Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2014 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi :)
I was kinda agreeing with you, hence the +1.  I think people kinda
understood what you meant and i suspect other people agree with you too.
The devs sometimes have great plans and good ideas and then users do some
crazy things.  It's difficult to anticipate what users will find difficult
and what is going to be easier for them to understand.

I've really enjoyed this thread.  Some amusing and enlightening posts.
Thanks and regards from

On 5 August 2014 14:56, Jon Harringdon <>

Tom Davies <> wrote:

I think Base nearly does do the best way around.  The only problem is
the easiest thing, the embedded database, is currently dangerously
 The devs appear to be addressing that although, obviously, they can't
the whole thing all at one go.  The first step seems reasonably well
to get the main bulk away from java.

I'm sure Java didn't used to be so awful.  It seems to have nose-dived
since Oracle took over but maybe that is preparation for monetising it
that is a reasonable thing for a profit-making company to want to do.

My criticism was not at all directed specifically against Base as I
don't know the first thing about it. It was rather directed against the
idea that developers know better than users. They rarely, if ever, do,

Users have a zillion creative ways of (mis-)using a product, many of
them undreamt-of by its developers. So the more user choice and less
developer diktat a product exhibits, the better it is, in general.

I avoid Java as much as I possibly can (read: always) but my argument
has nothing whatsoever to do with Java.


On 5 August 2014 13:33, Jon Harringdon <>

Wolfgang Keller <> wrote:

So I come back to my suggestion earlier today - LO Base needs to
the user the opportunity to specify what they want - RAM or file
based, single file or multiple files.

That would only confuse most end users.

Hear, hear.

The point is that the developers should make the most reasonable

This mindset will not help LO broaden its user base. Users (even if
are apparently deemed stupid by some) should be in the driving seat and
not some anonymous "developers".

Pip Coburn writes this about the tech industry: "I believe that users
are always in charge and that supply is a necessary but not sufficient
condition for commercial success. Companies and products geared toward
this holistic user orientation will succeed at far greater rates than
those stuck in a supplier-oriented mind-set." As far as I'm concerned
that hits the nail squarely on the head.

And as to confusing users with complex choices... a well-designed
can be simple for simple needs and complex for complex needs.

One-size-fits-all rarely fits anyone.

IMHO etc.


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

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.