On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Miroslav Mazel <maz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Michael Adams <mbad...@paradise.net.nz > >wrote: > > > On Wednesday 24 March 2010 11:14, Miroslav Mazel wrote: > > > 1. *The UI* > > > The UI is the single most important aspect of any piece of software. > > That's > > > how Apple makes its money: its products aren't feature packed and its > > > competitors usually already have the features its products have, but > > > Apple's hardware and software are really intuitive and comfortable to > > use. > > You have no conclusions from this observation - if you are an Apple > Fanboy, > > fine, but what were you expecting us to absorb from their strategy. > -- OK seriously, the FIRST thing you should ALWAYS do is look at what your competitors are doing and learn from it. Not to emulate or copy them, but to be aware of trends and what works. What do you hope to accomplish by sticking your fingers in your ears and calling people 'Apple Fanboy'? I don't particularly care for Apple myself, but I do recognize that they have been quite successful at marketing their products for quite some time now, and they do it by selling the sizzle, not the steak. Conclusion? You can have a great product, but if it looks dated most people will not have any faith in it's ability to get the job done. If the developers paid so little attention to the UI and UX, the same could be inferred about the back-end, whether true or not. > > > > 4. *The website* > > > The website holds the key to all of these, because that's where we get > > both > > > volunteers and customers. The website needs to be completely rethought, > > > from the ground up. The homepage needs a big, bright, warm download > > button > > > and needs to be more resolution-independent and colorful (judging by > the > > > Feng-GUI heat map, where the OOo logo is the most distinctive part of > the > > > page) in general. > > > > It just was. Where was your input into that process? > > > If I remember correctly, that refresh was 2 years ago. And I was among the > people who called for a more visible, direct Download button, among other > things. But that never amounted to anything... > -- The website, without a doubt, is a mess. It is a catacomb of wikis that lead to outdated pages and links upon links, has no clear direction, and undoubtedly turns many people who would contribute to or use this product away. I don't think you should expect anyone to even know where to begin on that one... > > > > > > > That's it. Of course, there are still problems like compatibility and > > > feature parity with Office to tackle, but I'd say those are secondary > > > (we've got the major compatibility problems solved, I think). > > > > > > Trying to achieve feature parity with a competitor only ever makes a > > product a > > copycat, not an innovative leader. > -- For one this is not a true statement. Apple copied Xerox, and Microsoft copied Apple, and they are both now the absolute authorities on innovation. Do you think Google was the first search engine? And as for feature parity, OpenOffice.org and Microsoft Office both offer the same exact results, as they are both office suites. What else would a word processor do differently than another word processor? And how is making something different, less comfortable, and more difficult for the sake of being different make it innovative? The only way OpenOffice.org could be considered innovative is if it offered EVERYTHING Microsoft Office does, with ADDITIONAL, much needed features that Microsoft Office DOESN'T offer that are intuitive and transparent. Feature parity is expected in software these days, if OpenOffice.org doesn't do something that Microsoft Office does, then that will be the ammo Microsoft will use to bury it. > > > > > I hope you feel better after your rant. I do however see a lot of finger > > pointing without much practical help offered. > > -- Who's pointing fingers now? I don't think anyone would even bother finding their way through the convoluted web site, to the unclear subscription prompts and instructions, finally to make it here on this mailing list, if they weren't serious about doing SOMETHING to help. The problem I see is too many chiefs and not enough Indians. Anytime someone contributes or discusses anything they are told why they can't, what they did wrong, how they totally missed the mark, or their ideas are dealt with in a quite condescending manner. Remember that we are all volunteers here, no one HAS to be here, and eventually maybe no one will be. -Brian
