OpenOffice 4.0 Lotus Symphony GUI vs LibreOffice

[BigCityCat]

Since IBM basically gave Lotus Symphony back to Apache OpenOffice. Apache OpenOffice is merging a lot of IBM's code into OpenOffice. There has been some talk of incorporating Lotus Symphony Interface into the new Apache OpenOffice 4.0.

https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/merging_lotus_symphony_allegro_moderato

Assuming that happens and people like the Lotus Symphony Interface. Do you believe a lot of people might jump ship from LibreOffice? One of the major complaints of both is the outdated user interface.

http://www.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/IBM-Lotus-Symphony-Screenshot-84329.html

[prodigy_]

One of the major complaints of both is the outdated user interface.

Oh, not again. /sigh It was discussed ad nauseam back in 2007. There's no consensus about Ribbon being better hence LibreOffice UI is NOT outdated. Case closed.

And OpenOffice needs to be put out of its misery. It's a pity that IBM followed Oracle and donated their code to ASF instead of TDF.

[Hagar Delest]

For the moment, it's not question about the ribbon interface. There are just ideas and some of them could be rather good, let's see what is implemented.

[Erik1984]

Oh, not again. /sigh It was discussed ad nauseam back in 2007. There's no consensus about Ribbon being better hence LibreOffice UI is NOT outdated. Case closed.

And OpenOffice needs to be put out of its misery. It's a pity that IBM followed Oracle and donated their code to ASF instead of TDF.

correction: You don't feel LO has an outdated interface, quite some other people do.

[prodigy_]

correction: You don't feel LO has an outdated interface, quite some other people do.
I hope you'll excuse me for not wanting to go back in time and relive one of the most tedious and pointless holy wars I've witnessed. /yawn

[Dr. C]

Or LibreOffice will simply add the Lotus Symphony GUI since the Apache License is compatible with the LGPL.

[BigCityCat]

Or LibreOffice will simply add the Lotus Symphony GUI since the Apache License is compatible with the LGPL.

Would love to see this.

For the record I didn't give my opinion on the current interface all though I do like what IBM did.

[monkeybrain2012]

I am with LBO, it has the momentum, the community support and most importantly it proves that a project like that is possible to survive and flourish without being controlled by a corporate master, and the GPL is good for open source. OOO should be merged with LO, let's not try to do sabotage by fragmenting developers and user base and resurrect the development model under Sun/Oracle.

[llanitedave]

I'd like to see Libre Office and Open Office re-merge, now that both are set free. There's no compelling reason for them to be in competition.

I don't have much opinion as to whether the LO interface is outdated. It's functional, things are for the most part in logical places, and I really HATE the MS Ribbon.

So what does it need? More color? More features? That's all fine with me, as long as it does't interfere with the speed and functionality I get from it now.

[monkeybrain2012]

I don't really care about the interface. Is the "interface" of Latex outdated? You use an office suit to do spreadsheet or documents, not to stare at it and marvel at its beauty, when you are done you close it. The interface is functional and intuitive, which no one can deny and that is enough. Instead of wasting developmental resources on interface I think they can add more features or improving existing ones (and fixing bugs of course)

[MrMilli]

I just registered to give my two cents.
I get the impression that most of you didn't even use Lotus Symphony (thoroughly at least) and think it's user interface differences are just cosmetically. That's where you're wrong. I also don't understand why some start talking about MS Ribbon (I guess because they don't know Symphony's UI too well). The OP makes no mention of Ribbon. Symphony's UI and Ribbon are nothing alike. I personally use Symphony for quite some time for the sole reason of it's very handy and useful UI which merges all the office apps into one screen. Formatting and properties are on the right (which makes much more sense than Ribbon on top) so no, already limited, vertical screen space is wasted.
LO and OO need to remerge, embrace Symphony's UI and the end result will be a product that a lot of people will want to use. I know it's stupid but so many of my clients are reluctant to use LO for the sole reason that it's UI 'looks' dated. They rather pay $100 for MS Office. Case point being Android (and others), where 'smoothness' has become a 'feature'.

[neu5eeCh]

I get the impression that most of you didn't even use Lotus Symphony (thoroughly at least) and think it's user interface differences are just cosmetically. That's where you're wrong.

+1

I wouldn't mind seeing some of Lotus's features brought into LO. Tabbed windows would be a tremendous improvement. I really don't need half a dozen "windows" on my desktop anymore than I need a "tabless" browser. I understand that the Document Foundation has had their hands full, but there really should be no debate about adding this feature. If nothing changes, I would consider switching back to Open Office.

[kurt18947]

I'd like to see Libre Office and Open Office re-merge, now that both are set free. There's no compelling reason for them to be in competition.

I don't have much opinion as to whether the LO interface is outdated. It's functional, things are for the most part in logical places, and I really HATE the MS Ribbon.

So what does it need? More color? More features? That's all fine with me, as long as it does't interfere with the speed and functionality I get from it now.

There may some new user rebellion to the current UI when younger/newer users who have only used MSO 2007 and newer get their first glimpse at the current LO/OO UI. Like it or not ( I don't), people coming out of school only know one office suite and it ain't LO/OO. Any alternative UI is going to have to be interesting/familiar/intuitive to them. The current LO/OO UI is familiar to people who learned on and know MSO 2003 and earlier. I'm not saying LO should mindlessly copy MSO but asking new users to take a perceived step back in time may not be well received.

[mastablasta]

I personally use Symphony for quite some time for the sole reason of it's very handy and useful UI which merges all the office apps into one screen. Formatting and properties are on the right (which makes much more sense than Ribbon on top) so no, already limited, vertical screen space is wasted.


i use 4:3 ration on computer and having anything on the side (Unity?!) is actually taking valuable screen space. i am still not sure why the 16:9 ration monitors are better and so massivelly produced. but that is another thing....

anyway i use MS Ribbon at work. the most i dont' liek is it is difficult to locate some tools. it just takes me long time to find them as they are not where i though they would be. on the other hand the plus is istant change of themes, so i can really see how it will look like on mouseover, not in some small tiny preview window. not sure if this has anyhting to do with ribon interface...

anyway kurt18947 is right. the current interface is similar to old MS Wordstar. only back then you had letters instead of icons. then icons came. well and i guess now it's time to perhaps move on. we have touch devices and i really don't see how it would be easy to use LO on a touch device.

it serves me ok but perhaps to some younger generation it might look odd or archaic.

ah and since we have opensource going on, and freedom and such. interface should be the choice of the user. i would porbably still go with old fashioned current LO interface.

[Bandit]

LO UI is outdated. I am not sure the ribbon interface is the best choice, I would like to see other choices brought up as I dont feel LS GUI is half as OK as MS's Office offerings. But who can say..

[Docaltmed]

Am I the only one around here who uses the HUD?

[mastablasta]

Am I the only one around here who uses the HUD?

probably not.

but when i write something i usually type it first and then edit it later. when i edit it i like to push the keyboard aways and use the mouse and i like to use a preview to see how it would look like. to me, it's more relaxing that way.

so to type for menues in edit stage seems kind of strange. the only way i could think of that HUD would be good is if i didn't know where to fins certain command in the menu. otherwise it seem ridiculous to type in menu sessions. i mean if someone wants to type to get to tools then learning shortcuts is way faster than hud.

[zombifier25]

It has tabs.

I don't care about the rest of the features.
:lolflag:

[cvnmjs]

lotus symphony UI is OK, going by the screenshots on the IBM site. Would like to see that as an option.

[forrestcupp]

This is actually the first I've heard of this. I don't know what to think about it. I guess Open Office has become irrelevant enough that it doesn't really make much difference if Lotus Symphony stays with IBM or merges. My only concern is that now our option for LS will be compromised with OO, which is not necessarily a good thing.

But my main complaint about LS is I don't like having everything in one window. I like to have my word processor full screen, but I only use one spreadsheet, which is a non-maximized window set at a certain size that fits the spreadsheet. Since LS puts everything in one window, the window size memory is shared between all of the different parts of the office suite. Other than that, they have some pretty cool features, though.


Oh, not again. /sigh It was discussed ad nauseam back in 2007. There's no consensus about Ribbon being better hence LibreOffice UI is NOT outdated. Case closed.Ribbon is not what makes LO's UI outdated. The fact that the UI has pretty much stayed the same forever, and copies a UI from 1995 makes it outdated. Ribbon is not the only new idea out there.


I don't really care about the interface. Is the "interface" of Latex outdated? You use an office suit to do spreadsheet or documents, not to stare at it and marvel at its beauty, when you are done you close it. The interface is functional and intuitive, which no one can deny and that is enough. Instead of wasting developmental resources on interface I think they can add more features or improving existing ones (and fixing bugs of course)
It depends on who you are. Some people don't care about interfaces, but a lot of people don't want to stare at crap all day while they're working.

[click4851]

I'm curious, do other tool heavy applications change their UI's when they become dated? I'm thinking Adobe's Photoshop or GIMP, or even some of the music editing software for example, changing a UI can have a major impact on someones workflow.

[llanitedave]

Having a major effect on workflow is the only legitimate reason I can think of for changing a UI, if that change enhances the workflow. Yes, tabbed working windows are a good thing, and maybe toolbars at the sides rather than exclusively on the top and bottom. Pretty icons won't hurt.

Other than that, though, functionality is functionality, and if they really want to do advanced interface development, then make the interface user-configurable in major ways.

Oh, and document stuff well and clearly.

[MySchizoBuddy]

It's a pity that IBM followed Oracle and donated their code to ASF instead of TDF.

ASF has contributed the most to open source software than any other foundation to date. no one even comes close to the amount of effort Apache has poured into open source softwares. Yet now we see open source fanatics turning against Apache. it's a shamefull and sad turn of events.

[labsin]

UI? I don't really care. I even like the multiple windowed one best, so I can easily hide them. Like showing and hiding the draw toolbar windowed. If you're using the suit often, you'd never need a mouse. They are really slow. Try to memorize all the shortcuts and word processing is going to fly.

A head? CTRL-number
A list? F12 or SHIFT-F12
Bold? CTRL-B
Subscript? CTRL-SHIFT-B
Next word? CTRL-arrow
Unicode character? CTRL-SHIFT-U-hex number

With these most text can be inputted for like 95% and you should past the images afterwards anyhow.

And if you need something else, there is still the HUD in Ubuntu that can find it pretty fast.
(although it's giving up on me for LO, still needs some work there)

[jelabarre]

i use 4:3 ration on computer and having anything on the side (Unity?!) is actually taking valuable screen space. i am still not sure why the 16:9 ration monitors are better and so massivelly produced. but that is another thing..

Just as an off-top comment to that; my understanding is that the LCD makers ate tooled up to do 16:9 screens for the HDTV market, and swapping back & forth between 4:3 and 16:9 would mean having to spend time & money to switch ratios on their equipment. Forget that it means customers can't get what they want, because who listens to customers anymore? (4:3 is much better when you work with a lot of remote terminals, portrait-formatted documents, etc, but who listens to us?).

[jelabarre]

ASF has contributed the most to open source software than any other foundation to date. no one even comes close to the amount of effort Apache has poured into open source softwares. Yet now we see open source fanatics turning against Apache. it's a shamefull and sad turn of events.

I'm angry at Oracle and IBM for putting Apache in that position. That way Oracle and IBM can dodge the blame for everything, and all the crap falls on Apache.

[mips]

Try WPS Office.

[aravindet]

Most replies in this thread take the form of people (vehemently) stating their personal opinion about some design. They're missing the point. It's not about your preference. User interface design, like architecture, is mostly about following a set of well-defined rules about what makes a good UI.

For example, just a few of the problems of the default Libre/Ooo UI include:
1. Much functionality is only available through pull-down menus and submenus. Menus are terrible (poor discoverability, slow, require multiple targeting movements)
2. Much functionality is only available through modal dialogs that block document navigation. You can't iteratively try out changes and preview the results.
3. Toolbars and the menu eat up scarce vertical space. MS Ribbon is an even worse offender.

I think the symphony sidebar solves all of these very well. It surfaces funtionality hidden behind menus and dialogs without using vertical space. This is why sidebars are used for exposing editing functionality in pretty much all modern image editing apps (Gimp, Inkscape, Photoshop, Illustrator), 3D modeling (Blender, AutoCad) apps etc. Even Impress makes a half-attempt with the "Task pane".

Caveat: Calc might do better with toolbars or with an auto-collapsing sidebar, because I believe that formatting, inserting images etc. are done less frequently in Calc than in Writer and Impress. Calc is closer to an IDE than an image editor. (I might be wrong about this.) I also feel that changing the number formatting is a common task that isn't adequately served by the 3 buttons in the toolbar - perhaps a styles-like dropdown would be better.

Talking about styles, the way Google Docs does it ("Update paragraph to match this style" / "Update style to match this paragraph") is a vast improvement over anything in OpenOffice, Symphhony or MS Office.

Please replies to this post include:
"You can customize that". No, you can customize it. Most people don't change the defaults, so the defaults should follow objective good UI principles.
"I never use that". Many users do. Microsoft's ribbon UI was driven by usage data. Functionality exposed on the ribbon are the features people use often.
"I use keyboard shortcuts (or something else)". We are very impressed. But again, most people don't. You can probably continue to use whatever you're using in the Symphony UI. If not, too bad but there's no logical reason Open Office should be tailored to your specific needs rather than well accepted, good UI design principles.