4 ms·

Maybe I'm being overly fussy. But I think they should polish their UI. For example https://www.libreoffice.org/assets/Uploads/EN-Project_images/4.1NewFeatures/

Maybe I'm being overly fussy. But I think they should polish their UI. For example https://www.libreoffice.org/assets/Uploads/EN-Project_images/4.1NewFeatures/Calc/ChartWizardSteppedLine.png https://www.libreoffice.org/assets/Uploads/EN-Project_images... — the "Properties" button and "Line Type" drop down are completely misaligned. These design issues add up and end up giving a poor impression of the software, regardless of its features.

davidw 13y ago
> I think they should polish their UI. Probably. They may need help though - it's a big project with a lot of code that runs on various platforms. Did you file a bug report, or, if nothing else, drop them an email?
- interpol_p 13y ago
  This image was selected and highlighted on their new features page. They must be aware of the layout issues, surely? I'm not suggesting that this is horrible software, just that it gives a bad first impression. I am suggesting that these sorts of screenshots shouldn't be used in advertising material until they are polished.
JulianMorrison 13y ago
Looking through the change log, clearly they are doing, and clearly it's a big job of work which isn't finished yet.
PhearTheCeal 13y ago
Why don't you help do something about it then? At least a bug report? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/bug/ https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/bug/
- interpol_p 13y ago
  The main reason I referred to this image is because they are using it to advertise a new feature. This was an image that was selected for marketing purposes. My point is that doing such a thing can make a bad impression. Show only the polished parts of the app.
jvm 13y ago
It couldn't be any worse than inkscape's official website[1], targeting designers no less! I wonder how many thousands have chosen not to install Inkscape as a result of this home page. The first time I went I assumed it was a URL squatter. [1] http://inkscape.org/ http://inkscape.org/
- pbhjpbhj 13y ago
  >targeting designers no less! // They're not targeting anyone, they're presenting their software and letting you use it under a free-libre & free-gratis license. In many ways it doesn't matter if you chose it or not. It's not being created in order to develop a need in you it's created to meet a need the creators have. Inkscape is functional. Of course there's no problem with the website being worked on and perhaps made to answer questions one has more easily. But I wouldn't really want to divert resources towards marketing it and away from making it more usable and functional. Maybe I've misunderstood the economics of FOSS but that's how I see it.
  - jvm 13y ago
    > In many ways it doesn't matter if you chose it or not. Just to be clear, it doesn't matter to the project creators/authors. We don't know that for a fact, but their behavior seems to imply that. I'll admit, I find that a bit surprising, since I've never worked hard on a public-facing project without hoping people would use it and find it useful. However from a global welfare perspective it clearly matters a great deal. The over-simplified but not-too-far-off math on the social benefit of a project is that global_welfare_added == (value_added_per_user) * n_users, so a positive multiplier on n_users is a positive multiplier on value so long as the value added is positive. In this case, making the website look like an actual website isn't about "creaing a need", it's about informing people who have that need (designers who need to edit vector graphics) that the product might fill that need. Currently the site doesn't communicate that at all. Furthermore, that their demonstrated indifference to communicating the nature of their product to potential users makes me loathe to donate dev time or money to fund development of a product that will be little used by those who might value it. > But I wouldn't really want to divert resources towards marketing it and away from making it more usable and functional. The tiny user base undoubtedly restricts the project's access to resources in terms of donations of both time and money. Again, it's easy to imagine why the authors would be indifferent to this, and my only point is that's a shame for anybody who values a more widely-used project.
buovjaga 13y ago
The design team is always looking for more contributors: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design
donniezazen 13y ago
That looks like a qt-kde theme problem.
pbhjpbhj 13y ago
The "line type" label and the value are not baseline aligned either.
tonylampada 13y ago
http://www.freedomsponsors.org/core/issue/175/new-libreoffice-ui http://www.freedomsponsors.org/core/issue/175/new-libreoffic... Just pointing out :-)

davidw 13y ago

> I think they should polish their UI. Probably. They may need help though - it's a big project with a lot of code that runs on various platforms. Did you file a bug report, or, if nothing else, drop them an email?

interpol_p 13y ago
This image was selected and highlighted on their new features page. They must be aware of the layout issues, surely? I'm not suggesting that this is horrible software, just that it gives a bad first impression. I am suggesting that these sorts of screenshots shouldn't be used in advertising material until they are polished.

JulianMorrison 13y ago

Looking through the change log, clearly they are doing, and clearly it's a big job of work which isn't finished yet.

PhearTheCeal 13y ago

Why don't you help do something about it then? At least a bug report? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/bug/ https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/bug/

interpol_p 13y ago
The main reason I referred to this image is because they are using it to advertise a new feature. This was an image that was selected for marketing purposes. My point is that doing such a thing can make a bad impression. Show only the polished parts of the app.

jvm 13y ago

It couldn't be any worse than inkscape's official website[1], targeting designers no less! I wonder how many thousands have chosen not to install Inkscape as a result of this home page. The first time I went I assumed it was a URL squatter. [1] http://inkscape.org/ http://inkscape.org/

pbhjpbhj 13y ago
>targeting designers no less! // They're not targeting anyone, they're presenting their software and letting you use it under a free-libre & free-gratis license. In many ways it doesn't matter if you chose it or not. It's not being created in order to develop a need in you it's created to meet a need the creators have. Inkscape is functional. Of course there's no problem with the website being worked on and perhaps made to answer questions one has more easily. But I wouldn't really want to divert resources towards marketing it and away from making it more usable and functional. Maybe I've misunderstood the economics of FOSS but that's how I see it.
- jvm 13y ago
  > In many ways it doesn't matter if you chose it or not. Just to be clear, it doesn't matter to the project creators/authors. We don't know that for a fact, but their behavior seems to imply that. I'll admit, I find that a bit surprising, since I've never worked hard on a public-facing project without hoping people would use it and find it useful. However from a global welfare perspective it clearly matters a great deal. The over-simplified but not-too-far-off math on the social benefit of a project is that global_welfare_added == (value_added_per_user) * n_users, so a positive multiplier on n_users is a positive multiplier on value so long as the value added is positive. In this case, making the website look like an actual website isn't about "creaing a need", it's about informing people who have that need (designers who need to edit vector graphics) that the product might fill that need. Currently the site doesn't communicate that at all. Furthermore, that their demonstrated indifference to communicating the nature of their product to potential users makes me loathe to donate dev time or money to fund development of a product that will be little used by those who might value it. > But I wouldn't really want to divert resources towards marketing it and away from making it more usable and functional. The tiny user base undoubtedly restricts the project's access to resources in terms of donations of both time and money. Again, it's easy to imagine why the authors would be indifferent to this, and my only point is that's a shame for anybody who values a more widely-used project.

buovjaga 13y ago

The design team is always looking for more contributors: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design

donniezazen 13y ago

That looks like a qt-kde theme problem.

pbhjpbhj 13y ago

The "line type" label and the value are not baseline aligned either.

tonylampada 13y ago

http://www.freedomsponsors.org/core/issue/175/new-libreoffice-ui http://www.freedomsponsors.org/core/issue/175/new-libreoffic... Just pointing out :-)