Hello, > If you put a scale in, does that mean I can either have Stability or > Features but not both? How am I going to decide what that even means for me > if I haven't used the software yet? > Why is 3.3.2 mentioned twice on some scales, does that make it superior to > 3.4.0?
On mine, it was because it was asked for a version of the adopt-o-meter that gives options for corporate users, home users and "early adopters." However, I think it is a ridiculous idea (because it is a lot of work) to try to keep three different releases fixed all the time. and, as you note, it's confusing to every user except Linux distributors -- many commercial distributions ship with more or less outdated software and have to be kept up to date for years. > What IS an early adopter? is it someone who downloads in the next few > months? is this a new office suite? You could say, a tester, but that would give people the wrong idea, because, fundamentally, a .0 release should be stable, even if later versions might be more stable even. > Does red/orange suggest that this isn't safe software? Does it indicate > higher processing/resource demands? Probably yes, although Jan H asked to avoid the colour red if I remember right, again a .0 release is not really a tester's version. And: no, would you expect that? > - How are beginner-users supposed to know what "x86" means? I concur. Slapping a "64-bit" behind the version now labelled "x64" and removing the "x86" should help here. The 64-bit part is important, though, as more and more systems run 64-bit OS'es and these users will want to have an optimised version. > - Why is there no emphasis on the actual software download link as opposed > to the language/help packs? The language packs have been eliminated as of version 3.4. I am unsure how long the help packs are supposed to stay since there is the Wiki help – personally I like to have an offline help file and found the fact that Firefox now uses an internet help site only a step backwards – such pages tend to be more confusing and less ordered than an offline help file. Anyway, the help file download should go somewhere in a sidebar or at least be less pronounced (as in your proposal). > - What is with the COMPLETE AND UTTER LACK OF A *DOWNLOAD BUTTON* on this > "downloads" page? I didn't notice until now, but this is bad. Although luckily not as bad as on Sourceforge where you have to navigate through folders etc. > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:PROP_DownloadsPage_110606NS.jpg Thank you for this contribution. I really like your proposal, the wording is sometimes a bit questionable, but the general idea is very good. > I don't know how possible that is to implement, but I'm happy to cough up > the images of someone is willing. Me neither, although with the script that changes the LibO version dynamically already in place, the HTML shouldn't be too complicated. Astron. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/design/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
