Re: [tdf-discuss] LibreOffice UI should be tweaked, not reinvented

Le 2010-11-03 15:55, Johannes Bausch a écrit : [About the interface]
> > One of the advantages of LibreOffice/OOo over MS Office is that the
> > interface is familiar and easy to grasp.
> I don't get that. It's familiar because its similar to MS Office? But
> why is the easiness an advantage over MS Office if it is similar? Then
> MS Office is easy, too. ...
> > Menus still provide a familiar and easy to use method of
> > organizing a large number of features.
> +1, I don't like ribbon interfaces neither, because you don't see your
> tools vanish. Greying out things is the better option, as long as they
> don't take up much space on screen.
>
> > Given the large number of features and complexity of office suites, one
> > needs to consider both use cases. Most of the time we only need a small
> > number of features and we want these conveniently located. Thankfully Lo/OOo
> > handles this nicely today with keyboard shortcuts and toolbar icons.
> Nobody I know knows any shortcuts besides ctrl+c, ctrl+v. Toolbar
> icons are misleading, over the half of which are permanently visible I
> couldn't even tell you that I have used them before. Only the tool-tip
> provides you with the necessary information.

Not too many people use shortcuts, I know. It always amazes me that very 
few people use even basic shortcuts such as those above, or Bold, 
Italics... Still, those who type a lot do use them, and if you give them 
good pre-programmed shortcuts (and ways to reconfigure them), they will 
use them.

There are two problems with toolbars, ribbons and sidebars:
- the amount of real estate they take;
- the fact only basic icons can readily be understood; others have to be 
learned.
Back in the days of 800x600 and 1024x768 screens, I had to often swap 
windows between reference material and the document I am writing. One 
thing I love of my current 1920x1200 screen is that I can see the new 
document I write and my reference material at the same time. It is hard 
to do with Ms Office 2007/2010 ribbon or with a side panel similar to 
what exists in PowerPoint or Impress.
As for icons, basically, the only ones easily understood are those 
related to bold, italics and the like.
> > We're asking users to relearn a familiar
> > interface, but why?
> Because the current one has lots of space for improvement.
I would not be that negative. But I think the challenge is to find a new 
interface that improves function. The ribbon interface has improved the 
looks and maybe the learning curve for new users, but it has not 
improved function. In many cases, it even degrades function; for 
instance, when typing, one needs more often to put one's hands away from 
the keyboard (not good for performance) and because many icons have 
pre-defined options that are not mine, it means I have to find the 
"other options" button which is often hidden and/or requires a few extra 
clicks.
If the new user finds the interface relatively easy to learn and the 
seasoned user finds it efficient and powerful, then we have success on 
all grounds.


> Honestly.
> The office suites have looked the same now for over ten years. We're
> practically standing still. You cannot tell me that you're completely
> satisfied with how it looks at the moment. Very simple tasks get
> tedious, because nobody uses things like styles ...
> ... The problem is that nobody really
> groups features: this one belongs to text attributes, here is the
> place I look if I want to embed a picture, here (and only here) are
> things concerning tables. We absolutely HAVE to make the user use the
> stylesheet stuff, and it must be so easy that they start to use it on
> one-paged documents.
One of the problems with grouping is that some functions belong in more 
than one group. For instance, where do you place all options related to 
the text below a picture: in the Text menu (font, paragraph, 
alignment...) or in the Image menu ?
As for styles, I use them a lot, but I know I am alone here.


> The most essential part at the moment is the interface. Are there any
> features missing which should be implemented? I don't know one.
> .... And since Writer is the figurehead of the
> complete office suite, I think we should start here.
Right and wrong. Writer is likely to be used much more than the other 
modules. On the other hand, I find Writer relatively easy to approach 
and the competition also has a good product that is also easy to 
approach. It would be great if we improved the user interface in such a 
way that people would use styles and space before paragraphs rather than 
empty paragraphs, for instance, but overall, it works. Calc also works 
fairly well for most people.

On the other hand, many people now use PowerPoint (and Impress), and 
quite frankly, both products need *a lot* of improvements. For instance, 
with Powerpoint, animations may be defined in the mask, but then they 
apply to ALL slides, or they have to be painstakingly defined slide by 
slide, one line at a time... There also are serious problems with the 
way films and sounds are linked in Powerpoint: they either have to be in 
the same folder or the link has to be an absolute one. So I think it 
would be relatively easy to upgrade Impress and make it better and 
easier to use than Powerpoint, and grab new users via the Impress module.

Regards,
--
Michel Gagnon
Montréal (Québec, Canada) -- http://mgagnon.net

--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***