Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:18 UTC
Features, Office The OpenOffice.org team has been experimenting with a new user interface for the suite of programs, and they've presented the first rough prototype of this new interface, more specifically for Impress. The general gist? It's Microsoft Office 2007's ribbon interface.
Thread beginning with comment 377476
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
copycat
by stooovie on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:21 UTC
stooovie
Member since:
2006-01-25

Perfect proof of Copycatism in Linux/OSS world. While i really like certain OSS projects, majority of open software that actually has some user base is a plagiate of windows/mac SW. I would guess OSS devs have freedom to explore new grounds, but rather they stick to paradigms proven by proprietary vendors.

Reply Score: 5

RE: copycat
by GiantTalkingCow on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:27 in reply to "copycat"
GiantTalkingCow Member since:
2009-01-27

Agreed. And what's more, in this case they've copied a bloody awful UI paradigm, and there's no indication that they've learned anything from Microsoft's mistakes. The default layout looks awful, takes up far too much spaces, and if the first pic is any indication, seems to be organized somewhat arbitrarily. I can only hope that unlike Microsoft's, this UI will be customizable, with users being able to create their own tab layouts. As is, this is the software equivalent of someone trying to copy a Ford Pinto.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: copycat
by gustl on Thu 6th Aug 2009 19:32 in reply to "RE: copycat"
gustl Member since:
2006-01-19

Totally agree but for one thing.

If OOo wants to venture into MSOffice user interface land, they should make sure that ALL buttons are at the exact same place and provide as similar a functionality to MSOffice as possible with OOo.

Why?

Because forcing somebody to learn ANOTHER brain-dead user interface seems to be no good idea to me.

The second advantage of this approach would be to save a lot of testing work to find out what is the best layout. I think Microsoft poured a lot of brainpower and testing into this to make it at least bearable.

No matter what they do, they better keep the current UI at least as an option.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: copycat
by chekr on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:29 in reply to "copycat"
chekr Member since:
2005-11-05

If your saying that they are copying the "ribbon" then take a look at the bluefish editor tools interface...keep in mind that their interface pre-dated MSO '07

Kind of turns your argument on its head :-D

Reply Parent Score: 10

RE[2]: copycat
by Ventajou on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:44 in reply to "RE: copycat"
Ventajou Member since:
2006-10-31

Looks like a ripoff of Coldfusion Studio 5:
http://gemsres.com/photos/story/res/42061/fig3.jpg

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: copycat
by drstorm on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:46 in reply to "RE: copycat"
drstorm Member since:
2009-04-24

bluefish editor

Oh, yeah! Surely, that's where Microsoft got the idea. They didn't spend millions of dollars on R&D, but instead they just copied this:
http://bluefish.openoffice.nl/screenshots/python_fref.png

Can you seriously believe that? I can't.

Besides, that tabbed toolbar is not ribbon, and tabbed toolbar has been around for ages - in Delphi, for example.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: copycat
by benir0 on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:52 in reply to "copycat"
benir0 Member since:
2006-07-26

Hmmm...the possibility of being a "copycat" never stopped MS or Apple from using any idea. There is very little new under the sun. The problem is that the idea as presented isn't a very good one.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: copycat
by siride on Thu 6th Aug 2009 14:18 in reply to "copycat"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

Don't blame Linux/OSS. This is a Sun project, mostly worked on by Sun folks.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: copycat
by Macrat on Thu 6th Aug 2009 22:00 in reply to "RE: copycat"
Macrat Member since:
2006-03-27

Don't blame Linux/OSS. This is a Sun project, mostly worked on by Sun folks.


Sun folks trying very hard to justify their continued employment with Oracle.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE: copycat
by MacTO on Thu 6th Aug 2009 14:56 in reply to "copycat"
MacTO Member since:
2006-09-21

I'm sorry to tell you this, but there are plenty of innovative ideas in the FLOSS world. We see those ideas both through discussion and implementation.

So why don't we see this innovation in common desktop environments? It is because we (as users) demand something that looks like and works like popular commercial products. The developers who dare to think different tend to have their hard work adopted by a very small number of users. So is it any wonder why many developers would prefer to work on the copycat projects?

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE: copycat
by unoengborg on Fri 7th Aug 2009 12:47 in reply to "copycat"
unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

I would guess OSS devs have freedom to explore new grounds, but rather they stick to paradigms proven by proprietary vendors.


The OSS devs have as much freedom as the users of their software allow. E.g. look at K-Office, an excellent office suite, but very few people uses it, most likely becaus they feel unfamiliar with the new interface.

BTW Microsoft have not always been dominant on office software, they got where they are by making it easy to switch to Microsoft, e.g. by making it easy to import, and to some extent files to competing system, and to have similar features. This is the same thing we are seeing in OpenOffice today.

Free software developers depend on the market demand just like Microsoft or Apple. If you can't get users to use your software, there will be very few potential buyers of support, less advertising income from your website, and when you try to advertise your developer skills e.g. at a job intervju the chances are much less chanse that the employer knows what you have done.

The problem is that a few venders controls large parts of the software ecosystem, and we get defacto standards of how things should look and work. If you don't fit in that ecosystem you are gone. This is a problem that applies to both free and non free software.

Reply Parent Score: 2