[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 135501] Change the default UI (see comment 67)

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135501

--- Comment #124 from Eyal Rozenberg <eyalroz1 at gmx.com> ---
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #123)
I think you're being somewhat unfair to the proponents of tabbed UI by default.
They seem to be coalescing towards an "invest in the tabbed UI to make it
usable as the default", IIUC. That said, I definitely agree with your rejection
of the motivation of "we must attract new users at all costs". I also believe
that offering UI alternatives at installation time is a sufficient (if not
excessive) gesture towards enticing those MSO users who absolutely must have
it.

(In reply to Luke Kendall from comment #117)
> If you make the UI choice a very visible indicator that can be used to
> switch to a different UI style,

Isn't it enough to make it visible during installation?

> I'll make another suggestion which I expect to be ignored: be (the first?)
> open source project to run an actual user trial to see what users prefer.

The questions of what try, how and for how long will be contentious. Remember
that it's pretty easy to cook surveys/polls:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GSKwf4AIlI

(In reply to Pedro from comment #119)
> I am counting commercial office suites, with more users or a similar
> userbase to LibO.

I was counting FOSS (and then also commercial) office suites listed on
Wikipedia.

> KOffice is discontinued. AbiWord is a word processing software.

Yes, but the point was made about the past 15 years; and I did mention AbiWord
is only an LO Writer equivalent, not a full suite.

> I can tell your bias just from this list you enumerated: Linux user and uses
> exclusively open source software.

I explicitly said that my interpretation of "alternative to LO" is,
fundamentally, FOSS. So, yes, I have that bias.

> If you think so then why are you so resistant to adapting to the newer more
> efficient UI paradigm?

You have it wrong... I meant adaptation from ribbons to a menubar and toolbars.
And ribbons is an _inferior_ UI paradigm (and certainly not more efficient).

> As much of a biased sample as your own selection of "alternatives" top LibO.

No, that is not comparable, as I've explained.


> > > The Standard UI is a fossil from a different computing era.
> > 
> > Well, it seems that statistically, that's not actually the case; and you've
> > only based this statement on the statistical claim.
> 
> 
> Statistically, we know that MSO is the most widely used Office suite in the
> world.

So, you're now going to make several points which do not contradict the fact
that the standard UI is not "a fossil".

Anyway, about this first one: Indeed, MSO is the most widely used office suite;
but it's only a single (suite of) applications. Almost no other applications
use ribbons, both on Windows and on Linux. And most FOSS office suites don't
use ribbons.

Also, Windows is the most widely-used operating system on PC's; but we would
not entertain an argument that a UNIX-like OS such as GNU/Linux or *BSD is a
"fossil from a different computing era".

> Statistically, the probability that any person you would pick
> randomly of the street nowadays would be more confortable with the Ribbon UI
> is much higher than being comfortable with a Standard toolbar.

Well, most people in the world don't have PCs/laptops at all; it's more likely
such a person would be uncomfortable with any PC app. But regardless - I'm not
sure what you mean by "comfortable". If you mean that MSO users are used to the
ribbon UI - then yes, but that's not the point.

> I know that most LibO devs prefer Linux, and would prefer if time had
> stopped in 2006 before the Ribbon UI became the de facto UI standard for an
> office suite when Microsoft Office launched it in 2007.

Again, common != standard. After all, commercial closed-source is also the
"de-facto standard" of how to write office suites by this definition.

Also, I work regularly on both Windows and Linux PCs. Ribbons suck IMHO on
Windows just like they do on Linux. GNOME-style UI which hides all the
functionality sucks on Linux - where it's quite popular unfortunately - and on
Mac. Hamburger menubutton rather than a full-fledged menu bar sucks on Linux
and on Windows.

> If you want to satisfy users

I do want to satisfy users, and we should satisfy users with the better UI -
the UI which makes it easier for them to be aware and remember how to use more
LO functionality, and be more effective document authors: A menu-bar and
toolbars rather than Ribbons/Tabbed UI.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.