subject:"\[libreoffice\-users\] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO"

I never tried Kingsoft Office myself, but I read a little about it
recently when I finally abandoned my old Nokia 3510 phone for an
Android phone. I found though, that Kingsoft Office doesn't support
ODF, and almost 100% of what I have is ODF so Kingsoft Office is
obviously not for me, and I never installed it.

I use Apache OpenOffice on my desktop (actually a laptop, but I use it
as a desktop) since I found LibreOffice way too buggy, but I installed
LibreOffice 4.0 for testing purposes. So far I didn't find something
for my spreadsheets for my phone. I know there are ODF viewers out
there, but I need to edit my files. So what I do right now, is that I
enter new stuff in a Google Docs spreadsheet, and when I come home, I
just copy and paste into the ”real” spreadsheet in Apache OpenOffice.
It works, but isn't very convenient…


Johnny Rosenberg

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Virgil Arrington

Jay provided a great response to this thread, but it appears as if he fell 
into the trap of hitting reply instead of reply all, so only I got the 
benefit of his response. I'm copying it below.


Jay wrote:

My understanding of the original XEROX research is that is for desktop GUI
there is a narrow range of options and criteria to implement a good
interface. What I always understood is that because the why humans
interact with the surroundings and basic physiology of arms, shoulders,
hands, etc. the WIMP based GUIs with menus, icons, windows, and a mouse
are the most practical interfaces. The XEROX conclusions, IMHO, are still
valid today. So the GUI (app or OS) should be very similar. Learning any
XEROX style GUI is fairly easy for most users because it feels right.

MS seemed to ignore the XEROX research with the Ribbon and the criticism
of W8 indicates they ignored the research again. I read MS was concerned
with the complexity of the menus in MSO and the fact that most users only
used a fraction of the available commands. Two logic flaws: complex
software will cause complex menus and most users probably only need to use
a fraction of commands. However different users will use a different
combination of commands.
--
Jay Lozier
jsloz...@gmail.com


As I think about software evolution, there was little consistency back in 
the DOS days. For example, Wordstar had its Ctrl-key combinations that were 
hard to learn but, once learned, made touch typists *very* proficient. 
WordPerfect preferred the Function key commands.


When Windows came out, it was not immediately embraced. DOS was fast, lean 
and light. I recall working very efficiently on a computer with a 10 mg. 
hard drive with plenty of room to spare.


One of the Windows selling points was that all of the programs could have a 
consistent UI. All programs followed the same basic menu structure (File, 
Edit, Format, Tools, etc.). While each program had its own quirks (page 
layout under File?), the general consistency of menus made programs 
relatively easy to figure out.


Users knew that everything could be found *somewhere* in the menu. Yes, more 
complex commands may be deeply buried, but that was the nature of the beast. 
More often-used commands could be attached to icons streamlining the 
process. But, the icon toolbars, while quick and easy, were never intended 
to *replace* the menu structure, just supplement it. Toolbars are, by their 
nature, very much subject to user preferences. When installing LO, I 
immediately customize the toolbars to eliminate icons I never use. That's 
okay, because I know *everything* is in the menu structure.


It appears that, with the ribbon, MS has tried to combine the menus and 
icons into one structure. But, for me at least, MS has abandoned the very 
logical and consistent menu structure that gave Windows its advantage over 
the inconsistent UIs of DOS.


(And, Doug, I have tried to load PC-Write onto my computer, but it won't run 
on a 64-bit computer. *sigh*)


Virgil

-Original Message- 
From: Doug

Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 8:39 PM
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO


On 06/07/2013 08:10 PM, Virgil Arrington wrote:

This has been fascinating reading all of the opinions about user
interfaces and the dreaded ribbon.

/snip/

I've been playing recently with WriteMonkey, a markdown text editor, and
I must confess, I like the UI with absolutely no toolbars or ribbons;
just keystroke combinations and some basic menus. Works for me.

Virgil


Sounds like you should find a copy of WordStar!

--doug

--
Blessed are the peacemakers..for they shall be shot at from both sides.
--A.M.Greeley

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? 
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/

Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Tom Davies

Hi :)
That point keeps coming up but it best said the other way around
80% of MSO almost never gets used.

Then split the remaining 20% up between different sorts of users.  Most people 
only use the Save button, Bold, Centre, Underline, copypaste errr that's about 
it.  Oh, receive email and reply.  More advanced users insert pictures or 
graphics or go the other way into using spreadsheets and/or maybe know how to 
start a fresh new email.   So even of that 20% there is a lot of stuff that 
people don't use or even know about.  It's just that within that 20% some 
people use some and others use different bits.  That still leaves 80% almost 
untouched by anyone.  

The way this is generally talked about is that everyone uses different things 
and so if you take enough people you find that there is an even spread of all 
parts being used by a roughly equal percentage of people.  However that is NOT 
what we are seeing.  Think about it this way instead, how many people do you 
know of that don't know how to make something bold?  Almost everyone knows 
that, right?  They might manage to fluff it badly but at least they can manage 
that much.  Now, how many can switch from left to right or fully justified?  
Not so many.  Quite a lot of people don't even know what you are talking about 
or think it looks too strange or 'different' (or cool).  How many people know 
how to mail-merge?  Not as many as know how to use bold!!

Regards from 
Tom :)  







 From: Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com
To: Doug dmcgarr...@optonline.net; users@global.libreoffice.org 
Sent: Saturday, 8 June 2013, 13:44
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO
 

Jay provided a great response to this thread, but it appears as if he fell 
into the trap of hitting reply instead of reply all, so only I got the 
benefit of his response. I'm copying it below.

Jay wrote:

My understanding of the original XEROX research is that is for desktop GUI
there is a narrow range of options and criteria to implement a good
interface. What I always understood is that because the why humans
interact with the surroundings and basic physiology of arms, shoulders,
hands, etc. the WIMP based GUIs with menus, icons, windows, and a mouse
are the most practical interfaces. The XEROX conclusions, IMHO, are still
valid today. So the GUI (app or OS) should be very similar. Learning any
XEROX style GUI is fairly easy for most users because it feels right.

MS seemed to ignore the XEROX research with the Ribbon and the criticism
of W8 indicates they ignored the research again. I read MS was concerned
with the complexity of the menus in MSO and the fact that most users only
used a fraction of the available commands. Two logic flaws: complex
software will cause complex menus and most users probably only need to use
a fraction of commands. However different users will use a different
combination of commands.
-- 
Jay Lozier
jsloz...@gmail.com


As I think about software evolution, there was little consistency back in 
the DOS days. For example, Wordstar had its Ctrl-key combinations that were 
hard to learn but, once learned, made touch typists *very* proficient. 
WordPerfect preferred the Function key commands.

When Windows came out, it was not immediately embraced. DOS was fast, lean 
and light. I recall working very efficiently on a computer with a 10 mg. 
hard drive with plenty of room to spare.

One of the Windows selling points was that all of the programs could have a 
consistent UI. All programs followed the same basic menu structure (File, 
Edit, Format, Tools, etc.). While each program had its own quirks (page 
layout under File?), the general consistency of menus made programs 
relatively easy to figure out.

Users knew that everything could be found *somewhere* in the menu. Yes, more 
complex commands may be deeply buried, but that was the nature of the beast. 
More often-used commands could be attached to icons streamlining the 
process. But, the icon toolbars, while quick and easy, were never intended 
to *replace* the menu structure, just supplement it. Toolbars are, by their 
nature, very much subject to user preferences. When installing LO, I 
immediately customize the toolbars to eliminate icons I never use. That's 
okay, because I know *everything* is in the menu structure.

It appears that, with the ribbon, MS has tried to combine the menus and 
icons into one structure. But, for me at least, MS has abandoned the very 
logical and consistent menu structure that gave Windows its advantage over 
the inconsistent UIs of DOS.

(And, Doug, I have tried to load PC-Write onto my computer, but it won't run 
on a 64-bit computer. *sigh*)

Virgil

-Original Message- 
From: Doug
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 8:39 PM
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO

On 06/07/2013 08:10 PM, Virgil

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 10:16:42 -0400, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk  
wrote:



Hi :)
That point keeps coming up but it best said the other way around
80% of MSO almost never gets used.

Then split the remaining 20% up between different sorts of users.  Most  
people only use the Save button, Bold, Centre, Underline, copypaste  
errr that's about it.  Oh, receive email and reply.  More advanced users  
insert pictures or graphics or go the other way into using spreadsheets  
and/or maybe know how to start a fresh new email.   So even of that 20%  
there is a lot of stuff that people don't use or even know about.  It's  
just that within that 20% some people use some and others use different  
bits.  That still leaves 80% almost untouched by anyone.
The way this is generally talked about is that everyone uses different  
things and so if you take enough people you find that there is an even  
spread of all parts being used by a roughly equal percentage of people.   
However that is NOT what we are seeing.  Think about it this way  
instead, how many people do you know of that don't know how to make  
something bold?  Almost everyone knows that, right?  They might manage  
to fluff it badly but at least they can manage that much.  Now, how many  
can switch from left to right or fully justified?  Not so many.  Quite a  
lot of people don't even know what you are talking about or think it  
looks too strange or 'different' (or cool).  How many people know how to  
mail-merge?  Not as many as know how to use bold!!


Regards from
Tom :)

IMHO the percentage of features used by 95% of users on LO or MSO is  
probably about 50 to 60% of those available - no research just navel  
gazing. I was talking to a colleague on another list about this point. MS  
has had a history of adding features to MSO that most users either would  
never use it or have no idea the feature is there (and probably would  
never use it). Part of the problem, particularly for commercial software,  
is the true core features of an office suite have been implemented years  
ago and only need refining. Tom's example of mail merge has been around  
for at least 20 years - I used it with WordPerfect in the mid 90's and it  
was not a new feature then. So to entice buyers/users MS and others must  
add features that sound nice but very few people will ever use.


A related problem is that most users are users. They want to get something  
do but do not want to spend a lot of time learning the software beyond a  
minimum to do their jobs. So if you asked them to do a mail-merge with LO,  
AOO, MSO, etc. you would get a blank stare. They do not know it can be do  
and are amazed you can do it.







From: Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com
To: Doug dmcgarr...@optonline.net; users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Saturday, 8 June 2013, 13:44
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO  
alternative is not LO



Jay provided a great response to this thread, but it appears as if he  
fell
into the trap of hitting reply instead of reply all, so only I got  
the

benefit of his response. I'm copying it below.

Jay wrote:

My understanding of the original XEROX research is that is for desktop  
GUI

there is a narrow range of options and criteria to implement a good
interface. What I always understood is that because the why humans
interact with the surroundings and basic physiology of arms, shoulders,
hands, etc. the WIMP based GUIs with menus, icons, windows, and a mouse
are the most practical interfaces. The XEROX conclusions, IMHO, are  
still

valid today. So the GUI (app or OS) should be very similar. Learning any
XEROX style GUI is fairly easy for most users because it feels right.

MS seemed to ignore the XEROX research with the Ribbon and the criticism
of W8 indicates they ignored the research again. I read MS was concerned
with the complexity of the menus in MSO and the fact that most users  
only

used a fraction of the available commands. Two logic flaws: complex
software will cause complex menus and most users probably only need to  
use

a fraction of commands. However different users will use a different
combination of commands.
--
Jay Lozier
jsloz...@gmail.com


As I think about software evolution, there was little consistency back  
in
the DOS days. For example, Wordstar had its Ctrl-key combinations that  
were

hard to learn but, once learned, made touch typists *very* proficient.
WordPerfect preferred the Function key commands.

When Windows came out, it was not immediately embraced. DOS was fast,  
lean

and light. I recall working very efficiently on a computer with a 10 mg.
hard drive with plenty of room to spare.

One of the Windows selling points was that all of the programs could  
have a
consistent UI. All programs followed the same basic menu structure  
(File,

Edit, Format, Tools, etc.). While each program had its own quirks (page
layout under File?), the general

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Kracked_P_P---webmaster


On 06/08/2013 11:32 AM, Jay Lozier wrote:
On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 10:16:42 -0400, Tom Davies 
tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:



Hi :)
That point keeps coming up but it best said the other way around
80% of MSO almost never gets used.

Then split the remaining 20% up between different sorts of users.  
Most people only use the Save button, Bold, Centre, Underline, 
copypaste errr that's about it.  Oh, receive email and reply.  More 
advanced users insert pictures or graphics or go the other way into 
using spreadsheets and/or maybe know how to start a fresh new 
email.   So even of that 20% there is a lot of stuff that people 
don't use or even know about.  It's just that within that 20% some 
people use some and others use different bits.  That still leaves 80% 
almost untouched by anyone.
The way this is generally talked about is that everyone uses 
different things and so if you take enough people you find that there 
is an even spread of all parts being used by a roughly equal 
percentage of people.  However that is NOT what we are seeing.  Think 
about it this way instead, how many people do you know of that don't 
know how to make something bold?  Almost everyone knows that, right?  
They might manage to fluff it badly but at least they can manage that 
much.  Now, how many can switch from left to right or fully 
justified?  Not so many. Quite a lot of people don't even know what 
you are talking about or think it looks too strange or 'different' 
(or cool).  How many people know how to mail-merge?  Not as many as 
know how to use bold!!


Regards from
Tom :)

IMHO the percentage of features used by 95% of users on LO or MSO is 
probably about 50 to 60% of those available - no research just navel 
gazing. I was talking to a colleague on another list about this point. 
MS has had a history of adding features to MSO that most users 
either would never use it or have no idea the feature is there (and 
probably would never use it). Part of the problem, particularly for 
commercial software, is the true core features of an office suite have 
been implemented years ago and only need refining. Tom's example of 
mail merge has been around for at least 20 years - I used it with 
WordPerfect in the mid 90's and it was not a new feature then. So to 
entice buyers/users MS and others must add features that sound nice 
but very few people will ever use.




The last time I heard of a MSO figure, it was:
95% of the MSO users uses less than 5% of the features.  That was mostly 
for Word and Excel users.
I have heard other figures like 90% uses 10%, but the highest figure was 
the 15% of the features of Word and Excel combined.


All of the rest are for the power users and need a good and detailed 
book to teach you - step by step - how to use these complex power user 
features and options.


For all of the people I have dealt with, none would be called a power 
user by any means.


I remember seeing a magazine advertisement for MSO, from several years 
ago, that stated that they added over 1,000 new and improved feature 
over the previous version.  That may have been for the MSO 2003 
version.  MSO-2003 was the last one I bought, with the first being 
MSO-97 I believe.  How many people would want to learn 1,000 features 
for their office package?  I may use 100 +/- features of LO and that is 
more than enough to do what I need to do.


A related problem is that most users are users. They want to get 
something do but do not want to spend a lot of time learning the 
software beyond a minimum to do their jobs. So if you asked them to do 
a mail-merge with LO, AOO, MSO, etc. you would get a blank stare. They 
do not know it can be do and are amazed you can do it.


I use to deal with mail-merging lists with a form document, but I have 
not done that for a long time.







From: Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com
To: Doug dmcgarr...@optonline.net; users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Saturday, 8 June 2013, 13:44
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO



Jay provided a great response to this thread, but it appears as if 
he fell
into the trap of hitting reply instead of reply all, so only I 
got the

benefit of his response. I'm copying it below.

Jay wrote:

My understanding of the original XEROX research is that is for 
desktop GUI

there is a narrow range of options and criteria to implement a good
interface. What I always understood is that because the why humans
interact with the surroundings and basic physiology of arms, shoulders,
hands, etc. the WIMP based GUIs with menus, icons, windows, and a mouse
are the most practical interfaces. The XEROX conclusions, IMHO, are 
still
valid today. So the GUI (app or OS) should be very similar. Learning 
any

XEROX style GUI is fairly easy for most users because it feels right.

MS seemed to ignore the XEROX research with the Ribbon and the 
criticism
of W8 indicates they ignored the research

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 12:04:20 -0400, Kracked_P_P---webmaster  
webmas...@krackedpress.com wrote:



On 06/08/2013 11:32 AM, Jay Lozier wrote:
On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 10:16:42 -0400, Tom Davies  
tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:



Hi :)
That point keeps coming up but it best said the other way around
80% of MSO almost never gets used.

Then split the remaining 20% up between different sorts of users.   
Most people only use the Save button, Bold, Centre, Underline,  
copypaste errr that's about it.  Oh, receive email and reply.  More  
advanced users insert pictures or graphics or go the other way into  
using spreadsheets and/or maybe know how to start a fresh new email.
So even of that 20% there is a lot of stuff that people don't use or  
even know about.  It's just that within that 20% some people use some  
and others use different bits.  That still leaves 80% almost untouched  
by anyone.
The way this is generally talked about is that everyone uses different  
things and so if you take enough people you find that there is an even  
spread of all parts being used by a roughly equal percentage of  
people.  However that is NOT what we are seeing.  Think about it this  
way instead, how many people do you know of that don't know how to  
make something bold?  Almost everyone knows that, right?  They might  
manage to fluff it badly but at least they can manage that much.  Now,  
how many can switch from left to right or fully justified?  Not so  
many. Quite a lot of people don't even know what you are talking about  
or think it looks too strange or 'different' (or cool).  How many  
people know how to mail-merge?  Not as many as know how to use bold!!


Regards from
Tom :)

IMHO the percentage of features used by 95% of users on LO or MSO is  
probably about 50 to 60% of those available - no research just navel  
gazing. I was talking to a colleague on another list about this point.  
MS has had a history of adding features to MSO that most users either  
would never use it or have no idea the feature is there (and probably  
would never use it). Part of the problem, particularly for commercial  
software, is the true core features of an office suite have been  
implemented years ago and only need refining. Tom's example of mail  
merge has been around for at least 20 years - I used it with  
WordPerfect in the mid 90's and it was not a new feature then. So to  
entice buyers/users MS and others must add features that sound nice  
but very few people will ever use.




The last time I heard of a MSO figure, it was:
95% of the MSO users uses less than 5% of the features.  That was mostly  
for Word and Excel users.
I have heard other figures like 90% uses 10%, but the highest figure was  
the 15% of the features of Word and Excel combined.


All of the rest are for the power users and need a good and detailed  
book to teach you - step by step - how to use these complex power user  
features and options.


For all of the people I have dealt with, none would be called a power  
user by any means.


I remember seeing a magazine advertisement for MSO, from several years  
ago, that stated that they added over 1,000 new and improved feature  
over the previous version.  That may have been for the MSO 2003  
version.  MSO-2003 was the last one I bought, with the first being  
MSO-97 I believe.  How many people would want to learn 1,000 features  
for their office package?  I may use 100 +/- features of LO and that is  
more than enough to do what I need to do.




I think there is a basic agreement that at least 25% of the features in  
MSO could be eliminated and no one would notice. I would not be surprised  
if LO and AOO could eliminate about 20% of the features without anyone  
noticing. I am suggesting any features be eliminated just that all office  
suites could probably go on a feature diet and actually improve their  
products. Just that some need a more rigorous diet than others.


I think what happens is someone thinks something would be a nice feature.  
They ask a focus group (or survey) about it and the group says it sounds  
good. But what is never asked is would you do actually miss the feature or  
use the feature if it was present. So the feature gets added.


The sense I get from the list is that feature set of MSO 2000 or XP hits  
the sweet spot for almost all users. The later MSO versions do not really  
add features the vast majority of users need, care about, or truly want.  
Or the feature can easily be implemented by other methods external to the  
suite. For example file sharing and collaboration with remote users can be  
done using a variety tools external to MSO or LO. I suspect that most if  
asked would say it is a good feature to include. But if you ask would they  
ever use it, the answer is no. In fact it can be fairly easily use  
external tools.


A related problem is that most users are users. They want to get  
something do but do not want to spend a lot of time

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Jean-Francois Nifenecker


Hi,

jumping in the bandwaggon..

Le 08/06/2013 18:33, Jay Lozier a écrit :


I think there is a basic agreement that at least 25% of the features in
MSO could be eliminated and no one would notice. I would not be
surprised if LO and AOO could eliminate about 20% of the features
without anyone noticing. I am suggesting any features be eliminated just
that all office suites could probably go on a feature diet and actually
improve their products. Just that some need a more rigorous diet than
others.


An idea I've been having for 20+ years now is: how about an office 
automation tool (wordprocessor, spreadsheet, whatever) that would come 
with the bare minimal features (define: bare minimal) and could be 
enhanced by adding features through a plugin system à la LibreOffice 
extensions?


This way, anyone could tailor the software to their exact needs and the 
tools devs would focus on dedicated areas to add features.


--
Jean-Francois Nifenecker, Bordeaux

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Fwd: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

Ok, sorry. Did it again. Replied privately, that is. Here's to the list:

-- Forwarded message --
From: Johnny Rosenberg gurus.knu...@gmail.com
Date: 2013/6/8
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO
alternative is not LO
To: Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com

2013/6/8 Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com:
 On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 12:04:20 -0400, Kracked_P_P---webmaster
 webmas...@krackedpress.com wrote:

 On 06/08/2013 11:32 AM, Jay Lozier wrote:

 On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 10:16:42 -0400, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
 wrote:

 Hi :)
 That point keeps coming up but it best said the other way around
 80% of MSO almost never gets used.

 Then split the remaining 20% up between different sorts of users.  Most
 people only use the Save button, Bold, Centre, Underline, copypaste errr
 that's about it.  Oh, receive email and reply.  More advanced users insert
 pictures or graphics or go the other way into using spreadsheets and/or
 maybe know how to start a fresh new email.   So even of that 20% there is a
 lot of stuff that people don't use or even know about.  It's just that
 within that 20% some people use some and others use different bits.  That
 still leaves 80% almost untouched by anyone.
 The way this is generally talked about is that everyone uses different
 things and so if you take enough people you find that there is an even
 spread of all parts being used by a roughly equal percentage of people.
 However that is NOT what we are seeing.  Think about it this way instead,
 how many people do you know of that don't know how to make something bold?
 Almost everyone knows that, right?  They might manage to fluff it badly but
 at least they can manage that much.  Now, how many can switch from left to
 right or fully justified?  Not so many. Quite a lot of people don't even
 know what you are talking about or think it looks too strange or 
 'different'
 (or cool).  How many people know how to mail-merge?  Not as many as know 
 how
 to use bold!!

 Regards from
 Tom :)

 IMHO the percentage of features used by 95% of users on LO or MSO is
 probably about 50 to 60% of those available - no research just navel gazing.
 I was talking to a colleague on another list about this point. MS has had a
 history of adding features to MSO that most users either would never use
 it or have no idea the feature is there (and probably would never use it).
 Part of the problem, particularly for commercial software, is the true core
 features of an office suite have been implemented years ago and only need
 refining. Tom's example of mail merge has been around for at least 20 years
 - I used it with WordPerfect in the mid 90's and it was not a new feature
 then. So to entice buyers/users MS and others must add features that sound
 nice but very few people will ever use.

 The last time I heard of a MSO figure, it was:
 95% of the MSO users uses less than 5% of the features.  That was mostly
 for Word and Excel users.
 I have heard other figures like 90% uses 10%, but the highest figure was
 the 15% of the features of Word and Excel combined.

 All of the rest are for the power users and need a good and detailed
 book to teach you - step by step - how to use these complex power user
 features and options.

 For all of the people I have dealt with, none would be called a power user
 by any means.

 I remember seeing a magazine advertisement for MSO, from several years
 ago, that stated that they added over 1,000 new and improved feature over
 the previous version.  That may have been for the MSO 2003 version.
 MSO-2003 was the last one I bought, with the first being MSO-97 I believe.
 How many people would want to learn 1,000 features for their office package?
 I may use 100 +/- features of LO and that is more than enough to do what I
 need to do.

 I think there is a basic agreement that at least 25% of the features in MSO
 could be eliminated and no one would notice. I would not be surprised if LO
 and AOO could eliminate about 20% of the features without anyone noticing. I
 am suggesting any features be eliminated just that all office suites could
 probably go on a feature diet and actually improve their products. Just that
 some need a more rigorous diet than others.

I wanted to create a spreadsheet a while ago, that was a little less
complicated than what I usually do, so I though that I could use
Gnumeric instead of LibreOffice/Apache OpenOffice Calc. It wasn't long
before I ran into the wall. I found its limitations surprisingly fast.
What are you supposed to use that crap for? That definitely beats me.
Maybe it's not the same thing with AbiWord, I don't know, I never use
word processors. Or almost never, anyway. When I write, I usually
write in mailing lists or forums, or in text editors (scripting or
programming – not that I am any good at it, though).

Johnny Rosenberg

 I think what happens is someone thinks something would be a nice feature.
 They ask a focus group (or survey)

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013/6/8 Jean-Francois Nifenecker jean-francois.nifenec...@laposte.net:
 Hi,

 jumping in the bandwaggon..

 Le 08/06/2013 18:33, Jay Lozier a écrit :


 I think there is a basic agreement that at least 25% of the features in
 MSO could be eliminated and no one would notice. I would not be
 surprised if LO and AOO could eliminate about 20% of the features
 without anyone noticing. I am suggesting any features be eliminated just
 that all office suites could probably go on a feature diet and actually
 improve their products. Just that some need a more rigorous diet than
 others.


 An idea I've been having for 20+ years now is: how about an office
 automation tool (wordprocessor, spreadsheet, whatever) that would come with
 the bare minimal features (define: bare minimal) and could be enhanced by
 adding features through a plugin system à la LibreOffice extensions?

 This way, anyone could tailor the software to their exact needs and the
 tools devs would focus on dedicated areas to add features.

 --
 Jean-Francois Nifenecker, Bordeaux

I can see a few problems with that, but I still agree it could be a good idea.
I'm also not sure how easy it would be for the developers to achieve this.
It should be easy to find and install the plug-ins without leaving the
program, I think.


Johnny Rosenberg

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Marc Grober

On 6/8/13 8:59 AM, Jean-Francois Nifenecker wrote:

 An idea I've been having for 20+ years now is: how about an office
 automation tool (wordprocessor, spreadsheet, whatever) that would come
 with the bare minimal features (define: bare minimal) and could be
 enhanced by adding features through a plugin system à la LibreOffice
 extensions?

 This way, anyone could tailor the software to their exact needs and
 the tools devs would focus on dedicated areas to add features.

seems to me this is what Borland tried to do with Sprint.

for most purposes I would probably be satisfied with wordstar - much
bloat is attached to go going from simple word processing to what passed
for desktop publishing 20 years ago

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 12:59:13 -0400, Jean-Francois Nifenecker  
jean-francois.nifenec...@laposte.net wrote:



Hi,

jumping in the bandwaggon..

Le 08/06/2013 18:33, Jay Lozier a écrit :


I think there is a basic agreement that at least 25% of the features in
MSO could be eliminated and no one would notice. I would not be
surprised if LO and AOO could eliminate about 20% of the features
without anyone noticing. I am suggesting any features be eliminated just
that all office suites could probably go on a feature diet and actually
improve their products. Just that some need a more rigorous diet than
others.


An idea I've been having for 20+ years now is: how about an office  
automation tool (wordprocessor, spreadsheet, whatever) that would come  
with the bare minimal features (define: bare minimal) and could be  
enhanced by adding features through a plugin system à la LibreOffice  
extensions?


This way, anyone could tailor the software to their exact needs and the  
tools devs would focus on dedicated areas to add features.




I like the concept that are core features combined with extensions/plugins  
to add little used features. Also, extensions/plugins would allow the dev  
team to focus on the core code and not run done every minor feature that  
is wanted. And the extenstions/plugins could be developed and maintained  
by others who are not part of the dev team.


This requires determining what are truly core features and have a robust  
API/SDK to make extension development more robust.

--
Jay Lozier
jsloz...@gmail.com

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Tom Davies

Hi :)
Isn't it called Abiword?
Regards from 
Tom :)  






 From: Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com
To: users.global.libreoffice.org users@global.libreoffice.org 
Sent: Saturday, 8 June 2013, 18:14
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO
 

On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 12:59:13 -0400, Jean-Francois Nifenecker  
jean-francois.nifenec...@laposte.net wrote:

 Hi,

 jumping in the bandwaggon..

 Le 08/06/2013 18:33, Jay Lozier a écrit :

 I think there is a basic agreement that at least 25% of the features in
 MSO could be eliminated and no one would notice. I would not be
 surprised if LO and AOO could eliminate about 20% of the features
 without anyone noticing. I am suggesting any features be eliminated just
 that all office suites could probably go on a feature diet and actually
 improve their products. Just that some need a more rigorous diet than
 others.

 An idea I've been having for 20+ years now is: how about an office  
 automation tool (wordprocessor, spreadsheet, whatever) that would come  
 with the bare minimal features (define: bare minimal) and could be  
 enhanced by adding features through a plugin system à la LibreOffice  
 extensions?

 This way, anyone could tailor the software to their exact needs and the  
 tools devs would focus on dedicated areas to add features.


I like the concept that are core features combined with extensions/plugins  
to add little used features. Also, extensions/plugins would allow the dev  
team to focus on the core code and not run done every minor feature that  
is wanted. And the extenstions/plugins could be developed and maintained  
by others who are not part of the dev team.

This requires determining what are truly core features and have a robust  
API/SDK to make extension development more robust.
-- 
Jay Lozier
jsloz...@gmail.com

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Doug


On 06/08/2013 11:32 AM, Jay Lozier wrote:

On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 10:16:42 -0400, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:


Hi :)
That point keeps coming up but it best said the other way around
80% of MSO almost never gets used.




/snip/



How many people know how to mail-merge?  Not as many as know how to use
bold!!

Regards from
Tom :)


What the heck is a mail merge? I use Thunderbird, i wouldn't have any idea
how to do any kind of mail in a word processor. And I don't know why I'd 
ever

want to.--doug




--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO


On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 14:16:31 -0400, Doug dmcgarr...@optonline.net wrote:


On 06/08/2013 11:32 AM, Jay Lozier wrote:

On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 10:16:42 -0400, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:


Hi :)
That point keeps coming up but it best said the other way around
80% of MSO almost never gets used.




/snip/



How many people know how to mail-merge?  Not as many as know how to use
bold!!

Regards from
Tom :)


What the heck is a mail merge? I use Thunderbird, i wouldn't have any  
idea
how to do any kind of mail in a word processor. And I don't know why I'd  
ever

want to.--doug


Mail-merge is using a Write document as template and inserting data into  
various fields in the template from a spreadsheet, table, or database. The  
final set of documents can be mailed or more rarely emailed to the  
recipients.


--
Jay Lozier
jsloz...@gmail.com

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Felmon Davis


On Sat, 8 Jun 2013, Doug wrote:


On 06/08/2013 11:32 AM, Jay Lozier wrote:

On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 10:16:42 -0400, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:


Hi :)
That point keeps coming up but it best said the other way around
80% of MSO almost never gets used.




/snip/



How many people know how to mail-merge?  Not as many as know how to use
bold!!

Regards from
Tom :)


What the heck is a mail merge? I use Thunderbird, i wouldn't have any idea
how to do any kind of mail in a word processor. And I don't know why I'd 
ever

want to.--doug


not knowing what it is, it's understandable why you'd not know why 
you'd want to. g


you want to send mail (usually printed stuff) to 1000 individuals but 
personalized so each letter has the individual's name, address, 
perhaps a personal greeting like good morning, doug!


you can modify each letter by hand a thousand times or use mail merge.

I would love to do it, also for emails, but for my purposes I probably 
need to set up a database instead.


F.

--
Felmon Davis

Never make anything simple and efficient when a way can be found to
make it complex and wonderful.


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Jean-Francois Nifenecker


Le 08/06/2013 20:16, Doug a écrit :


What the heck is a mail merge? I use Thunderbird, i wouldn't have any idea
how to do any kind of mail in a word processor. And I don't know why I'd
ever want to.



Say you want to send an invitation by mail to your 10.000 friends. You 
simply write the letter once with holes within. Then you merge (hence 
the name) the letter and the missing data which is stored in a seperate 
database (LibO uses the datasource term). As a result you get 10.000 
different letters, from just one.


Of course, a private person might not use that feature frequently, but 
any company which wants to advertise does this very often.

--
Jean-Francois Nifenecker, Bordeaux

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013/6/8 Jean-Francois Nifenecker jean-francois.nifenec...@laposte.net:
 Le 08/06/2013 20:16, Doug a écrit :


 What the heck is a mail merge? I use Thunderbird, i wouldn't have any idea
 how to do any kind of mail in a word processor. And I don't know why I'd
 ever want to.


 Say you want to send an invitation by mail to your 10.000 friends. You
 simply write the letter once with holes within. Then you merge (hence the
 name) the letter and the missing data which is stored in a seperate
 database (LibO uses the datasource term). As a result you get 10.000
 different letters, from just one.

 Of course, a private person might not use that feature frequently, but any
 company which wants to advertise does this very often.

Especially if we talk about 10 000 friends. I don't even know ig I met
10 000 people all together in my whole life yet… I think I have like
10 friends…


Johnny Rosenberg


 --
 Jean-Francois Nifenecker, Bordeaux


 --
 To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
 Problems?
 http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
 Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
 List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
 All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
 deleted

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Doug


On 06/08/2013 02:44 PM, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:

2013/6/8 Jean-Francois Nifenecker jean-francois.nifenec...@laposte.net:

Le 08/06/2013 20:16, Doug a écrit :



What the heck is a mail merge? I use Thunderbird, i wouldn't have any idea
how to do any kind of mail in a word processor. And I don't know why I'd
ever want to.



Say you want to send an invitation by mail to your 10.000 friends. You
simply write the letter once with holes within. Then you merge (hence the
name) the letter and the missing data which is stored in a seperate
database (LibO uses the datasource term). As a result you get 10.000
different letters, from just one.

Of course, a private person might not use that feature frequently, but any
company which wants to advertise does this very often.


Especially if we talk about 10 000 friends. I don't even know ig I met
10 000 people all together in my whole life yet… I think I have like
10 friends…


Johnny Rosenberg


Thanx everybody. Now I know what mailmerge is. I don't think I would 
ever need it. If I send mail to more than 5 people at once it would be a 
lot.


--doug
--
Blessed are the peacemakers..for they shall be shot at from both sides. 
--A.M.Greeley


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Mirosław Zalewski

On 08/06/2013 at 18:59, Jean-Francois Nifenecker jean-
francois.nifenec...@laposte.net wrote:

 An idea I've been having for 20+ years now is: how about an office
 automation tool (wordprocessor, spreadsheet, whatever) that would come
 with the bare minimal features (define: bare minimal) and could be
 enhanced by adding features through a plugin system à la LibreOffice
 extensions?

I believe they are called TeX (for word processing) and R (for 
calculations[1]).

But there is a reason they never get substantial mainstream market share. Most 
users simply do not care if software is bloated and slow as long as it gets 
work done. Only professionals are ever interested in investing time into 
adjustments that will benefit them in longer run.

[1] Yes, I know that calling R program for calculations is radical 
oversimplification.
-- 
Best regards
Mirosław Zalewski

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread T. R. Valentine

On 8 June 2013 07:44, Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com wrote:

 As I think about software evolution, there was little consistency back in
 the DOS days. For example, Wordstar had its Ctrl-key combinations that were
 hard to learn but, once learned, made touch typists *very* proficient.
 WordPerfect preferred the Function key commands.

Yes, but people who used WordPerfect extensively (as I did in the
early 1990s) knew all 48 functions (plain function, Shift+function,
Alt+function, Ctrl+function) and were, indeed, very proficient. Even
though I only typed about 90 wpm, I could crank out stuff as quickly
as much faster typists.

Because I knew the function keys, I did not use WordPerfect's menu
card which was designed to sit on the top of the keyboard over the
function keys — but when I was away from my desk people would use my
PC for printing because I had a faster and nicer printer and would
bring their menu card so they could print and whatever else they
needed to do  and frequently leave it behind. I'd return to my
desk, find the menu card and toss it in the overhead bin — had quite a
collection of those things!


 One of the Windows selling points was that all of the programs could have a
 consistent UI. All programs followed the same basic menu structure (File,
 Edit, Format, Tools, etc.). While each program had its own quirks (page
 layout under File?), the general consistency of menus made programs
 relatively easy to figure out.

I always wondered why MS Word had the Page Format under the File
command instead of under the Format command, but got used to it. Until
the ribbon, I typically used the Alt key plus keystrokes as I do in
LO. It just doesn't make sense to me to move from the keyboard to a
mouse whilst typing text. I've become accustomed to the ribbon (I
teach MS Word classes), and the Alt key plus keystrokes is still
there, but it seems much harder to use. However, I must have (in both
LO and MSO) my keyboard shortcuts and create keyboard shortcuts for
things I frequently use. The more I can keep my fingers over the
keyboard, the better.


 More often-used commands could be attached to icons streamlining the
 process.

Or to keyboard shortcuts.

 But, the icon toolbars, while quick and easy, were never intended
 to *replace* the menu structure, just supplement it.

I don't look at it that way. What I stress in all my classes is that
there are multiple ways to do things and none of them are more correct
than the others. I recommend users find a way with which they are most
comfortable and stick with it. I may think it a waste of time to move
my hand to the mouse, move it until my eye picks up the pointer on the
screen, move it to the bold format icon and click on it and then
return to the keyboard (and repeat to turn it bold formatting off),
but that doesn't make it more right. Just as different people have
different ways of learning, I think different people have different
degrees of comfort with the various ways to execute commands.


 Toolbars are, by their
 nature, very much subject to user preferences. When installing LO, I
 immediately customize the toolbars to eliminate icons I never use.

I would encourage everyone to do this. Working with the default
arrangement rarely makes sense. It should be viewed as a starting
point.

--
T. R. Valentine
Your friends will argue with you. Your enemies don't care.
'When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food
and clothes.' -- Erasmus

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-08 Thread Steve Edmonds



On 2013-06-08 12:10, Virgil Arrington wrote:
This has been fascinating reading all of the opinions about user 
interfaces and the dreaded ribbon. I've not found *anyone* who 
actually likes the ribbon. I agree with several of you who have 
observed that the ribbon makes using styles much harder. And, since 
it's harder to use styles, it only makes it that much harder for me to 
teach styles to my students and effectively persuade them to use styles.


It makes me wonder if MS did any type of focus group testing before 
foisting it upon us. And, if they did do such testing, who did they 
get in the focus groups?


Like many of you, I have used computers for many, many years. (I go 
back to the PC-Write for DOS days), and I can honestly say that, over 
the decades, I have found very few UI changes that have actually made 
a difference in helping me be more productive.


I've been playing recently with WriteMonkey, a markdown text editor, 
and I must confess, I like the UI with absolutely no toolbars or 
ribbons; just keystroke combinations and some basic menus. Works for me.


Virgil

It's like the introduction of the mouse with the keyboard number pad. 
Taking your hand off the mouse to enter numbers is a waste of time so 
you have to learn to be left moused to keep productivity up.

Steve


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO



Hi :)
The MS Office Eula makes similar claims on the rights of work produced 
using their software.  MS owns your work!  You don't!  It'd be 
interesting to see that one stand up in court though.  Too many 
precedents exist where MS has not fought to enforce that part of their 
own Eula.  So, I can't imagine any judge anywhere allowing that.  Hmm, 
maybe MS have changed their Eula since i last read it thoroughly about a decade 
or so ago.  


I too wouldn't touch Kingsoft with a barge pole.  I want to steer towards using 
formats that will be 
around and usable in a few years time.  I want to be able to open 
documents maybe 10-20 years from now without having to struggle against 
malware and without having to try to find long-dead versions of long 
dead software produced by a company that may not even exist by then.  


What i tend to find is that people use all sorts of rubbishy excuses for why 
they 'cant' move away from certain software.  They moan and grumble 
about petty issues in an alternative they have been handed but then go 
and find some other alternative that they feel more in control of because they 
chose it.  Once they have made the break away from that certain software they 
become more reasonable about looking at other 
alternatives realistically.  


One of the commonest grumbles i hear about LO (at the moment) is that it 
uses the old interface and not the nice new ribbon-bar.  So, 'obviously' LO is 
old!  (Easy to see how FUD develops, right?).  Kingsoft neatly 
deal with that and such grumblers can now be pointed towards that as an 
alternative.  Of course when i do that i will still be quite disparaging about 
the ribbon-bar specifically and about proprietary software (and 
formats) in general but at least now i can sound like it's not just sour 
grapes, 
just because LO hasn't got it.  Now i can be seen to be offering genuine 
choices rather than trying to herd people in a direction they might not want to 
go.  


Of course any fool that does escape the one trap by jumping into another 
is still able to completely jump free by trying out LO at some point in 
the future.  Perhaps by then they will be ready.  


Regards from 
Tom :)  




 From: Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com
To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk 
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013, 1:46
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO
 

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 20:09:48 -0400, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk  
wrote:

 Hi :)
 That comment looks like FUD to me.  Where are the links to substantiate  
 his claims?  There is a lot of FUD about China at the moment.  Perhaps  
 some is true but western journalism has it's own biases so getting at  
 the truth is a tad tricky.  
 Also it's not Cnet that are recommending Kingsoft.  It's only the  
 author's opinion.  PLus it's got a question mark after it.  If you  
 search through Cnet you will probably find similar claims in titles of  
 articles about LibreOffice


 This page in Wikipedia
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_office_suites
 shows Kingsoft has been around since 1988 and is available for Windows  
 and GnuLinux (incl Android).  LibreOffice's first release date is  
 listed as 2010 which just shows how tricky it is to adequately report on  
 such things.  Many people would say the first release of LO is the same  
 as OpenOffice and that should be the same as StarOffice's first release  
 date over a decade ago.  I just had to do a little editing there myself  
 but if you check the history you can see that the lines about Kingsoft  
 have been unchanged for ages, possibly years.

 Regards from

 Tom :)

Kingsoft appears to use a proprietary format with MSO support. Also, they  
only have Writer, Calc, and Impress equivalents. Those two issues make me  
wary about the package: poor ODF support and limit suite. The ODF issue is  
philosophical; I prefer to use an open, ISO format that means my files are  
much less likely to be orphans in future. Most long time computer users  
have data that is in obsolete file formats if not on obsolete media.




 
 From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com
 To: LibreO - Marketing Global market...@global.libreoffice.org;  
 LibreO - Users Global users@global.libreoffice.org
 Sent: Thursday, 6 June 2013, 19:48
 Subject: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO  
 alternative is not LO



 I never even heard of this office packages company.

 If the commenter is correct, then CNET really need to rethink their
 recommendations.

 -


 http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33153_7-57587824-10391733/kingsoft-office-2013-the-best-free-microsoft-office-alternative/


 Kingsoft Office 2013: The best free Microsoft Office alternative?

 Not only does it have the best interface around, it also brings
 innovations like tabbed document viewing and drag-and-drop paragraph
 adjustment.

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-07 Thread Virgil Arrington

If I recall, I tried Kingsoft a few years ago, and found it woefully 
deficient for my needs. I don't recall specifically what the issue(s) were, 
but I recall concluding that it couldn't hold a candle to LO.


As to the Ribbon, I pray LO never adopts it. A short while ago, we had a 
discussion about using paragraph styles. In my experience with my technology 
students, the Ribbon tends to encourage direct formatting of paragraphs by 
having the formatting commands readily available. Yes, the Ribbon is easy; 
yes, it is (generally) well organized. But, that very ease and organization 
steers a person into thinking that the Ribbon is the *only* way to work, and 
thus the user never learns to appreciate the great advantages to using 
styles. Yes, styles are found on the Ribbon, but in such a way that many 
users haven't a clue as to what they mean or how to use them. I much prefer 
the hierarchical listing of styles docked to right side of my document.


Virgil




-Original Message- 
From: Tom Davies

Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 5:41 AM
To: Jay Lozier ; Users@Global.LibreOffice.Org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO




Hi :)
The MS Office Eula makes similar claims on the rights of work produced
using their software.  MS owns your work!  You don't!  It'd be
interesting to see that one stand up in court though.  Too many
precedents exist where MS has not fought to enforce that part of their
own Eula.  So, I can't imagine any judge anywhere allowing that.  Hmm,
maybe MS have changed their Eula since i last read it thoroughly about a 
decade or so ago.



I too wouldn't touch Kingsoft with a barge pole.  I want to steer towards 
using formats that will be

around and usable in a few years time.  I want to be able to open
documents maybe 10-20 years from now without having to struggle against
malware and without having to try to find long-dead versions of long
dead software produced by a company that may not even exist by then.


What i tend to find is that people use all sorts of rubbishy excuses for why 
they 'cant' move away from certain software.  They moan and grumble

about petty issues in an alternative they have been handed but then go
and find some other alternative that they feel more in control of because 
they chose it.  Once they have made the break away from that certain 
software they become more reasonable about looking at other

alternatives realistically.


One of the commonest grumbles i hear about LO (at the moment) is that it
uses the old interface and not the nice new ribbon-bar.  So, 'obviously' LO 
is old!  (Easy to see how FUD develops, right?).  Kingsoft neatly

deal with that and such grumblers can now be pointed towards that as an
alternative.  Of course when i do that i will still be quite disparaging 
about the ribbon-bar specifically and about proprietary software (and
formats) in general but at least now i can sound like it's not just sour 
grapes,
just because LO hasn't got it.  Now i can be seen to be offering genuine 
choices rather than trying to herd people in a direction they might not want 
to go.



Of course any fool that does escape the one trap by jumping into another
is still able to completely jump free by trying out LO at some point in
the future.  Perhaps by then they will be ready.


Regards from
Tom :)





From: Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com
To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013, 1:46
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO



On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 20:09:48 -0400, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:


Hi :)
That comment looks like FUD to me.  Where are the links to substantiate
his claims?  There is a lot of FUD about China at the moment.  Perhaps
some is true but western journalism has it's own biases so getting at
the truth is a tad tricky.
Also it's not Cnet that are recommending Kingsoft.  It's only the
author's opinion.  PLus it's got a question mark after it.  If you
search through Cnet you will probably find similar claims in titles of
articles about LibreOffice


This page in Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_office_suites
shows Kingsoft has been around since 1988 and is available for Windows
and GnuLinux (incl Android).  LibreOffice's first release date is
listed as 2010 which just shows how tricky it is to adequately report on
such things.  Many people would say the first release of LO is the same
as OpenOffice and that should be the same as StarOffice's first release
date over a decade ago.  I just had to do a little editing there myself
but if you check the history you can see that the lines about Kingsoft
have been unchanged for ages, possibly years.

Regards from

Tom :)


Kingsoft appears to use a proprietary format with MSO support. Also, they
only have Writer, Calc, and Impress equivalents. Those two issues make me
wary about the package: poor ODF

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

Hi :)
I also dislike the ribbon-bar.  It's faster and easier to hunt around menus to 
find things you don't use all the time and/or can't remember exactly where they 
are or can't figure out the 'MS way of thinking' in order to find.  Plus people 
often see things that are unfamiliar and occasionally explore and thus learn 
new capabilities.  

However that's not the point.  A lot of morons now demand the ribbon-bar and 
can't cope without it.  A lot of them seem to think a program is old and 
rubbish if it doesn't have one.  Why should i use the old looking one instead 
of the posh new one? [errr, because it's better and easier to use and you 
won't make such a nightmare mess of things as you normally do].  

Kingsoft fills that demand and might be a useful stepping stone on the 
migration away from dependence on MS.  I wont be using it myself, if i can 
possibly avoid it, but it's up to the morons to decide what they want to use 
even 'if' that turns out to only be temporarily.  LO is better so most of them 
will eventually migrate the whole way.  Getting people to move is tough but 
once they have started it's easier to keep them going.  
Regards from 
Tom :)  







 From: Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com
To: Users@Global.LibreOffice.Org 
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013, 12:45
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO
 

If I recall, I tried Kingsoft a few years ago, and found it woefully deficient 
for my needs. I don't recall specifically what the issue(s) were, but I recall 
concluding that it couldn't hold a candle to LO.

As to the Ribbon, I pray LO never adopts it. A short while ago, we had a 
discussion about using paragraph styles. In my experience with my technology 
students, the Ribbon tends to encourage direct formatting of paragraphs by 
having the formatting commands readily available. Yes, the Ribbon is easy; 
yes, it is (generally) well organized. But, that very ease and organization 
steers a person into thinking that the Ribbon is the *only* way to work, and 
thus the user never learns to appreciate the great advantages to using styles. 
Yes, styles are found on the Ribbon, but in such a way that many users haven't 
a clue as to what they mean or how to use them. I much prefer the hierarchical 
listing of styles docked to right side of my document.

Virgil




-Original Message- 
From: Tom Davies
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 5:41 AM
To: Jay Lozier ; Users@Global.LibreOffice.Org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO



Hi :)
The MS Office Eula makes similar claims on the rights of work produced
using their software.  MS owns your work!  You don't!  It'd be
interesting to see that one stand up in court though.  Too many
precedents exist where MS has not fought to enforce that part of their
own Eula.  So, I can't imagine any judge anywhere allowing that.  Hmm,
maybe MS have changed their Eula since i last read it thoroughly about a 
decade or so ago.


I too wouldn't touch Kingsoft with a barge pole.  I want to steer towards 
using formats that will be
around and usable in a few years time.  I want to be able to open
documents maybe 10-20 years from now without having to struggle against
malware and without having to try to find long-dead versions of long
dead software produced by a company that may not even exist by then.


What i tend to find is that people use all sorts of rubbishy excuses for why 
they 'cant' move away from certain software.  They moan and grumble
about petty issues in an alternative they have been handed but then go
and find some other alternative that they feel more in control of because 
they chose it.  Once they have made the break away from that certain 
software they become more reasonable about looking at other
alternatives realistically.


One of the commonest grumbles i hear about LO (at the moment) is that it
uses the old interface and not the nice new ribbon-bar.  So, 'obviously' LO 
is old!  (Easy to see how FUD develops, right?).  Kingsoft neatly
deal with that and such grumblers can now be pointed towards that as an
alternative.  Of course when i do that i will still be quite disparaging 
about the ribbon-bar specifically and about proprietary software (and
formats) in general but at least now i can sound like it's not just sour 
grapes,
just because LO hasn't got it.  Now i can be seen to be offering genuine 
choices rather than trying to herd people in a direction they might not want 
to go.


Of course any fool that does escape the one trap by jumping into another
is still able to completely jump free by trying out LO at some point in
the future.  Perhaps by then they will be ready.


Regards from
Tom :)




 From: Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com
To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013, 1:46
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-07 Thread Kevin O'Brien


On 6/7/2013 7:45 AM, Virgil Arrington wrote:


As to the Ribbon, I pray LO never adopts it. A short while ago, we had 
a discussion about using paragraph styles. In my experience with my 
technology students, the Ribbon tends to encourage direct formatting 
of paragraphs by having the formatting commands readily available. 
Yes, the Ribbon is easy; yes, it is (generally) well organized. But, 
that very ease and organization steers a person into thinking that the 
Ribbon is the *only* way to work, and thus the user never learns to 
appreciate the great advantages to using styles. Yes, styles are found 
on the Ribbon, but in such a way that many users haven't a clue as to 
what they mean or how to use them. I much prefer the hierarchical 
listing of styles docked to right side of my document.


It may be a coincidence, but when MSO started to use the ribbon I found 
that I could not use Styles effectively any longer. I doubt any of the 
actual functionality went away, but I kept getting lost trying to do 
things I had been doing previously. So I also hope LO never goes there.


Regards,

--
Kevin B. O'Brien
zwil...@zwilnik.com
There's a difference between tempting fate and giving it a lap dance.


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-07 Thread jorge

Hi all:

I have installed Kingsoft in my Android Tablet because at this moment I
think is the best option in that plataform and we don't have LibreOffice
or OpenOffice for Android. But I didn't know that they have a version
for windows.

I didn't use it a lot because I use my tablet for others things, but
when I used it, its perfomance is good.

Of course, until I remember it doesn't have all the features that
LibreOffice or OpenOffice have (At least as I rememberd and I didn't use
my last update of this program in my Tablet to know is it it is true as
I tell you)

Regards,

Jorge Rodríguez

El jue, 06-06-2013 a las 17:24 -0400, Kracked_P_P---webmaster escribió:
well I never heard of that product and if there is any truth of what the
commenter states, I would not want to try it.

I really do not see any free office product that is better than
LibreOffice. I have been using LibreOffice since it was just about to
be released off of the release candidate stage. Have been supporting
LO since 3.3.2 or 3.3.3. I have been handing out brochures of one type
or another promoting LO, and CDs and DVDs with LO on them since the
spring/summer of 2011.

I believe that LibreOffice is better than MSO, not just a free
alternative to MSO. I stopped buying MSO with the 2003 release.

So, I do not agree with your article.

I believe in LibreOffice and all of its pros and cons. I use it and
promote it.

So, I have never heard of Kingsoft's office package. I have never seen
any other articles stating that Kingsoft was a good or great free package.

On 06/06/2013 02:55 PM, jack wallen wrote:
The author of that article was me...just so ya know.

I never even heard of this office packages company.

If the commenter is correct, then CNET really need to rethink their
recommendations.

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33153_7-57587824-10391733/kingsoft-office-2013-the-best-free-microsoft-office-alternative/

Kingsoft Office 2013: The best free Microsoft Office alternative?

Not only does it have the best interface around, it also brings
innovations like tabbed document viewing and drag-and-drop paragraph
adjustment.
Rick Broida
by Rick Broida
June 5, 2013 10:52 AM PDT

---

One of the replies to that article is as follows
---

the_brigadier
25 minutes ago

You do know Kingsoft is a communist Chinese company whose nation has
been conducting unrelenting hack attacks to strip America of all its
technology? If you can't build it, steal it is their credo. What better
way to open up a million backdoors then by offering free software that
exactly emulates Microsoft's flagship program.

By the way read their EULA very carefully. IT CLEARLY STATES THAT
ANYTHING CREATED USING THEIR SOFTWARE BECOMES THE PROPERTY OF KINGSOFT.
Have you read it Karyn? I downloaded this software several years ago
read that EULA and used Revo to deepscan uninstall that software. It had
put tendrils all through my computer. Revo is very good and got it all,
but don't be fooled.

This is part and parcel to China's hacking attempts and for cnet to
recommend it is both incredibly naive and questionable at best.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted

--
Atentamente,

Jorge Rodríguez

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-07 Thread Kracked_P_P---webmaster


On 06/07/2013 05:41 AM, Tom Davies wrote:


Hi :)
The MS Office Eula makes similar claims on the rights of work produced
using their software.  MS owns your work!  You don't!  It'd be
interesting to see that one stand up in court though.  Too many
precedents exist where MS has not fought to enforce that part of their
own Eula.  So, I can't imagine any judge anywhere allowing that.  Hmm,
maybe MS have changed their Eula since i last read it thoroughly about a decade 
or so ago.


I too wouldn't touch Kingsoft with a barge pole.  I want to steer towards using 
formats that will be
around and usable in a few years time.  I want to be able to open
documents maybe 10-20 years from now without having to struggle against
malware and without having to try to find long-dead versions of long
dead software produced by a company that may not even exist by then.


What i tend to find is that people use all sorts of rubbishy excuses for why 
they 'cant' move away from certain software.  They moan and grumble
about petty issues in an alternative they have been handed but then go
and find some other alternative that they feel more in control of because they 
chose it.  Once they have made the break away from that certain software they 
become more reasonable about looking at other
alternatives realistically.


One of the commonest grumbles i hear about LO (at the moment) is that it
uses the old interface and not the nice new ribbon-bar.  So, 'obviously' LO is 
old!  (Easy to see how FUD develops, right?).  Kingsoft neatly
deal with that and such grumblers can now be pointed towards that as an
alternative.  Of course when i do that i will still be quite disparaging about 
the ribbon-bar specifically and about proprietary software (and
formats) in general but at least now i can sound like it's not just sour 
grapes,
just because LO hasn't got it.  Now i can be seen to be offering genuine 
choices rather than trying to herd people in a direction they might not want to 
go.


I was talking to a professor a few days ago.  He does not like the newer 
versions due in part to the way they keep changing the interface and 
how to do things. I made sure he know about LO.  He loved the multi 
language part as well.


I did not like the ribbon menu system either.  Sure, the type of 
interface that LO uses has been around for years, but that does not mean 
you need to change it.  Refreshing or redesigning the interface, just 
because you can, is not a reason to.  One of the good things about LO as 
it went from 3.3 though 4.0 is the way the interface does not change, or 
has a slow change so it does not stand up and slap your face with the 
changes.  Once you learn what is where and how to do things, changing 
that will cause problems.  Sure the interface could use some 
enhancements, like the persona addition, but to keep our users happy, 
you must not make the users relearn how to do things or where are the 
menu options are now located.



.


Of course any fool that does escape the one trap by jumping into another
is still able to completely jump free by trying out LO at some point in
the future.  Perhaps by then they will be ready.


Regards from
Tom :)





From: Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com
To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013, 1:46
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative 
is not LO


On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 20:09:48 -0400, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:


Hi :)
That comment looks like FUD to me.  Where are the links to substantiate
his claims?  There is a lot of FUD about China at the moment.  Perhaps
some is true but western journalism has it's own biases so getting at
the truth is a tad tricky.
Also it's not Cnet that are recommending Kingsoft.  It's only the
author's opinion.  PLus it's got a question mark after it.  If you
search through Cnet you will probably find similar claims in titles of
articles about LibreOffice


This page in Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_office_suites
shows Kingsoft has been around since 1988 and is available for Windows
and GnuLinux (incl Android).  LibreOffice's first release date is
listed as 2010 which just shows how tricky it is to adequately report on
such things.  Many people would say the first release of LO is the same
as OpenOffice and that should be the same as StarOffice's first release
date over a decade ago.  I just had to do a little editing there myself
but if you check the history you can see that the lines about Kingsoft
have been unchanged for ages, possibly years.

Regards from

Tom :)


Kingsoft appears to use a proprietary format with MSO support. Also, they
only have Writer, Calc, and Impress equivalents. Those two issues make me
wary about the package: poor ODF support and limit suite. The ODF issue is
philosophical; I prefer to use an open, ISO format that means my files are
much less likely to be orphans in future. Most long time computer

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

Hi :)
+1
Good to see another professor that is not a moron about soemthing outside of 
her/his specialism!
Regards from 
Tom :)  







 From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com
To: users@global.libreoffice.org 
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013, 15:18
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO
 

On 06/07/2013 05:41 AM, Tom Davies wrote:

 Hi :)
 The MS Office Eula makes similar claims on the rights of work produced
 using their software.  MS owns your work!  You don't!  It'd be
 interesting to see that one stand up in court though.  Too many
 precedents exist where MS has not fought to enforce that part of their
 own Eula.  So, I can't imagine any judge anywhere allowing that.  Hmm,
 maybe MS have changed their Eula since i last read it thoroughly about a 
 decade or so ago.


 I too wouldn't touch Kingsoft with a barge pole.  I want to steer towards 
 using formats that will be
 around and usable in a few years time.  I want to be able to open
 documents maybe 10-20 years from now without having to struggle against
 malware and without having to try to find long-dead versions of long
 dead software produced by a company that may not even exist by then.


 What i tend to find is that people use all sorts of rubbishy excuses for why 
 they 'cant' move away from certain software.  They moan and grumble
 about petty issues in an alternative they have been handed but then go
 and find some other alternative that they feel more in control of because 
 they chose it.  Once they have made the break away from that certain 
 software they become more reasonable about looking at other
 alternatives realistically.


 One of the commonest grumbles i hear about LO (at the moment) is that it
 uses the old interface and not the nice new ribbon-bar.  So, 'obviously' LO 
 is old!  (Easy to see how FUD develops, right?).  Kingsoft neatly
 deal with that and such grumblers can now be pointed towards that as an
 alternative.  Of course when i do that i will still be quite disparaging 
 about the ribbon-bar specifically and about proprietary software (and
 formats) in general but at least now i can sound like it's not just sour 
 grapes,
 just because LO hasn't got it.  Now i can be seen to be offering genuine 
 choices rather than trying to herd people in a direction they might not want 
 to go.

I was talking to a professor a few days ago.  He does not like the newer 
versions due in part to the way they keep changing the interface and 
how to do things. I made sure he know about LO.  He loved the multi 
language part as well.

I did not like the ribbon menu system either.  Sure, the type of 
interface that LO uses has been around for years, but that does not mean 
you need to change it.  Refreshing or redesigning the interface, just 
because you can, is not a reason to.  One of the good things about LO as 
it went from 3.3 though 4.0 is the way the interface does not change, or 
has a slow change so it does not stand up and slap your face with the 
changes.  Once you learn what is where and how to do things, changing 
that will cause problems.  Sure the interface could use some 
enhancements, like the persona addition, but to keep our users happy, 
you must not make the users relearn how to do things or where are the 
menu options are now located.


.

 Of course any fool that does escape the one trap by jumping into another
 is still able to completely jump free by trying out LO at some point in
 the future.  Perhaps by then they will be ready.


 Regards from
 Tom :)



 
 From: Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com
 To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
 Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013, 1:46
 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
 alternative is not LO


 On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 20:09:48 -0400, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk
 wrote:

 Hi :)
 That comment looks like FUD to me.  Where are the links to substantiate
 his claims?  There is a lot of FUD about China at the moment.  Perhaps
 some is true but western journalism has it's own biases so getting at
 the truth is a tad tricky.
 Also it's not Cnet that are recommending Kingsoft.  It's only the
 author's opinion.  PLus it's got a question mark after it.  If you
 search through Cnet you will probably find similar claims in titles of
 articles about LibreOffice


 This page in Wikipedia
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_office_suites
 shows Kingsoft has been around since 1988 and is available for Windows
 and GnuLinux (incl Android).  LibreOffice's first release date is
 listed as 2010 which just shows how tricky it is to adequately report on
 such things.  Many people would say the first release of LO is the same
 as OpenOffice and that should be the same as StarOffice's first release
 date over a decade ago.  I just had to do a little editing there myself
 but if you check the history you can see that the lines about

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-07 Thread Girvin R. Herr




Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:
snip
I was talking to a professor a few days ago.  He does not like the 
newer versions due in part to the way they keep changing the 
interface and how to do things. I made sure he know about LO.  He 
loved the multi language part as well.


I did not like the ribbon menu system either.  Sure, the type of 
interface that LO uses has been around for years, but that does not 
mean you need to change it.  Refreshing or redesigning the 
interface, just because you can, is not a reason to.  One of the good 
things about LO as it went from 3.3 though 4.0 is the way the 
interface does not change, or has a slow change so it does not stand 
up and slap your face with the changes.  Once you learn what is 
where and how to do things, changing that will cause problems.  Sure 
the interface could use some enhancements, like the persona 
addition, but to keep our users happy, you must not make the users 
relearn how to do things or where are the menu options are now located.


I have been using the OO/LO office suite since OO.o 1.x and now I am 
using LO 3.6.6.  (I have not tried LO 4.0.x, since I am still waiting 
for that less-buggy 4.1.5+ version to be released.)  However, I have 
found the incremental changes to the user interface refreshing.  OO.o 
and now LO, have made great improvements in this area with each 
release.  Nothing to make me go back to school to get my degree on how 
to use it, but the changes made the functions much easier to use and 
more intuitive.  To me, that is a big plus.  I want to be productive, 
not have to re-learn user interfaces with each new release.  Although I 
am a retired electronics engineer, I am _not_ a techno-geek who has to 
have the latest and greatest all the time.  You won't find me waiting 
for hours outside an Apple store to buy the latest iPhone.  If it works, 
don't fix it is my motto.

Girvin Herr

snip

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-07 Thread anne-ology

   so agree  :-)

'change for the sake of change' is so inane.



On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Girvin R. Herr
girvin.h...@sbcglobal.netwrote:


 Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:
 snip

 I was talking to a professor a few days ago.  He does not like the newer
 versions due in part to the way they keep changing the interface and how
 to do things. I made sure he know about LO.  He loved the multi language
 part as well.

 I did not like the ribbon menu system either.  Sure, the type of
 interface that LO uses has been around for years, but that does not mean
 you need to change it.  Refreshing or redesigning the interface, just
 because you can, is not a reason to.  One of the good things about LO as it
 went from 3.3 though 4.0 is the way the interface does not change, or has a
 slow change so it does not stand up and slap your face with the changes.
  Once you learn what is where and how to do things, changing that will
 cause problems.  Sure the interface could use some enhancements, like the
 persona addition, but to keep our users happy, you must not make the
 users relearn how to do things or where are the menu options are now
 located.

  I have been using the OO/LO office suite since OO.o 1.x and now I am
 using LO 3.6.6.  (I have not tried LO 4.0.x, since I am still waiting for
 that less-buggy 4.1.5+ version to be released.)  However, I have found the
 incremental changes to the user interface refreshing.  OO.o and now LO,
 have made great improvements in this area with each release.  Nothing to
 make me go back to school to get my degree on how to use it, but the
 changes made the functions much easier to use and more intuitive.  To me,
 that is a big plus.  I want to be productive, not have to re-learn user
 interfaces with each new release.  Although I am a retired electronics
 engineer, I am _not_ a techno-geek who has to have the latest and greatest
 all the time.  You won't find me waiting for hours outside an Apple store
 to buy the latest iPhone.  If it works, don't fix it is my motto.
 Girvin Herr



-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

Hi :)
+1 
and welcome back Anne-ology! :D  

On the other hand it's nice to see a competitor getting sucked into changes 
that it's not going to be able to keep up with.  Nice to see they offer the 
option so that we don't have to ;)
Regards from 
Tom :)  






 From: anne-ology lagin...@gmail.com
To: Girvin R. Herr girvin.h...@sbcglobal.net 
Cc: users@global.libreoffice.org 
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013, 18:42
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO
 

       so agree  :-)

'change for the sake of change' is so inane.



On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Girvin R. Herr
girvin.h...@sbcglobal.netwrote:


 Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:
 snip

 I was talking to a professor a few days ago.  He does not like the newer
 versions due in part to the way they keep changing the interface and how
 to do things. I made sure he know about LO.  He loved the multi language
 part as well.

 I did not like the ribbon menu system either.  Sure, the type of
 interface that LO uses has been around for years, but that does not mean
 you need to change it.  Refreshing or redesigning the interface, just
 because you can, is not a reason to.  One of the good things about LO as it
 went from 3.3 though 4.0 is the way the interface does not change, or has a
 slow change so it does not stand up and slap your face with the changes.
  Once you learn what is where and how to do things, changing that will
 cause problems.  Sure the interface could use some enhancements, like the
 persona addition, but to keep our users happy, you must not make the
 users relearn how to do things or where are the menu options are now
 located.

  I have been using the OO/LO office suite since OO.o 1.x and now I am
 using LO 3.6.6.  (I have not tried LO 4.0.x, since I am still waiting for
 that less-buggy 4.1.5+ version to be released.)  However, I have found the
 incremental changes to the user interface refreshing.  OO.o and now LO,
 have made great improvements in this area with each release.  Nothing to
 make me go back to school to get my degree on how to use it, but the
 changes made the functions much easier to use and more intuitive.  To me,
 that is a big plus.  I want to be productive, not have to re-learn user
 interfaces with each new release.  Although I am a retired electronics
 engineer, I am _not_ a techno-geek who has to have the latest and greatest
 all the time.  You won't find me waiting for hours outside an Apple store
 to buy the latest iPhone.  If it works, don't fix it is my motto.
 Girvin Herr



-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-07 Thread Kracked_P_P---webmaster


On 06/07/2013 01:30 PM, Girvin R. Herr wrote:



Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:
snip
I was talking to a professor a few days ago.  He does not like the 
newer versions due in part to the way they keep changing the 
interface and how to do things. I made sure he know about LO.  He 
loved the multi language part as well.


I did not like the ribbon menu system either.  Sure, the type of 
interface that LO uses has been around for years, but that does not 
mean you need to change it.  Refreshing or redesigning the 
interface, just because you can, is not a reason to.  One of the good 
things about LO as it went from 3.3 though 4.0 is the way the 
interface does not change, or has a slow change so it does not stand 
up and slap your face with the changes.  Once you learn what is 
where and how to do things, changing that will cause problems.  Sure 
the interface could use some enhancements, like the persona 
addition, but to keep our users happy, you must not make the users 
relearn how to do things or where are the menu options are now located.


I have been using the OO/LO office suite since OO.o 1.x and now I am 
using LO 3.6.6.  (I have not tried LO 4.0.x, since I am still waiting 
for that less-buggy 4.1.5+ version to be released.) However, I have 
found the incremental changes to the user interface refreshing.  OO.o 
and now LO, have made great improvements in this area with each 
release.  Nothing to make me go back to school to get my degree on how 
to use it, but the changes made the functions much easier to use and 
more intuitive. To me, that is a big plus.  I want to be productive, 
not have to re-learn user interfaces with each new release.  Although 
I am a retired electronics engineer, I am _not_ a techno-geek who has 
to have the latest and greatest all the time.  You won't find me 
waiting for hours outside an Apple store to buy the latest iPhone.  If 
it works, don't fix it is my motto.

Girvin Herr

snip



My last version of MSO was 2003.
I ran OOo back in those early days as well, and went to LO back just 
before they switched from the first RC version to the first full 
release version back in late winter 2011.  I currently use 4.0.3 on 
both Ubuntu and Win7 systems.


I like the fact that the LO interface, as a whole, has not changed. Yes, 
there are some added things, like the 1 or 2 page view and some other 
things.  But it looks mostly like it has been for that past year or 
two.  No need to relearn where the needed menu option has been 
relocated.  No need to figure out how to do needed options, since the 
process has not changes or the change is slow slight is seem like no 
change at all.


The one big complaint I have heard about MSO is the fact they seem to 
change how you do things, after you get use to doing it their new way 
after the last change.  I know many business people have stated that 
every time a new MSO is bought [or now rented] for their company 
users, they have to spend time and money while the users learn how to do 
the things they need to do with the changes that MSO has made in the 
interface and the steps to do the needed options.


I need to relearn the interface for Paint Shop Pro X5, when I used 
version 5 since the XP days.  But since I can not get v5 to install on 
Win7 Home Premium that my laptop has, I had to upgrade it and relearn 
the new interface.  Same with PSP 5 or X5 vs. GIMP.  The time it takes 
to relearn how to do the things that comes very easily to me with the 
old interface, well it is very frustrating to say the least and has 
taken 2 to 5 times longer to do the things I want/need to do.


So if people feel that way about the MSO interface changes, and want to 
use one that is easier use and clearer to understand, then they need to 
use a package - like LO - that does not have major interface changes.  I 
hope no one decides to revamp/refresh LO's interface to the point where 
our users will have the same frustrations as they did with the constant 
changes that MSO seems to relish in.




--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-07 Thread MR ZenWiz

I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but I just had to use Word10
again for a company spec, and I have to say...

One of the things about the ribbon that I find so annoying is that it
hides information.

Yes, it is organized in a way that some people find convenient and MS
obviously loves - for now.

But especially w.r.t. formatting and styles, I have the worst time
using it and most often resort to a nifty plugin that some brilliant
entrepreneur wrote and distributes for free that emulates the old
menus.

Specifically, I have trouble with two pieces of the styles.

One is that I can't tell from looking at even the expanded menu which
style the cursor paragraph is in. I'm pretty sure it is not my eyes or
color scheme, there's just no indication at all.  It is also difficult
to see what the font and font-size are at a glance.  All of these are
easily and prominently visible in the formatting toolbar that is
standard at the top of every document (in LO and any MSO before 2007).

The other is when I want to use a style that isn't on the menu, but I
know is available.  I've never been able to figure out how to find
them, where in the pre-ribbon menu system, I just click on the style
down-arrow on the formatting bar and poof.  Even if it's not there, I
can click on the formatting styles icon on the same bar and it is
trivial to make everything show up.  The ribbon just doesn't present
this capability, or it is so obscure that finding it is an adventure
all its own.

There are many other things I dislike about the ribbon.  The main one
is that the fundamental window toolbar style and
every-other-imaginable-kind-of-window-except-Chrome menu bar have been
around since the dawn of (all?) windowing systems, so around 30+
years, but MS just couldn't make it better, they had to mangle it
completely and use the 2007 and newer versions to force users into
their new world.

Whatever happened to meeting the users' needs, rather than mandating
their changes?

/soapbox

Maybe I'm just a traditionalist, but I've seen the whole gamut from
CP/M (and older) to now, and the ribbon made a change that was
unnecessary, cryptic and only barely and narrowly easier to use than
the menus.

Foo.

Cheers!

MR

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

Hi :)
+1
Those things probably are there but it's a pain trying to find anything.  2007 
is even worse than 2010!  

I know one of them is that you have to keep going back to the Home tab in 
order to see the font, font-size and maybe paragraph-style at the cursor's 
location.  What has always annoyed me about MSO is that style might change 4 
times in 4 characters beside each other, possibly even within a single word.  
But that was 1 of the things we were grumbling about in the styles thread 
fairly recently.  

I'm just really glad i can stick with LibreOffice for pretty much everything 
now.  
Regards from 
Tom :)  






 From: MR ZenWiz mrzen...@gmail.com
To: LibreOffice users@global.libreoffice.org 
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013, 20:21
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO 
alternative is not LO
 

I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but I just had to use Word10
again for a company spec, and I have to say...

One of the things about the ribbon that I find so annoying is that it
hides information.

Yes, it is organized in a way that some people find convenient and MS
obviously loves - for now.

But especially w.r.t. formatting and styles, I have the worst time
using it and most often resort to a nifty plugin that some brilliant
entrepreneur wrote and distributes for free that emulates the old
menus.

Specifically, I have trouble with two pieces of the styles.

One is that I can't tell from looking at even the expanded menu which
style the cursor paragraph is in. I'm pretty sure it is not my eyes or
color scheme, there's just no indication at all.  It is also difficult
to see what the font and font-size are at a glance.  All of these are
easily and prominently visible in the formatting toolbar that is
standard at the top of every document (in LO and any MSO before 2007).

The other is when I want to use a style that isn't on the menu, but I
know is available.  I've never been able to figure out how to find
them, where in the pre-ribbon menu system, I just click on the style
down-arrow on the formatting bar and poof.  Even if it's not there, I
can click on the formatting styles icon on the same bar and it is
trivial to make everything show up.  The ribbon just doesn't present
this capability, or it is so obscure that finding it is an adventure
all its own.

There are many other things I dislike about the ribbon.  The main one
is that the fundamental window toolbar style and
every-other-imaginable-kind-of-window-except-Chrome menu bar have been
around since the dawn of (all?) windowing systems, so around 30+
years, but MS just couldn't make it better, they had to mangle it
completely and use the 2007 and newer versions to force users into
their new world.

Whatever happened to meeting the users' needs, rather than mandating
their changes?

/soapbox

Maybe I'm just a traditionalist, but I've seen the whole gamut from
CP/M (and older) to now, and the ribbon made a change that was
unnecessary, cryptic and only barely and narrowly easier to use than
the menus.

Foo.

Cheers!

MR

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO

2013-06-07 Thread Girvin R. Herr




Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:
snip


I need to relearn the interface for Paint Shop Pro X5, when I used 
version 5 since the XP days.  But since I can not get v5 to install on 
Win7 Home Premium that my laptop has, I had to upgrade it and relearn 
the new interface.  Same with PSP 5 or X5 vs. GIMP.  The time it takes 
to relearn how to do the things that comes very easily to me with the 
old interface, well it is very frustrating to say the least and has 
taken 2 to 5 times longer to do the things I want/need to do.
Ahh!  The Gimp.  Great program and I do have some use for it.  However, 
learning it has a _steep_ learning curve for me and, frankly, sitting at 
the screen and reading the online manual is not what I would prefer 
using my limited time for.  There are several learning books out 
there, but which one is the best one I need to learn The Gimp?  That is 
my problem with it.  Once or twice I fiddled with it and got it to do 
somewhat what I wanted, but it wasn't very intuitive and I feel it could 
do so much more for me.  If I could just get a good book on it and sit 
down and play with it...

Girvin Herr

snip


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] CNET is claiming the best free MSO alternative is not LO