<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/">
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Change the default UI (see comment 67)"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135501#c82">Comment # 82</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Change the default UI (see comment 67)"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135501">bug 135501</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:jmills59@yahoo.com" title="John Mills <jmills59@yahoo.com>"> <span class="fn">John Mills</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to ajlittoz from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=135501#c81">comment #81</a>)
<span class="quote">> Very long, didn't read the whole thread. My opinion may then be biased.
>
> I'm afraid that all this discussion about the "ideal" UI to be elected as
> the default one misses the real point.
>
> UI is not the target in an application. The target is the usefulness of
> application purpose and UI is only a tool to serve this usefulness.
>
> What is the chore of LO and its distinctive power feature? Styles.
>
> Styles are present in Writer, Calc, Impress and Draw at different level of
> abstraction and power.
>
> Style usage should be encouraged by all means because they are the key to
> full LO power. When you must review and reformat a sophisticated document,
> the task is overwhelming if direct formatting was the base of the workflow.
>
> IMHO, M$ Office-like UIs are wrong because:
>
> 1 - they lead to the "intuitive application control" syndrome making users
> falsely think they master the application
>
> 2 - they encourage direct formatting because the alternative style control
> is not that obvious (and styles are far less developed in the competition)
>
> 3 - being immediately accessible, they postpone the need to read the Guides
>
> The net result is a tremendous number of angry questions on AskLO from users
> ranting that LO is not M$ Office.
>
> In my point of view, LO doesn't offer yet a full original style-oriented UI.
> In Writer, the paragraph styles sit in the toolbar with their own menu but
> character, frame, page and list are not there. You must display the side
> style pane and selecting one non-paragraph style requires first to click on
> an icon to change the displayed list.
>
> As a long-time advocate of styles, I find this is not the correct way to
> push users towards styling.
>
> The present status (with a menu View>User Interface>…choices… seems to me a
> good trade-off. It is hidden just the correct level so that a curious user
> discovers the trick and the lazy user is doomed to learn new ways of doing
> its job.</span >
We need to be more mature that calling Microsoft, M$ it just demeans the whole
conversation and shows an obvious bias.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>