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, copy&paste 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) 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 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 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > -- > 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
