Agree, I have met some people who has dissapointed about something and after that they will feel very bad, especially if it is losing data. After they feel dissapointed, it will become more difficult to attract that people to try again the products in future. They may feel that next time maybe another kind of bugs which is not explained by others may happened and also make troubles.
I found some issue which interesting http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=33851 http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=20496 http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=17245 http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=20345 And others I hope it can be solved in Ooo 2.2, especially because it can make user losing data. Which I think is not a good experience for user. We need to reduce the problems which make user feel bad about Ooo. Just my 2c Thanks, Utomo -----Original Message----- From: Kai Backman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 3:52 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [dev] Specification Process Possibilities ... On 10/31/06, Mathias Bauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This was an "enhancement", not a bugfix. If you read the issue you can > see that it covered quite a lot of considerations. I don't know enough There are 36 reported issues and over 120 votes for this problem. Users have hidden a number of cells and perform an action on the visible ones. Based on their experience the expectation is that the hidden cells stay unchanged. Instead their spreadsheet is botched. What if they save before they realize the damage and don't have a backup? Whatever we call the issue, it's pretty clear it hurts users. We all want to improve quality. The user is the one who judges quality. -Not- QA and certainly not us developers. Maybe this specification discussion is really about more fundamental priorities. This issue has been open for five years. Over those five years, how has the specification process improved the user experience? Are we writing software for the users or us developers? :-) Kai On 10/31/06, Jim Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You have highlighted exactly the issue in this case - users see that > this is clearly a bug or a defect, but the developer says the > behaviour is intended. -- Kai Backman, Software Engineer, [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
