Of course, you're right, if I understand you, but I did not say that LO should not look great for linux, on the contrary. It seems that there have been attempts to redesign the icons, to be modern and..., but I can only see a bunch of different pictograms whose design not belong to any of these systems philosophy. Access to the tools is a major problem. I'm interested in just who decides about all of this and how I contribute, Does it make sense to talk about this, or continue business as usual :)
On 19 June 2011 19:10, RGB ES <[email protected]> wrote: > 2011/6/19 Budislav Stepanov <[email protected]>: > > Of course it looks like MSO, LO now looks like MSO 2003:). Everyone > should > > take part in this, I just gave a suggestion. > > @ Ricardo - I do not understand what is so special in the current > interface > > and so well that it should not be changed, is it not better to be easily > > manipulated with the tools,I read somewhere that people in the company > can > > not find their way in, Is not it better to simplify it. Who is against > it? > > we all, as designers need to design how everything should look like, not > > to ask developers what is better, that all of the tools in one place r > that > > the user loses until you find what they need . What is the aim of > developing > > this program? . No one said that he would deviate from KDE, but it would > be > > much easier to use all the features of the program. After all let's ask > many > > people who use the LO what is better, maybe they make a suggestion? LO > > should be used with enthusiasm, not because we must, because it is free. > > Without ideas there is nothing. Just my opinion. > > I'm not talking about the current interface that for sure needs a > redesign, but about how the interface integrates with the desktop > environment used. > On your mock-up you wrote that LibO should have an unique look > independently of the OS and I do not agree with that, that's all ;) > Which tools are available and where (dockers, side toolbars, etc.), > and the way to access all the others must be a desktop independent > trademark for LibO, that's right: each app is unique in many senses > and so they are their tools. But how menus and buttons are > highlighted, the colour scheme, even icon theme (the save, open, > new... buttons, for example) should be, if possible, in harmony with > the rest of the system so users can feel "at home" with the app and, > first of all, do not get that second of confusion when changing from > LibO to another apps or vice versa. > That's why I mentioned the file picker. Right now, LibO's own file > picker is bad (to be nice...), but even if it were good a user that > needs to save a file to a new location needs also to switch his/her > mind from what they are used to use to whatever LibO offers *every > time*, and that is counter-productive. > I mentioned KDE just as an example: what I'd said holds, I think, for > gnome, xfce, mac (acqua?)... > LibO must be an unique product, granted, but it should not look as an > intruder on the desktop session. > Cheers > Ricardo > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > deleted > > -- Regards, Budislav -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
