LibreOffice Adds A Command Popup / HUD, Inspired By Half-Decade Old Microsoft Office Feature

[finalzone]

I happened to think that Mac OS X Office is actually the most beautiful of all the office suites, but I'm rarely on a Mac.

Subjective at best. Mac OS X Office looks like Windows Microsoft Office. The last version 2016 was discontinued in favour of subscription approach.
About LibreOffice, switch the icons like Silf to get a more clean look.

[tornado99]

Please note I did not say they were good. The 7 different designs of libreoffice interface cover from the 1980s right though to 2010 theories for what would make a good software interface.

Please note

Mac OS X Office<< I guess you mean iwork. Mac OS X Office written that way is MS Office.

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design

There is a design team that anyone who thinks they can do better are willing to attempt.

Do beware libreoffice supports 119 languages. MS Office on mac os only supports 27 yet on windows supports 91. Yes there are limitations in the base Mac OS GUI elements that reduce the number of languages you can support and explain why on Mac OS LibreOffice interface absolutely looks out of place due to not using native toolkit and why less language options of MS Office work on Mac OS vs the Windows version.

Its a catch people would not think about that libreoffice has to be culturally neutral to the people who us 119 languages it supports as well.

Reality with libreoffice the requirements to design are hard.

Do note thunderbird has the same problem it supports 59 different languages and Macos only support at best 39. So you have 20 languages the application supports that the Mac OS platform does not support lot of them you cannot use MacOS default toolkit parts to-do.

tornado99 its not just about having a eye for good design here. When you have multi cultures and languages to support doing good design for everyone gets a hell load harder. So projects like libreoffice are always looking for new people join the design team with new ideas crossing fingers that one of them will be good.

There is a horrible fact that a interface that look generally horrible normally does not end up culturally offensive to anyone. Accusing a person not having a good eye for design by most people who do have the mistake that a interface has to look good from their culture point of view not considering need for culture neutrality.

Thanks for a comprehensive reply, but I'm not convinced that supporting a large number of languages is a reason for the dated UI. Google docs, for example, supports 70 languages.

I rather suspect the main reason is that the people developing LO think concepts such as a "design language" are lightweight and Apple-esque, and as long as the interface has buttons everywhere for what you need to do, then what else is needed.

[oiaohm]

Thanks for a comprehensive reply, but I'm not convinced that supporting a large number of languages is a reason for the dated UI. Google docs, for example, supports 70 languages.

Do note libreoffice does have a online version it does have the direct means to pixel render under HTML because some languages LibreOffice has don't render well using HTML either. HTML is suite to more language than apple native toolkit but its not perfectly suited to all the languages libreoffice supports.

I rather suspect the main reason is that the people developing LO think concepts such as a "design language" are lightweight and Apple-esque, and as long as the interface has buttons everywhere for what you need to do, then what else is needed.

There is no reason to suspect anything.

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Principles

Apple-esque is not part of Libreoffice design principles. Design language is not lightweight and doing a good design is not simple. The language issue is you first problem this does really do a number on the way you can use many GUI toolkits. Next is libreoffice core design principles focus on usability not appearance. There is no point having a nice looking application if it not usable.

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Guidelines/HIG_foundations#UX_Manifesto

ISO 9241-110 is something else as well. That is 2006. There is newer ISO 9241-210 form 2019 that libreoffice does not support yet.

tornado99 libreoffice has a lot of design principles that have to be followed. Libreoffice from its document format to its interface conforms to ISO standards as well. Yes that does make changing the interface harder process because you just cannot do something that results in non conformance to the ISO 9241-110.

tornado99 language is a big one. Something to also remember iworks(applications this includes pages) and MS Office are not ISO 9241-110 conforming. This standard effects what happens when you click a button this standard effects the colour of buttons and text used in all places in the application.

Microsoft auto ribbon idea where it will creatively hide functionality that you could use because you don't use it regularly is a breach of ISO 9241-110.

Designing a interface inside the rules what what libreoffice need to conform to standard and be accessible to all is really not easy. If you can do better the libreoffice design team will happily take you.

Libreoffice has a decanted team for interface. Don't walk in with just make Libreoffice look like X application because majority of the time X application interface has major faults when you put it head to head with ISO 9241-110.

[tornado99]

Do note libreoffice does have a online version it does have the direct means to pixel render under HTML because some languages LibreOffice has don't render well using HTML either. HTML is suite to more language than apple native toolkit but its not perfectly suited to all the languages libreoffice supports.



There is no reason to suspect anything.

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Principles

Apple-esque is not part of Libreoffice design principles. Design language is not lightweight and doing a good design is not simple. The language issue is you first problem this does really do a number on the way you can use many GUI toolkits. Next is libreoffice core design principles focus on usability not appearance. There is no point having a nice looking application if it not usable.

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Guidelines/HIG_foundations#UX_Manifesto

ISO 9241-110 is something else as well. That is 2006. There is newer ISO 9241-210 form 2019 that libreoffice does not support yet.

tornado99 libreoffice has a lot of design principles that have to be followed. Libreoffice from its document format to its interface conforms to ISO standards as well. Yes that does make changing the interface harder process because you just cannot do something that results in non conformance to the ISO 9241-110.

tornado99 language is a big one. Something to also remember iworks(applications this includes pages) and MS Office are not ISO 9241-110 conforming. This standard effects what happens when you click a button this standard effects the colour of buttons and text used in all places in the application.

Microsoft auto ribbon idea where it will creatively hide functionality that you could use because you don't use it regularly is a breach of ISO 9241-110.

Designing a interface inside the rules what what libreoffice need to conform to standard and be accessible to all is really not easy. If you can do better the libreoffice design team will happily take you.

Libreoffice has a decanted team for interface. Don't walk in with just make Libreoffice look like X application because majority of the time X application interface has major faults when you put it head to head with ISO 9241-110.

I'm sorry but that's a ridiculous argument. Who decided that every computer program should follow ISO 9241-110! Those kind of technical documents are intended for industrial and factory environments.

Good design is a mix of engineering and artistic flair. The latter is entirely missing from LO.

[oiaohm]

I'm sorry but that's a ridiculous argument. Who decided that every computer program should follow ISO 9241-110! Those kind of technical documents are intended for industrial and factory environments.

But we are not talking about every program. We are talking about Libreoffice. ISO 9241-110 support is one of the reason national archives use Libreoffice leading to the legacy document support. Yes ISO 9241-110 also the reason why Collabora to sell there own fork of Libreoffice into particular government markets over MS Office. Libreoffice is used by quite a few companies for writing the manuals for their industrial and factory environments.

So its important feature to support to keep Libreoffice funded.

Good design is a mix of engineering and artistic flair. The latter is entirely missing from LO.

That the first thing about libreoffice. Libreoffice first objective is high grade engineering this means Artistic flair is absolutely second place and that is exactly what particular markets want. So you want to do artistic flair in the design team of libreoffice you have do that without harming the engineering.

Libreoffice is not 100 percent devoid of artistic flair.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...Writer_3.3.png vs https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/...ng-section.png
There has been quite a bit of artistic flair changes in the icons over the last 10 years. There has also be lot of interface changes.

What is good design does depend on what you customers class as good design. Libreoffice funding end users put engineering above artistic flair and this is a valid option like it or not so good design for libreoffice has to put engineering first. This does mean you need to look at the problem from that point of view.

So like it or not libreoffice interface look you don't like is a different groups idea of good design. Yes libreoffice is more you industrial/factory office suite with solid functionality not a pretty office suite with flaky functionality. Yes Libreoffice appearance really does match what it is.

[danmcgrew]

...Good design is a mix of engineering and artistic flair. The latter is entirely missing from LO.

...As is the former.


There is a well-known saying:

"Excellent design is not the result of there being nothing left to add, but rather there being nothing left to remove."

It has been twenty-one years now since TDF has been trying to achieve ITS perverse and convoluted version of "excellent design"--by out-of-control--and meaningless--ADDITION. The only thing TDF has proven is the absolute truth of this saying.

It hasn't worked. It never will. The Document Foundation has proven that it is impervious to learning from the above axiom.

[tornado99]

So like it or not libreoffice interface look you don't like is a different groups idea of good design. Yes libreoffice is more you industrial/factory office suite with solid functionality not a pretty office suite with flaky functionality. Yes Libreoffice appearance really does match what it is.

Well perhaps LibreOffice is trying to be too many things to too many people. What other software can you think of that is used on the factory floor and in peoples homes?

Here's an experiment for you. Write say 7 paragraphs of text. Now import a couple of medium size images, and for each, resize it and move it around a bit. In the latest versions of Microsoft Office the existing text smoothly animates and reflows around the image, and all the options to manipulate the image and integrate it into your document are easily accessible. The program remains responsive at all times. Now repeat with LibreOffice. On an intel i7 it's incredibly clunky, jerky, and almost brings LO to its knees.

I sometimes wonder if the advocates of LO actually use if for the type of tasks that mainstream society do.

And one further point. Go to Reddit and look at the comments every time a new version comes out. You'll see the phrases "why is it so ugly", "why is it stuck in the 1990s" repeated by many different people. As somebody who follows UX development, there are certain modern design trends which make software pleasurable to use. LO has taken on board none of them. In fact, one of Google's Summer of Code Projects 2021 is the following:

Working on "100 paper cuts" of LibreOffice to improve the UI, implement various enhancements, and fixing other UX-related "most annoying issues" of this open-source office suite.

So my opinion is not held alone!

[oiaohm]

It has been twenty-one years now since TDF has been trying to achieve ITS perverse and convoluted version of "excellent design"--by out-of-control--and meaningless--ADDITION. The only thing TDF has proven is the absolute truth of this saying.

It has not been 21 years. TDF has only existed from 2010. There was no design team for OpenOffice before it. Design team is new addition to LibreOffice.

If you compare the menus of Libreoffice vs OpenOffice you will find complete menus have pulled the disappearing act out of Libreoffice. So no LIbreoffice is not out of control addition with no removal. There has been removal from the Libreoffice GUI just people have not noticed it this is what you call well considered removal.

The multi UX option of Libreoffice was out a overnight choice that was 2 years of debates before that happened. The first plan was to pick a single new design to replace the old design. Reality of the design process was working out that agreement was impossible. This bring you to the part of UX design that annoying the functional prototype stage. Then none of the prototypes in fact suited all users.

There is also a classic quote to remember.
"Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black." Henry Ford. Note this was Henry Ford response to hearing there would be exactly 1 model of model T Ford. Of course after this response there in fact multi models of model T fords all the same cars but different Colours.

Good question is it correct to-do one size fits all UX for something like Libreoffice with a wildly diverse user base? This is a question that has not really been asked that much as supporting it requires more developer time.

[tornado99]

The multi UX option of Libreoffice was out a overnight choice that was 2 years of debates before that happened. The first plan was to pick a single new design to replace the old design. Reality of the design process was working out that agreement was impossible. This bring you to the part of UX design that annoying the functional prototype stage. Then none of the prototypes in fact suited all users.

It's not a multi UX though. It's just 7 different rearrangements of the same UX.

[oiaohm]

It's not a multi UX though. It's just 7 different rearrangements of the same UX.

They are in fact 7 different UX design proposals starting with different design ideas. The developers have recycled as much of the existing UX as possible to put those UX designs in users hands. Yes over time features from contextual single have spread to everything else. Insert a image in really old libreoffice or current open office and you will notice there is a in original toolbar mode image toolbar that appears when you go over image. Yet in current day libreoffice that does not happen the formatting toolbar transforms when you go over a image this feature comes from the contextual design not the traditional design.

There are 7 different UX designs and over time Libreoffice has been merging the most useful features from all of them in attempt to produce 1 interface. The fact that you think they are 7 different rearrangement of the same UX means you have really missed what happened. Yes the 7 different design use to be more different.

tornado99 there have been a lot of changes. One reality is something being a different UX design using different UX design concepts does not mean using different artwork.