LibreOffice 4.3 Released With Many Exciting Changes

[Azpegath]

I don't care so much how the interface looks, but I think it should be intuitive.

For example, if you want to permanently change the paper size for all new documents, you have to create a new template and then set that template as the default template. That's not intuitive: intuitive is a knob in the preferences. (At least, that's where I expect it.)

More generally, it is necessary to Google for how to do anything except basic formatting. The goal should be, rather than introducing fancy new 3D graphics, to simply make the program intuitive.

Exactly, that was my point as well. Making things "intuitive" is a lot harder than most people think though.

[bastiaan]

Exactly, that was my point as well. Making things "intuitive" is a lot harder than most people think though.

That's perfectly true. Still, it being hard is not a good reason not to try it. And it can be a gradual process. I think an attempt was made to simplify page numbering already.

[RGB-es]

I don't care so much how the interface looks, but I think it should be intuitive.

For example, if you want to permanently change the paper size for all new documents, you have to create a new template and then set that template as the default template. That's not intuitive: intuitive is a knob in the preferences. (At least, that's where I expect it.)

If you ask ten people what's the meaning of "intuitive" in an user interface, probably you'll get 15 answers... For instance I have a LaTeX background and for me a "knob in preferences" that magically change all new documents like MSOffice do is something horrifying: in my mind, styles+templates is a synonym for formatting, thus I find setting a default template quite "intuitive", just like choosing a documentclass

More generally, it is necessary to Google for how to do anything except basic formatting. The goal should be, rather than introducing fancy new 3D graphics, to simply make the program intuitive.

That's true, but I'll change "make the program intuitive" by "give the program an easier learning curve". The problem with LibO, AOO and all OpenOffice derivatives is not that they are difficult to use: they are easy once your learn how they work. The real problem is actually learning how they work.

[Daktyl198]

To everybody who wants a revamp of some kind (UI, "intuitiveness", whatever), please note that there is literally only a couple people (last I heard) working in the "User Interface" section of Libreoffice. Literally 2-3 people. If you want something done, they need help...

[Cyber Killer]

This is why desktop Linux never hits the mainstream... too many options, none of them great on their own. I think that is why Apple is so successful. They tell the customer what the customer wants, and the customer gets it. Customer's don't really know what they want, or they all want different things. If you are going to play that card, however, you have to really know what you are doing... which may be why it doesn't happen that often. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_paralysis

I guess you should use Gnome3 - its devs seem to have taken the 'apple way of shoveling their preferences down users throats' that you are so fond of. I as a customer exactly know what I want, in case of document software I want to just use LaTeX, but if that's unavailable, then I want the normal word processor UI that has been with me nearly my whole life ever since I started using computers in the early 90s. That is: toolbars with 16x16px buttons, menus, context menus, etc - I can customize this interface to my personal liking in a matter of minutes, modify toolbars, keyboard shortcuts, write some scripts to help me get stuff done, etc.

As for the dumb users, that really don't know what they want - everybody should stop caring about them. There's this famous quote about making better idiot proof software and the universe making better idiots, and it's totally true. Nothing will ever be 'easy' enough for them, so we should start making software for 'us' (people with tech knowledge), and if they want to use it too, then just give them a kick in the *** and make them learn.

[Azpegath]

I guess you should use Gnome3 - its devs seem to have taken the 'apple way of shoveling their preferences down users throats' that you are so fond of. I as a customer exactly know what I want, in case of document software I want to just use LaTeX, but if that's unavailable, then I want the normal word processor UI that has been with me nearly my whole life ever since I started using computers in the early 90s. That is: toolbars with 16x16px buttons, menus, context menus, etc - I can customize this interface to my personal liking in a matter of minutes, modify toolbars, keyboard shortcuts, write some scripts to help me get stuff done, etc.

As for the dumb users, that really don't know what they want - everybody should stop caring about them. There's this famous quote about making better idiot proof software and the universe making better idiots, and it's totally true. Nothing will ever be 'easy' enough for them, so we should start making software for 'us' (people with tech knowledge), and if they want to use it too, then just give them a kick in the *** and make them learn.

I would like my word processor to be as simple to use and powerful as writing LaTeX.

[clementl]

This is why desktop Linux never hits the mainstream... too many options, none of them great on their own. I think that is why Apple is so successful. They tell the customer what the customer wants, and the customer gets it. Customer's don't really know what they want, or they all want different things. If you are going to play that card, however, you have to really know what you are doing... which may be why it doesn't happen that often. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_paralysis

I read something like thing almost everyday on this forum. It almost seems Linux hasn't hit mainstream because nothing's done right.

But I think this is very incorrect.
First of, Linux's succes doesn't depend on Libreoffice. Most Libreoffice users are probably running it on Windows/Mac. And if you need a ribbon and/or full OOXML support on Linux, there's always Kingsoft Office.

The real reason Linux is small on the desktop, is because it rarely gets preinstalled on pc's. The majority of the population wouldn't even bother installing a new Windows release on their current machine, and rather buy a new one. So Linux doesn't stand a chance that way. It's actually quite impressive that there's more than a 1% market share for Linux on pc's. Most of those millions a people have had to install Linux manually.

[caligula]

I read something like thing almost everyday on this forum. It almost seems Linux hasn't hit mainstream because nothing's done right.

But I think this is very incorrect.
First of, Linux's succes doesn't depend on Libreoffice. Most Libreoffice users are probably running it on Windows/Mac. And if you need a ribbon and/or full OOXML support on Linux, there's always Kingsoft Office.

The real reason Linux is small on the desktop, is because it rarely gets preinstalled on pc's. The majority of the population wouldn't even bother installing a new Windows release on their current machine, and rather buy a new one. So Linux doesn't stand a chance that way. It's actually quite impressive that there's more than a 1% market share for Linux on pc's. Most of those millions a people have had to install Linux manually.

There are major things blocking Linux adoption. For example on Ubuntu if the apt updater gets stuck, you need to manually delete some lock file via terminal and sudo. The average user doesn't need to do this. As long as this sort of polishing is broken, it won't be good. The Windows/OSX installers never get stuck this badly, Ubuntu gets every time you lose mains power. It's a real PITA.

For Office use, LibreOffice is far for compatible. The docx files are usually horribly broken. You need at least 90% compatibility. Unfortunately the LO guys are lazy at implementing it even though OOXML is now an official open source friendly patent free standard. It's also very old document standard already. It's almost like they got the binary doc compatibility faster but the reaon is, LO was proprietary StarOffice back then when they first did office compatibility and proprietary coders are more competent.

[mmstick]

There are major things blocking Linux adoption. For example on Ubuntu if the apt updater gets stuck, you need to manually delete some lock file via terminal and sudo. The average user doesn't need to do this. As long as this sort of polishing is broken, it won't be good. The Windows/OSX installers never get stuck this badly, Ubuntu gets every time you lose mains power. It's a real PITA.

For Office use, LibreOffice is far for compatible. The docx files are usually horribly broken. You need at least 90% compatibility. Unfortunately the LO guys are lazy at implementing it even though OOXML is now an official open source friendly patent free standard. It's also very old document standard already. It's almost like they got the binary doc compatibility faster but the reaon is, LO was proprietary StarOffice back then when they first did office compatibility and proprietary coders are more competent.

Linux's success doesn't depend upon Ubuntu, however; programming a simple software updater that overcomes that issue in Ubuntu is relatively simple to accomplish too. Vendors like HP and Dell could ship their own utilities if they wanted to.

Actually, I've never really seen a document broken in LibreOffice. I have, however, seen plenty of docx files broken between releases of Microsoft Office. Compatibility issues haven't stopped anyone from using services like Google Docs, so I don't see why we need to base everything on Microsoft formats.

The reason for Linux not being successful is still because no one markets it at all. Until products are actually on shelves in stores with ads on TV, it's not going to happen.

[quikee]

For Office use, LibreOffice is far for compatible. The docx files are usually horribly broken. You need at least 90% compatibility. Unfortunately the LO guys are lazy at implementing it even though OOXML is now an official open source friendly patent free standard. It's also very old document standard already. It's almost like they got the binary doc compatibility faster but the reaon is, LO was proprietary StarOffice back then when they first did office compatibility and proprietary coders are more competent.

Ohh.. what a flame bait! Don't respond to this people.. this lonely POS is not worth it.

Just for the record - the competent proprietary StarOffice developers are the main reason why more bigger changes aren't happening in LO. Just to support more than 65536 characters per paragraph (the bug that is fixed in this release) we had to touch almost every class in the code-base, because the competent proprietary StarOffice developers thought it is a good idea (actually they didn't even talk with each other) to have 6 or 7 different string types (each with its own limitations). So to get rid of that bug we had to convert all to use one common string type (actually 2 - 8 and 16-bit variant) which took more then a year because the code base is so huge and only afterwards this bug could be fixed. The competent proprietary StarOffice developers also forgot to write any kind of automated tests (even for totally basic things) - now have this FUN when you try to refactor or change something!