RE: The "like" factor
"Bryan Harris" wrote: > "My mother had a favorite saying (origin unknown): "You can get used to > anything if you do it long enough. Even hanging." She trotted out that > saying whenever my siblings or I complained about something that wasn't > going to change." > > And later: > > "Persuasion Tip #22: People automatically get used to minor annoyances over > time." > > "My mom's point of view captures an important rule in persuasion. People > can get past minor annoyances if you give them enough time. Humans quickly > adapt to just about anything that doesn't kill them." What Rupert described did not seem to me an annoyance. And define 'adapt to'. Tolerate? Accept? Assimilate? I'll be honest with you: the social engineering approach rather disgusts me. And I happen to know a lot of people who won't fall for it, anyway. On the contrary. They'd be walking out the moment it'd be tried. Overall, I'd advice against this approach. --schaafuit.
Re: The "like" factor
Re: question: > How did you solve the "like" factor? I don't know how true, but I like these passages. "My mother had a favorite saying (origin unknown): "You can get used to anything if you do it long enough. Even hanging." She trotted out that saying whenever my siblings or I complained about something that wasn't going to change." And later: "Persuasion Tip #22: People automatically get used to minor annoyances over time." "My mom’s point of view captures an important rule in persuasion. People can get past minor annoyances if you give them enough time. Humans quickly adapt to just about anything that doesn't kill them." From Win Bigly by Scott Adams V/r, Bryan On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Rupert Gallagher wrote: > Yes, this may well be the problem: easier to understand if we speak of > teddy bear, much harder if we speak > of software upgrades! And yet, here we are... > > Sent from ProtonMail Mobile > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 02:17, wrote: > > > I wrote: > > In that case, I'd interpret the beancounter's reponse as > 'have to make > sacrifices, don't we? *sigh*'. I amend that. Isn't it just > loss? We experienced techies try not to allow ourselves to get too attached > to an environment, don't we? But hasn't there been a 'first time' this has > happened, for us all? And were *we* that prepared for it? It's like a > replacement teddy bear, isn't it? The old one might be in pieces and still > the new one won't ever feel as real. Or one's first love. It never quite > feels the same again, does it? Perhaps a shared drink to mark the > transition will help the grieving process along a little. I could still be > all wrong, so I'll just shut up for now and see what others have to say. > --schaafuit. >
Re: The "like" factor
Yes, this may well be the problem: easier to understand if we speak of teddy bear, much harder if we speak of software upgrades! And yet, here we are... Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 02:17, wrote: > I wrote: > > In that case, I'd interpret the beancounter's reponse as 'have > to make > sacrifices, don't we? *sigh*'. I amend that. Isn't it just loss? We > experienced techies try not to allow ourselves to get too attached to an > environment, don't we? But hasn't there been a 'first time' this has > happened, for us all? And were *we* that prepared for it? It's like a > replacement teddy bear, isn't it? The old one might be in pieces and still > the new one won't ever feel as real. Or one's first love. It never quite > feels the same again, does it? Perhaps a shared drink to mark the transition > will help the grieving process along a little. I could still be all wrong, so > I'll just shut up for now and see what others have to say. --schaafuit.
Re: The "like" factor
LibreOffice has the *old* Microsoft Office GUI, which is what the users wanted. The change was introduced to help them keeping the old workflow with the old GUI while meeting the demands of automated software deployment, relevant ISO 27001/2 policies, and yes, get past the Microsoft licencing nightmare. This is not a light-hearted change: it requires quite a bit of thinkwring with a sprinkle of courage. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile > @safe-mail.net>
RE: The "like" factor
I wrote: > > In that case, I'd interpret the beancounter's reponse as 'have to make > sacrifices, don't we? *sigh*'. I amend that. Isn't it just loss? We experienced techies try not to allow ourselves to get too attached to an environment, don't we? But hasn't there been a 'first time' this has happened, for us all? And were *we* that prepared for it? It's like a replacement teddy bear, isn't it? The old one might be in pieces and still the new one won't ever feel as real. Or one's first love. It never quite feels the same again, does it? Perhaps a shared drink to mark the transition will help the grieving process along a little. I could still be all wrong, so I'll just shut up for now and see what others have to say. --schaafuit.
Re: The "like" factor
Muscle memory and shortcuts are certainly something we must look after, within reason. Microsoft itself has changed menu one time too many, to the point of having people complain for it and not wanting to use the new versions. As they now have a menu that is close to the original favourite, and a modern engine underneath, perhaps we should circulate a DIY memo on menu icons relocation. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 00:43, Noah wrote: > The software does mostly the same things, but you moved the menus and buttons > around. The pictures they recognize aren't there. Things work just a little > differently now. For some, it takes longer to do the things they need to do. > They have muscle memory and "shortcuts" that some of us find silly (such as > "I don't know what it's called, but it's always been the squiggly icon near > the top right corner" or "it's the third thing down on the second menu bar > list"). Chances are, the revolt would be similar upgrading from Win XP to 7, > 7 to 10, or office 97 to office 2012. > > Prepare to be very patient with them. Give them the training and resources > they need to get their workflows back. They just want to do their jobs, and > they don't care if you dislike the tools they've grown comfortable with. > > On Nov 19, 2017 4:44 PM, "Rupert Gallagher" wrote: > >> We nerds are the other side of the problem, because we are apparently unable >> to understand their problem. We have little simpathy for those who frown >> without evidence of an actual problem. Perhaps this is an example that >> humans still find it comfortable to "follow and go along together", like a >> herd of sheeps. Since "word" and "excel" is what they hear and use, perhaps >> they feel "cheap" or "non-standard" by using something else. Perhaps all we >> need to do with libreoffice is to improve its spash-screen, its icons and >> menus, and they will never notice the difference. >> >> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
Re: The "like" factor
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 00:40:38 +0100 wrote: > bytevolc...@safe-mail.net wrote: > > Perhaps it isn't just word/excel, but rather, getting used to the > > operating system changes and its antics. It appears you have changed > > their OS and their software, and this has upset them. No training > > was provided explaining to them the nooks and crannies of the new > > software, so they are frustrated as they are forced to satisfy > > someone elses' nerdgasm. > > How is office politics necessarily equivalent to a 'nerdgasm'? Think about this. You change the toolset they've been used to for years, with something radically different. Whether or not you like it, OpenOffice/Libreoffice/OpenBSD/Linux is radically different from a MS Office/Windows setup. Now instead of coming to work and just doing the job they were assigned to, they now have to learn new bits of software, and you "don't understand the problem." > Either way, aren't most 'desktop environments', and libreoffice, > 'sold' on the premise that it's so easy to convert from M$ poop? > Given the situation he described it was more like windoze nt 5.2. I > could be wrong on that, though. Doesn't matter. It appears he just forced his users to use radically different software to do the same task, without understanding what they face, or justifying his reason for the change to the users. > Yeah, but like in most other abusive relationships, those people find > it very hard to leave M$, whatever they do. > > And will still eye a potential replacement partner with a lot of > scepticism (not quite unjustified). It won't help the case if you come across as unsympathetic/unwilling to understand your users, and it won't help if you don't try to work with them to resolve the issues. This is the key to solving the "like" factor, as Rupert calls it. The users rightfully want a justification for the change, and they won't understand "oh this software is open source, so we're not locked in to proprietary closed Microsoft software." They won't care either, they just want to do the job and go home. I don't do this kind of thing anymore, but whenever I had to change the system around, some retraining was in order and I would provide the user with a comparison on how they did something in the old system vs how they do it in the new system.
RE: The "like" factor
"Rupert Gallagher" wrote: > Well, people hated Microsoft's new GUIs, and wanted the old windows xp/7 > back, which we delivered. They are happy now, and so do we. > > They also hated the new GUI with the latest Office suite, so they kept using > the older version. LibreOffice has the Microsoft Office GUI, so they are > happy now, and so do we. > > The original file explorer has always been simple minded, and they are happy > to experiment with the alternatives. In that case, I'd interpret the beancounter's reponse as 'have to make sacrifices, don't we? *sigh*'. --schaafuit.
Re: The "like" factor
Well, people hated Microsoft's new GUIs, and wanted the old windows xp/7 back, which we delivered. They are happy now, and so do we. They also hated the new GUI with the latest Office suite, so they kept using the older version. LibreOffice has the Microsoft Office GUI, so they are happy now, and so do we. The original file explorer has always been simple minded, and they are happy to experiment with the alternatives. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 00:29, wrote: > Perhaps it isn't just word/excel, but rather, getting used to the operating > system changes and its antics. It appears you have changed their OS and their > software, and this has upset them. No training was provided explaining to > them the nooks and crannies of the new software, so they are frustrated as > they are forced to satisfy someone elses' nerdgasm. I notice a big difference > between modern MS Office and LibreOffice/OpenOffice, which is why I prefer > the latter. I also notice a big difference between OpenBSD and Windows 10, > and you would have to be a blithering idiot to not notice the differences. > You seem to have forgotten the huge uproar Microsoft created in 2006/2007 > with the idiotic "ribbon" interface. This is similar, but on a much smaller, > more local scale.
RE: The "like" factor
bytevolc...@safe-mail.net wrote: > > Think about this. You change the toolset they've been used to for > years, with something radically different. Whether or not you like it, > OpenOffice/Libreoffice/OpenBSD/Linux is radically different from a MS > Office/Windows setup. Now instead of coming to work and just doing the > job they were assigned to, they now have to learn new bits of software, > and you "don't understand the problem." There's not necessarily any technical problem, at least not one that cannot be solved (luser education has been mentioned). But of course there's still a problem. If I'm not too mistaken, that's why Rupert asked for advice. > Doesn't matter. It appears he just forced his users to use radically > different software to do the same task, without understanding what they > face, or justifying his reason for the change to the users. Yeah well, going by his wording, I divine that he was sceptical himself and it was decided higher up the food chain. I don't approve of it (and that's putting it mildly), but in some organizations that's just how it works. > It won't help the case if you come across as unsympathetic/unwilling to > understand your users, and it won't help if you don't try to work with > them to resolve the issues. Well, if the root issue is the command from up high, then it's either obey or quit. A nasty dilemma, to say the least. > This is the key to solving the "like" factor, as Rupert calls it. The > users rightfully want a justification for the change, and they won't > understand "oh this software is open source, so we're not locked in to > proprietary closed Microsoft software." They won't care either, they > just want to do the job and go home. Again, if it's you as a sysadmin that makes the decisions, that *can* fly as well in practice as it does in theory. But often you find yourself just obeying 'corporate policy', and it can take a true BOFH to sabotage it effectively. > I don't do this kind of thing anymore, but whenever I had to change the > system around, some retraining was in order and I would provide the > user with a comparison on how they did something in the old system vs > how they do it in the new system. When some hyped geek sells it to the CEO, or (more likely) the higher regions fall for the $$$ argument, and they have declared it "not needed", well, what are you going to do? Say that the shareholders can stuff the extra dividends up their asses? Again, not everyone is a BOFH. --schaafuit.
RE: The "like" factor
"Daniel Wilkins" wrote: > Something to consider is that there *are* areas where libreoffice is > deficient. Yup. > > It's not uncommon for businesses to have a terrifying amount of embedded > visual > basic and incredibly elaborate excel macros, I wouldn't be surprised if the > (possibly theoretical) suit literally can't get their work done because they > don't have access to their scripts and macros that some secretary wrote in > 1999. Any migration which messes with office, if you want it to be successful > you really need a serious period of testing where you grab up as many > business-essential documents as you can and identifying scripts and macros > which may become problems, then rewriting them in LO compatible way (LO > has scripting, it's just not *literally* vbscript). It has a basic dialect > so translation shouldn't necessarily be hard, just time consuming. I'd like to shoot the person who first decided that documents should contain arbitrary macros (can we really call them that way, as it's imperative? I associated macros with a declarative style) that varies their contents. But indeed, that doesn't help anyone who's made the unwise decision to do so, at least not anymore. Their stuff will break, guaranteed. Though repeating the mistake by re-writing stuff in yet another 'macro' language, embedded in documents, is something that I'd rather see avoided. --schaafuit.
Re: The "like" factor
Something to consider is that there *are* areas where libreoffice is deficient. It's not uncommon for businesses to have a terrifying amount of embedded visual basic and incredibly elaborate excel macros, I wouldn't be surprised if the (possibly theoretical) suit literally can't get their work done because they don't have access to their scripts and macros that some secretary wrote in 1999. Any migration which messes with office, if you want it to be successful you really need a serious period of testing where you grab up as many business-essential documents as you can and identifying scripts and macros which may become problems, then rewriting them in LO compatible way (LO has scripting, it's just not *literally* vbscript). It has a basic dialect so translation shouldn't necessarily be hard, just time consuming.
RE: The "like" factor
"Noah" wrote: > The software does mostly the same things, but you moved the menus and > buttons around. The pictures they recognize aren't there. Things work just > a little differently now. For some, it takes longer to do the things they > need to do. They have muscle memory and "shortcuts" that some of us find > silly (such as "I don't know what it's called, but it's always been the > squiggly icon near the top right corner" or "it's the third thing down on > the second menu bar list"). Chances are, the revolt would be similar > upgrading from Win XP to 7, 7 to 10, or office 97 to office 2012. > > Prepare to be very patient with them. Give them the training and resources > they need to get their workflows back. They just want to do their jobs, and > they don't care if you dislike the tools they've grown comfortable with. You're looking at it from a purely technical perspective. I'm not sure that's justified, given all the potential social causes Rupert and I just identified. Besides, despite all technical measures, you can't make people like something. Except of course with application of the hungry doberman and the length of rubber hose... --schaafuit.
Re: SPOOFED: Re: The "like" factor
Perhaps it isn't just word/excel, but rather, getting used to the operating system changes and its antics. It appears you have changed their OS and their software, and this has upset them. No training was provided explaining to them the nooks and crannies of the new software, so they are frustrated as they are forced to satisfy someone elses' nerdgasm. I notice a big difference between modern MS Office and LibreOffice/OpenOffice, which is why I prefer the latter. I also notice a big difference between OpenBSD and Windows 10, and you would have to be a blithering idiot to not notice the differences. You seem to have forgotten the huge uproar Microsoft created in 2006/2007 with the idiotic "ribbon" interface. This is similar, but on a much smaller, more local scale. On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 17:44:06 -0500 Rupert Gallagher wrote: > We nerds are the other side of the problem, because we are apparently > unable to understand their problem. We have little simpathy for those > who frown without evidence of an actual problem. Perhaps this is an > example that humans still find it comfortable to "follow and go along > together", like a herd of sheeps. Since "word" and "excel" is what > they hear and use, perhaps they feel "cheap" or "non-standard" by > using something else. Perhaps all we need to do with libreoffice is > to improve its spash-screen, its icons and menus, and they will never > notice the difference. > > Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
FU: RE: The "like" factor
I wrote: > windoze nt 5.2. I meant 6.0. Sorry, haven't been keeping track and M$ is, true to form, not making it easy by having obscured the number (and since having switched to outright *lying* about it). --schaafuit.
RE: The "like" factor
bytevolc...@safe-mail.net wrote: > Perhaps it isn't just word/excel, but rather, getting used to the > operating system changes and its antics. It appears you have changed > their OS and their software, and this has upset them. No training was > provided explaining to them the nooks and crannies of the new software, > so they are frustrated as they are forced to satisfy someone elses' > nerdgasm. How is office politics necessarily equivalent to a 'nerdgasm'? Either way, aren't most 'desktop environments', and libreoffice, 'sold' on the premise that it's so easy to convert from M$ poop? > I notice a big difference between modern MS Office and > LibreOffice/OpenOffice, which is why I prefer the latter. I also notice > a big difference between OpenBSD and Windows 10, and you would have to > be a blithering idiot to not notice the differences. Given the situation he described it was more like windoze nt 5.2. I could be wrong on that, though. > You seem to have forgotten the huge uproar Microsoft created in > 2006/2007 with the idiotic "ribbon" interface. This is similar, but on > a much smaller, more local scale. Yeah, but like in most other abusive relationships, those people find it very hard to leave M$, whatever they do. And will still eye a potential replacement partner with a lot of scepticism (not quite unjustified). --schaafuit. P.S.: why 'SPOOFED'?
RE: The "like" factor
"Rupert Gallagher" rote: > We nerds are the other side of the problem, because we are apparently unable > to understand their problem. And even if we understand it, we often cannot offer a solution that satisfies them. > We have little simpathy for those who frown without evidence of an actual > problem. The flip side of this is that a feeling sometimes *is* a good indicator that there's something wrong, without being able to consciously define that 'something'. > Perhaps this is an example that humans still find it comfortable to > "follow and go along together", like a herd of sheeps. If that's all they've ever known... > Since "word" and "excel" is what they hear and use, perhaps they feel > "cheap" or "non-standard" by using something else. IME that attitude goes from politics all the way down to underwear. > Perhaps all we need to do with libreoffice is to improve its > spash-screen, its icons and menus, and they will never notice the > difference. Yeah well, gnome, kde, et al certainly appear to follow the 'IBM CUA' approach: a grand unified set of rules, determined through extensive pseudo-scientific research... resulting in an appearance that only a mother could love :) I might be wrong, though. I don't use those. --schaafuit.
Re: The "like" factor
We nerds are the other side of the problem, because we are apparently unable to understand their problem. We have little simpathy for those who frown without evidence of an actual problem. Perhaps this is an example that humans still find it comfortable to "follow and go along together", like a herd of sheeps. Since "word" and "excel" is what they hear and use, perhaps they feel "cheap" or "non-standard" by using something else. Perhaps all we need to do with libreoffice is to improve its spash-screen, its icons and menus, and they will never notice the difference. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
RE: The "like" factor
Hi, "Rupert Gallagher" wrote: > How did you solve the "like" factor? As I have no experience in office situations, I cannot answer that. However, it would've been an interesting experiment to just swap the logos and see how long it'd take for them to notice. #include Hm, that makes me recall a dark and distant past in which I preferred the look of windoze 3 over any other WIMPy GUI I had seen, even though it was the least useful of 'em all, and in hindsight is certainly one of the ugliest. I was a little kid at the time. I suppose I was just not mature enough to appreciate alternatives to what I'd been given. Besides, I had (and still have) little use for WIMPy GUIs. As now, I mainly used them for games that I like but are so broken that they will only run under them. And beancounters hate 'scruffies', not to forget, and that hate tends to be mutual. Using something associated with an opposing tribe is something that primates tend to rather frown upon. If the beancounter was of the somewhat more mature variety, his disappointment may just have been an 'it was nice while it lasted, but we all have to grow up' type of reaction, though. I couldn't possibly judge this. If none of these explanations apply, I guess it's plain familiarity. Or the groupthink that primates are well-known for. --schaafuit.
The "like" factor
I bet none of you dared this much in "change management". The accountant walks in to a new work-station. The initial excitement is followed by a quiet "no windows 10/7/xp? and a less quiet "no windows office?". That's right: new office politics, we are through with Microsoft, move on with your duties. All is well, apart from the "like" factor. The user is unable to explain why they miss Microsoft Excell and Word 2007, by comparison with up-to-date libreoffice. How did you solve the "like" factor? Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
