Archbishop John Missing wrote:
Before this discussion moves on to another list, I think I should point out who a user is: the only reason for the product to be produced and the only one who can judge the quality of the product. If the product is not meeting the users needs, then it is useless to spend any time or money on it. If the only recommendation to solve a user's problems is to get a different product, then is there any need for the product in the beginning.
If someone really needs (or believes they need) a feature found in product B, and which is not currently found in product A (even though product A might be generally superior to product B), then it is reasonable to recommend product B as a possible solution.
All users and potential users of a product do not have the same needs (or expectations or wants).
I have spent time and money on products that have not met *all* my needs, and don't think the time and money wasted in most cases. No product does everything equally well. Which product meets *all* your needs or desires? It is reasonable and normal to spend time and money on products that don't meet all your "needs" or supposed "needs". It is impossible not to do so.
If, as many here assert, OpenOffice is superior to all these other programs, why does it not meet all the needs that the other programs did, even if it has to use a different means to achieve it.
Anyone who might state that OOo Writer is in all ways superior to all other word processing programs or text processing programs would be wrong. And I doubt that OOo Writer or any word processing application or text processing applications will ever be inarguably superior to all other applications of that kind for the long term.
Neither the demand for "reveal codes" not the insistence that is is unnecessary addresses the issue that there is a real need for the *user who is, after all the only reason for the product.*
There is no one "user". Some users care desperately about a good English grammar checker (perhaps because their English is not particularly good.) Others want nothing to do with grammar checkers. Some, like myself, want better typographical abilities in Writer. Others don't care about such things or even notice them.
Not all products can or should cater to every "need". For example, if you want publishing application, you could use OOo Writer. But Adobe InDesign is far better, unless you are short of funds and "need" a very inexpensive system, if not as capable as the more expensive one. Adobe InDesign provides for the "needs" of some users and OOo Writer for the "needs" of others.
As to "real" need, a user who claims he or she needs to see the formatting codes in the text stream of a word processor that doesn't have any text stream formatting codes is making a false assumption. That user doesn't know how OOo Writer works but assumes there *must* be formatting codes used internally.
If there were such codes, I would also very much want to see them easily and be able to manipulate them directly. But that entire level is absent in OOo Writer and most modern word processors and publishing publishing programs. Instead you set formatting directly onto ranges or text, paragraphs and so forth without going through an intermediary step of setting codes to do it for you.
Jallan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
