about
open source not solving their pet issues promptly, but few of them have
actually tried to get issues solved in commercial products. I have. And
just because I paid for the software is absolutely *no* guarantee that
my issue will be attended to. Commercial software is just as likely to
tell you your issues are not important. It depends on the product, for
sure, but this is not always about open source vs. commercial, or even
necessarily about any particular product. More often than not it is
users thinking that because it is open source, and they actually have
access to the developers to post bugs to, that this means their bugs
automatically must get attended to, and if the developers respond with
"Sorry, we're too busy working on things lots of users want. Your
issues just aren't important right now" then they are being personally
insulted. They assume that for all commercial software any issue they
post will immediately get seen to, and because open source doesn't work
that way, it is not good enough. Unfortunately this just isn't true of
commercial software.

I've actually had better results, in the commercial software realm, with smaller vendors. They seem to be more interested in problems you find and seem to be more willing to fix them. To some extent, the same with small freeware/open source products.

But with the issues above, most of those were never an issue with Word. A couple I didn't have a need for in Word, such as printing PNG graphics. The PNG format may not have even been available. :-)

Not saying you are saying this, I just wanted to point this out because
I see it a lot, and your email didn't actually say that this wasn't the
case for you.

If we're on the same page here, I did say I didn't expect to be at the front of the problems list somewhere. :-)

Contributing by reporting issues is all I can do for any software, but eventually you hope to see things you find fixed. You find theses problems because they are features of a software package that you use. After some period of time, when things don't get fixed, you begin to think, "Why bother?" It's not just LO, I use another open source program where a lot of users have expressed the same opinions about that program. I'm on the lookout for another program there, too. :-)

RE: my comment about smaller vendors, I've a commercial file management program, that I discovered had a problem. Their primary official support is a volunteer, possibly a few I honestly don't remember. After a few emails, and testing as requested, the volunteer forwarded the issue as a bug/problem. Then I got an email from one of the developers, saying he could not replicate the program. After more emails requesting I do this and that to see if the problem existed, the developer was stumped. I finally figured out what triggered the problem, reported it, and the conversation ended.

Now... Is it fixed? I don't know, but I suspect it is, it was just a dialogue box not showing up where it should. There has been a program update, but the primary purpose of the update was to ensure the program is OS X 10.9 Mavericks compatible. I've no plans to go to Mavericks, I've not seen anything in the newest OS X than entices me, but I have seen a lot that I don't want. :-) Since I'm not going to Mavericks, no reason to update the file management software. That being said, there is one feature request I would like to see added, and it's the 2nd most requested feature on their site. The minute that feature is added, I'm upgrading! LOL


Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 17.0.8

To unsubscribe 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.