[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>From my limited experience, the impression I have is that ooo developers
seem to arbitrarily implement new features which are inferior to the
corresponding features in standard use. A good example is the tree setup
for the custom installer. The approach I would like to see would be to
start with the standard features of MS office and then explore what
improvements can be made. IMPROVEMENTS: not arbitrary changes. Users have
plenty of complaints about ms products. The ooo developers should
identify these and go trom that point.
Sandy
I think the installer has not gotten a lot of attention, particularly
the custom installer, and it seems to be the source of a lot of your
difficulties. Most people just accept the default installation and don't
run into these issues. I agree they should be addressed, but not at the
expense of deferring fixes/enhancements which are needed for standard
operations in day-to-day activities.
My experience over the last couple of years is very different from what
you'e feeling. Implementation is not arbitrary, but reflects the
information contained in the issue/enhancement tracking system (which we
can look at and contribute to, including voting for issues of interest
to us). The approach that appears to me to be taken is exactly what you
recommend, but OOo is not a clone of MS Office. It has its own
structure, which can affect how things are done. There is a natural
tendency to feel that the way software we're familiar with (and have
invested a lot of time in learning) does things is the "right" way, so
anything different is "wrong." Personally, I've found that I can nearly
always accomplish my tasks as well or better in OOo as I could with MSO,
once I've learned how OOo handles it.
We really need to talk about specific features that create issues for
you, if we're going to be of any help.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
