On 11/4/15 5:43 PM, Cley Faye wrote:
2015-11-05 1:28 GMT+01:00 Ken Springer <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
If you want to go head to head with with MS or Corel, then you'll have to
fix the problems your uses have with the program.
It's been pointed out already, and I'll reproduce it here:
If this is a bug your options are:
1. Fix it yourself;
2. Pay for a fix;
3. Find a friend/family member to fix it;
4. Wait patiently until a volunteer *chooses* to fix it.
Really, as with any opensource project, every resource is finite,
including dev time.
Are you saying commercial enterprises don't have finite resources?
What get prioritized by the main devs is (in no
particular order, this is a general remark not specific to LibreOffice)
bugs affecting a very large part of the userbase, trivial issues to fix
(those are rare!), and things that devs are interested in. This also mean
that problems users have with the program do get fixed (just check the
You have to identify the members of the userbase. Are they ordinary
individuals for whom the bugs may or may not be trivial? And they have
the time to spend looking for workarounds. Or, are they a commercial
individual/entity that is competing with other individuals/entities in
the market place? That's a place were time *is* money. And I believe
they want a product that works, not a product that needs work.
While some bug may be deemed trivial by the devs or some system, that
bug may not be trivial to the user.
Beyond that, asking for an opensource project to dedicate resources to fix
a minor issue that is unnoticed by almost everyone (or, in the case of this
thread, something that is not even a bug in LibreOffice) is not reasonable.
If one encounter a particularly nasty issue and can't raise interest in it,
there are companies that can fix them for a price. It have happened before,
and I don't doubt that it will continue to happen.
Which is fine, but not my point. Commercial entities know their
survival is based on meeting user needs, not the needs of management of
those entities. It's a fundamentally different viewpoint.
Note that I'm not even touching the subject of those big corporations
reactivity with minor issues; commercial products might have more
ressources, but I'm sure there's a fair number of minor bugs that have left
some users disgruntled ;)
Which is why I'm leaving Libre Office for the 2nd time. The deal
breaker was finding out that in 5.x, once again LO could not print Avery
labels. There has to be something out of kilter in the development
process for this to reoccur. If people are going to trust any product
in the market place, they have to have faith that problems fixed remain
When it comes to LO, I no longer have that faith. I can't go tell
people to use LO for their word processing needs, when a basic function
today includes printing mailing labels, when it's broken again. I'll
just find a different suite that doesn't exhibit the problems I notice.
FWIW, I always look for open source or free software that meets my
needs. And I will continue to do so. LO just won't be one of those
sources that I'll support or recommend.
Mac OS X 10.8.5
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"
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] LEBRE VERSION STILL · Joel Madero
- Re: [libreoffice-users] LEBRE VERSION STILL (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