Le lundi 07 août 2006 à 17:59 +0100, Ian Lynch a écrit : > On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 17:26 +0200, Cor Nouws wrote: > > Hi Nicolas,
Hi Ian and Cor (will reply to both there as it seems I've only received Ian's message so far) > > Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > > > > Shows use of other character map implementations which are not as > > > minimalistic as the OO.o one > > > > > > > You're right that impovements are possible. > > However, looking to the number of people I more or less suport in using > > OOo, and the amount of complaints, I would say it bothers less than > > 0,1%. Which does not mean that the issue cannot be important. Actually it drives me almost mad when I use OO.o under windows, but since it can be solved at the os level and my platform of choice does not suffer from it, it's a very low priority for me. I suspect a lot of users either have never been exposed to a good character map, of if they have that means they're not using windows and don't care about the windows port. > > But in such situation speaking about sucking, useless, dumb ... well, > > that's to much for me :-) I'm sorry, that's nothing but the truth. You should remember however that the quality of implementation is orthogonal to the priority - it's more important to be good at features people absolutely need (notes and comments) than to excel at features fewer people care about (either because they're not important or because they're not aware they could be better). My message was intended to convey 1. I totally understand the OP frustration, OO.o does suck 2. I however do not care enough to file an issue, so he should do it himself And actually I'd rather have OO.o interface directly with the OS charmap app than reimplement it, since the value added by an OO.o-specific implementation is pretty small and I'd rather have OO.o devs focus on their core code. > We will never please all of the people all of the time but with every > incremental improvement some more will come on board and find it does > what they need. For the developers, choosing the priorities is not easy. > Let's hope they have the wisdom to choose the easier things that are > likely to have the greatest effect first. For 90%+ of word processor > users Writer is already over-kill but we do want to include the last 10% > eventually. I totally agree with Ian. Getting feature-parity on the core office perimeter (*not* outlook) with MS Office is much higher prio than expending efforts elsewhere, since even where OO.o sucks greatly if Office sucks too few people will complain. OTOH lacking features users find and use in Office is a killer. Let's be honest : OO.o is not mature enough yet to play the best of breed game across the board. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
