New design

users
#21

Hi :slight_smile:
+1
It is difficult to explain to people. Perhaps try saying that although there is chocolate ice-cream, not all ice-cream is chocolate! Choice, diversity and market forces are often seen as a bad thing in computer markets! It is confusing to be given a choice! Hoever in almost anything else people would be outraged if their choice was restricted to a "one size fits all".

I think most people here, in these lists, are happier with diversity and the benefits it brings. "Diversity breeds serendipity"
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#22

Hi :slight_smile:
Errr apparently Gnome 3 is heading the same way and may end-up where Unity is now. I think Unity is likely to become more like Gnome 2 over the next few years but without the problems and restrictions.

In Ubuntu it is fairly easy for power-users to switch to a Gnome DE or even to add a completely different DE.

If LO were skinable then it might allow large corporate set-ups to have something more appropriate to their users.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#23

Knock off the flame - the relative merits of a distro is not the real issue. The issue is how to improve the LO UI. The only reasons Unity and Gnome 3 would be important are lessons that could be used from their experiences. Note Gnome 3 is used on a number distros with acerbic comments by users about wanting classic Gnome.

#24

Skins - now thats an idea.

#25

I'm in favor of a skins option - or at least a way to easily customize. I
could care less if people want to stick to a default skin if I can change
what I want/need. If there's a way to easily customize and then
export/import the customizations, large companies would be able to
remove/add important features and easily (sort of) import that
skin/customization to other computers.

#26

And by quiet people who love it and would not lightly go back to G2.

-jh

#27

Myself, I dislike Unity so far and have been warming to Gnome 3 particularly with Mint's additions or when using a dock for quick access. However this is a personal, ascetic reason not particularly technical. I actually like G2.

The issue is how to manage updating/upgrading the UI so people have choices. What I like or find very useful another may find to be pointless bloat. This issue is how to manage the options so enough are present for the mythical average user and for the "power" users to be content.

I recognize this is difficult to do. The complaints about Unity and Gnome 3 are an indication that this is not easy to do. My comment is that we should pay attention to the experience and try to find a better way forward not that I have a particular objection. There will a tension among users who feel almost any UI we use is dated and staid and those who find the current UI is very comfortable.

Possibly a better approach would be to ask users, particularly Linux users, who have seen recent UI changes in an OS what why they liked or disliked about the changes. Also, ask how they would handle the changes. Some of the issues will be ascetic and some technical/hardware (size of monitor, etc).

#28

Hi :slight_smile:
We do. We ask people to get involved with the decision making at all levels in TDF. Hmmm, well probably that is mostly the other lists but we do ask occasionally. Don't forget that a lot of those "users" are really us, or become us even if we disagree and argue with each other occasionally. It's not like a proprietary thing where there is a clear distinction between users and people that that manage the project. Each new person that starts getting involved changes the project and changes what "us" means. There is not really an them&us here. It's one of the exciting things about the project imo.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#29

Hi :slight_smile:
+1
The new one as a feature that people can add if they want to.  Then next release as the standard but with a pop-up or something to let people easily swap back to the old UI easily ....

Slowly give it more prominence and people might find the transition easier, maybe.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#30

Hi :slight_smile:
Here is a link to a very old article in "OMG! Ubuntu!".  Rather than just linking to their home page i thought it might be more interesting to have a retrospective look
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/01/libreoffice-3-3-released/
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#31

Hi :slight_smile:
Ahah, at last i dug deep enough to reach this!

Even on 4:3 aspect ratio the menus and general clutter seems aimed at reducing an A4 portrait mode (ie typical letter or other document) to a tiny thin sliver that makes it difficult to see how over-verbose i might have been or to see the context or flow (or lack of).  The empty grey areas at the sides of documents can be annoying too.  Grrrrr.

Shunting some stuff to the sides would be great.  Looking at the ribbon bar it looks as though MSO is heading that way too.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#32

Websites now expect people to mouse-over everything, but it didn't start that way.
Key-command users hardly ever touch a mouse, but most people aren't fluent in this regard and don't attempt it as a method until they really understand how much quicker it is.

See other responses below.

Citrus has one thing right.

When editing a document you need "Insert - Styles - Text - View".
Float "Document", "Page", "Paragraph" and "Defaults" where ever you want, but most are used to the upper left hand corner. Heck, maybe "Paragraph" should be under "Defaults" anyway.

Why "Styles" instead of "Paragraph" before "Text". Because once you start writing documents over 2 pages, your not going to edit that way unless you really are GUI only.

What they got wrong was where they put it.
The optimum is when you right click anywhere in the document and "Insert, Styles, Text, View"
shows up there. Don't waste space putting things on the edge. Once a sub-menu is paused on, it stays open unless you move your cursor to the next sub-menu.

If you keep do not keep the menus the same, what happens with the Extensions that add to the top-level of menus, like Linguist, Writer's Tools, and Writer's Extras? Would they still work or have to be redesigned?

Menus and sub-menus of a right click at cursor position are added/edited/removed the same as always. My discomfort is in the distances to acquire the majority of most used editing actions.

The "Tools" menu comes to mind. I don't use it that often and could be in the upper left.
The "Tables" menu should be under "Insert" for new and auto-magically added to the primary menu when for edit/remove/options on right click.

How about all of the other toolbars that are part of LO's top and bottom of the "window"? Will this new design allow these toolbars to be used? I use many of them that I lock to either the top or the bottom area of the "window". I need many of these tools for my LO work.

There are a lot of things to be thought through before changes are made.

Was not trying to change that part of displayed information, only shifting most used commands nearer.

Add "Cut" to menu if an object (letter, frame, whatever...) is selected and add "Paste" to next click point. If it doesn't happen then, "Paste" is always under "Insert" for last object.

If you want it sexy, use flat rectangle selection sub-menu (mouse movement or up/down arrow keys) rotated based on cylindrical movement (mouse movement or wheel or left/right arrow keys).

Many people do not have a wheel on their mouse, like laptops for one. Does Macs still use only one mouse button? I have not used one since 2000 or so, so I do not know. We go not want to tie a function to a button or mouse wheel if these buttons or wheels are not on all of the user's computers. How many people use laptops as their only computers [other than tablets and smart phones].

Yes, but Macs still have the Command key button, Press Command key and menus arrive.
Laptops don't have wheels, but once right-clicked, the pad is it's equivalent.
As stated, use arrows-keys if you do not have other available.