In a message dated 2010.08.31 23:50 -0500, NoOp wrote:
On 08/31/2010 07:50 PM, Bob Knepper wrote:
Hi jonathon,
Based on responses to my questions at two local computer clubs and
postings on the OOo and other web forums, OOo is getting a reputation
of being somewhat difficult to learn and not very user friendly.
You said>The issue is whether or not the individual is willing to
invest the time into learning how to use OOo,<
This condesending response to Seamas O Brogain may be true but
contributes to the negative opinions. I'm sorry because I had
planned to use OOo, and may still.
Bob Knepper
Actually I think it's an excellent response.
FWIW, Gary, I don't. Bob called jonathon's reply condescending, which
it clearly was [and when is that ever helpful?]. Before I read Bob's
reply, my reaction was that jonathon's attitude was churlish throughout,
but I did not reply because I thought Bob had said enough. The point is
not (was never) to get into a WP v OOo spitting match, but consider what
Bob said: OOo /does/ have a reputation as "somewhat difficult to learn
and not very user friendly." There's a reason why a product as good as
OOo - being *given away*, available on every practical platform - still
does not have a commanding market presence. The helpful thing to do is
to consider why that is, and see what we can do about it.
One doesn't transition from WP to MS Office without changing/learning.
One also doesn't transition from WP to OOo without doing the same.
Of course not. I didn't hear anyone object to stretching a bit; did you?
[Plenty of people have complained about a lack of Reveal Codes in Word
as well, for most of the same reasons.] That said, if you are trying to
compare learning curves, Writer's /is/ a bit steeper than Word's. To
some extent that is because Writer is more ambitious, but I also believe
it is because Writer's styles functionality is less than clearly thought
out. I hate to say that, because we simply don't have the space to
solve that problem here, and it would be huge, and hugely off-topic.
But I have to say it, because I don't believe that all of the people who
*want* OOo to be a success, but have trouble with it, are some
combination of lazy and/or stupid.
I suppose if you're inclined to pay $249.99 - $399.99[1] for WP along
with the Widows software OS to support it then you're entitled to do
that. ... Corel only supports one basic OS: Windows. OOo supports:
http://download.openoffice.org/other.html
FWIW, that was once the position of WP: supporting every platform (more
than OO supports today), and BTW with a GREAT manual and free unlimited
tech support (which was badly abused). [There's a huge story behind
that, including an open-source component, but it's too big and OT to
relate here.] It is precisely because WP came to support Windows only
that sent many people looking for a successor. When people have trouble
with formatting [as I still have, for example with unexpected spacing
issues when I use a lot of graphics], and then try to figure out what is
the equivalent troubleshooting functionality in Writer, "take the time
to learn it" is an inadequate response.
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org
