On Tuesday 04 December 2007 12:37:37 William Case wrote: > Hi; > > On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 22:16 +0100, :murb: [maarten brouwers] wrote: > > Hi Graham, and everybody else who is still with us ;) , > > > > First, to all, I would like to see others to join the discussion if they > > are interested in something besides aesthetics, the actual content and > > information to be presented.
Hi Bill, > > Taking that liberty. No liberty taken, much welcomed in fact. > > [snip] > > > >> 4. http://www.apple.com/iwork/ > > > > > > Nobody at apple has dialup, that is obvious. > > > > > :) > > I think that the > http://www.molcan.cz/download/ooo3.jpg is still the best so far: There is lots to be said for Filip's design but it would load like a slug on prozac on dialup just like the i-works one. I don't know what it's like in the rest o f the world, but in Australia, dialup connection accounts for about 40% of all connections, in NZ it's over 50% and both countries are first world. Where does that leave the rest Graphics take an age to load. So on that measure it is not very good User Experience > > I laid it out, using tabs in my browser, next to other attractive sites, > particularly to the iWork site. Try it. I think you will find it draws > your attention more than any other except iWork. The only thing that kept me from killing the i-work page other than feeling that I had a duty to look at it, was two games of free cell! :) > > Other suggestions presented are prettier and more sophisticated, but to > me, the main factor is drawing the viewer in, to encourage him to > explore the possibilities. > [....] > > > I think you are skipping hear a group, enthousiastic people, who know > > that Office suites can do more, and think computing can be fun as well. > > Those people want new fonts, images, cliparts, or want a small program > > that can help them with their household finance, and then I have left > > out this discussion the interest of companies, who might be interested > > in what can be done with OpenOffice.org after some more advanced > > tweaking using extensions they might create themselves. However those > > users shouldn't yet be bothered with Issues, Uno etc. Btw., why is > > Native Language there? There is a large non-English audience... > > I agree with the use of the word 'enthusiastic' -- means people who are > a little more OOo and web page literate. They can more easily handle > more specific links. > > Maybe 'EXTENSIONS ETC.' on the home page then a choice and a toolbar in > the 'EXTENSIONS' sub-home page. Fair enough, however the experienced ones would most likely go straight to their favourite project. Remember we have to deal with the lowest common denominator in terms of internet sophistication > > > >> - do you think it is still appropriate to include some lines > > >> explaining in very global terms, e.g. "OpenOffice.org is a > > >> multiplatform and multilingual office suite and an open-source > > >> project. Compatible with all other major office suites, the product is > > >> free to download, use, and distribute. " > > > > > > Yes and No. It's about prominence on launch and so long as it is > > > readable but not the most prominent thing when the page launches. > > > However the above statement is clear and concise and relevant and gives > > > our casual "Foot traffiic" client one more nudge to hit the "I want to > > > learn more...." button / icon / link. I'm more in favour than not > > KISS. Put definitions in sub-domains. In this case, the 'What is > OpenOffice?' sub-home page. I'm not sure what you mean here. This is not a definition, rather a couple of sentences explaining what people are looking at on this webpage, I'll admit I'm not hugely committed one or another but if I was told to get off the fence I would probably go for leaving it. > > > Something different though, > > > > you have always said that buttons on the main page could directly refer > > to the most appropriate subdomains. I think this is a bad idea, and I > > would keep things more under control of one 'authority', being this > > group. Only then we can guarantee style consistency, which is important > > for the user experience as well. Maybe you don't think this is that > > interesting, but I don't think the landing on the why page, which has a > > totally different lay-out than the normal OpenOffice.org website (~first > > page ;) ) is communicating quality. Imho, this years redesign should > > include subpages for the main buttons, thus including learn, download > > etc. > > > > g., > > Yes. I believe this process should develop both the main home page and > the sub-home pages that go with it. We need to make decisions by the 15th, if we are going to do those as well we need design and sitemaps now > > Regarding one-click downloads; I don't think a download would be used or > expected off of the home page. In fact, some new users might get annoyed > at having an office suite dumped on their machine when all they wanted > to do was to take a look at what a download and installation involves. > > Give them a download page; give them reassurances and explanations on > that page; then, let them have the one-click download Agreed > > Regards Bill > Cheers GL -- Graham Lauder, INGOTs Assessor Trainer Moderator New Zealand (International Grades in Office Technologies) www.theingots.org Phone DDI +64 7 886 8171 Mobile +64 27 494 4315 OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
