Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.

NoOp wrote:
> On 11/30/2010 02:43 AM, plino wrote:
>   
> > The point here is that OOo has a small installer with 140Mb (no Java, and
> > only English, Spanish and French dictionaries).
> > Why is LO going in the opposite direction with 299 and 466Mb???
> >
> > The current packages (including in the smallest option 56 language packs!!!)
> > makes no sense IMO as I mentioned in this post
> > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-tp1954148p1973749.html
> >
> > I think that an English only version of LibreOffice and then separate
> > Language Packs (10-40Mb) which include the translation for the interface and
> > dictionaries, spelling, etc is the best option.
> >
> >     
>
> Actually the point that I was trying to make, but apparently you've
> snipped all (including attribution as to who you were replying to) is this:
>
>   Those that think including additional bits such as documentation in
> any initial download need to consider the impact of both the user and
> the download method.
>
> The current download (as has been explained in other threads) is large
> due to the added language add-on's. No worries, as the LO is still beta.
> However my post was to remind others that downloading an application
> such as LO is very much an issue. Whether the download be 100Mb or
> 300Mb, the result is large for dial-up users.
>
> Another post indicated that dialup users are used to large downloads &
> let them run overnight. Fair enough... but it's obvious that that poster
> doesn't use dialup. It's analogous to assuming that all users have DVD
> readers... I test multiple OS's, multiple open-source programs, and I
> just checked; out of 10 systems that I have running, only 4 have DVD
> readers, 2 have DVD r/w, and all exept one have floppy drives. BTW: I
> live and work in "Silicon Valley".
>
> My opinion is to *not* add documentation to the inital download. Instead
> reduce the initial download as much as possible, and improve the Help
> section to ensure it is correct, and to instruct and or point  a new
> user additional documentation.
>   
I simply MUST disagree for one simple reason, I just don't think that 
there should be one single take-it-or-leave-it download package!  there 
must be a choice of packages, one without anything extra, and ALSO 
others with certain amounts of extras added.  That way you could find a 
package that is right for your needs and your download capability. 


NoOp, it sounds like a lot of your computers are almost antiques.  I 
tossed the last of my floppy disks in the trash a couple of months ago.  
I am a retired system builder, and I now am down to just 2 computers, 
(from about a dozen at one point) my tower which I built, Athlon 64 bit 
dual core, SATA HD and DVD burner,  and my Toshiba laptop, also Athlon 
64 bit dual core, 320 gig HD and DVD burner. 


I remember that optical disks started to replace floppies in about 1995 
because Win-95 came either way.  Win-98 was CD only.  I will admit that 
DVD burners didn't become affordable until about 2005, but most of what 
I built in 2000 through 2004 had either a CD burner and a DVD read only, 
or from 2003 on combo drives, CD burn, DVD read only.  But my point here 
is that 2004 and older machines are horribly obsolete today, and the 
vast majority of them have been scrapped!  Also most of these old 
clunkers are only found in the more technologically advanced countries, 
because the 3rd world countries didn't start to get computers in any 
significant numbers until after the time of the old floppy based machines. 

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***