Hi André, Chris, *,
André Wyrwa schrieb:
>Hei,
>
>> for example:
>> 1:power user.
>> 2:simplified.
>> 3:Microsoft Office like.
>> 4:Open Office Classic
>
>sorry, but i always thought that such a choice is big non-sense.
this is a hard word.. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>That is, offering an interface choice like MSO-like or OOo-Classic and
>other configurations sure makes quite a bit of sense.
>But asking the
>user if he's a power user, noob or avarage or whatever doesn't.
> Offering functionality-wise scaled UI setups is a good thing though.
I agree with You here..
>More particularly, such an option would have the benefit of enabling
> not only scaled configurations, but specialized setups for certain
> tasks or branches.
In addition an other point of view:
Imagine there was a framework, which allowed building that configuration
sets (let's call them "capes" to complete the suite? :o))) in an easy
way. This made it possible to widely extend the resources of active
OOo development by separating core development from GUI development. The
latter could be done by the new founded ux project.
One of the effects would be that core developers weren't forced to spend
much time to make decision which _one_ solution would be the good one
for all users, as they often do. Instead they could implement _every_
way that made sense or even was a known way.
In my opinion this is the way to make an office suite which can face all
the tasks of the future. It can give the answers to a very wide range
of users questions - users migrating from other office applications
because they find a way to keep there experience using an application
which serves them and not which they serve.
Gruß/regards
--
Friedrich
Ansprechpartner / contact person for the "PrOOo-Box"
german language OpenOffice.org and more on CD/DVD
http://prooo-box.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
