Improving download page

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
Next » 12
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Improving download page

Hi all,

Recently we discussed the need to improve the download page (on the
marketing list).
Christoph was so kind to help us to find again the existing wiki page on
the subject with the mockups, Download page whiteboard page:
  http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/Download_Page

Without doubt, this is the best we have at this stage. However, with
discussions from the last months in mind, I've been thinking and looking
a while about some possible improvements: How to offer our latest
greatest as much as possible, though in a responsible way, and soon?


The idea:
--------
So:
  a. how to show the default / other download
  b. when do we switch the development lines 'default' <> 'other'

AD a
   - The intention is to get people download the latest as soon as
reasonable safe.
   - Condition: the version can be installed by all, without trouble,
and no problems in basic use
   - How: Start with labelling 3.5.x asap as default, possibly already
the 3.5.0, + a clear link nearby, explaining the availability of the
'more conservative release'.
   - Rationale: that should be enough for people with some understanding
about software. And the people that do not understand it, probably make
use of so little features, that there is no problem for them that the
3.5.0/1 has some more glitches :-)

AD b
   - Basically is answered with a.: the version can be installed by all,
without trouble and we show a clear link leading to information.


Result:
-------
I think we must distinct between three situations/phases
  1. 3.5.x must be promoted but with care
     (might be 3.5.0, maybe 3.5.1 or might even be skipped)

  2. 3.5.x considered good enough
     for non-expert installation and use
     (might be 3.5.0, maybe 3.5.1)

  3. 3.5.x is simply default
     (for probably 3.5.1 or 3.5.2 and up)


I've done three simple, rough mockups and added them to the wiki
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/Download_Page#Mockups_2012

Compared to the previous mockups (1), I suggest to skip the explaining
texts. Those are always debatable, and we link to a page (popup?) with
some more words for understandable explanation.

The ideas for download buttons, offering help packs  (windows/Linux) and
Language packs/OS (Linux) as suggested in the previous mockups are OK,
must haves.

Also links for/to 'we've guessed wrong', 'handy resources' should be
there too.


Can this be done?
-----------------
So ... I hope this is technically possible.
Of course this makes it necessary that we discuss about the status of
(earlier) releases in order to get the download page in proper shape.
But we have those discussions anyway ;-)


Cheers,
Cor

1) Linked from the wiki
  - windows default example:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/7/7c/2011-07-01_DownloadPage_Default_Windows_Collapsed.png
  - Linux download page example
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:2011-07-01_DownloadPage_Features_Linux_Expanded.png

--
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

Cor Nouws wrote (11-02-12 10:44)

> Can this be done?

For in case the new download page may not be there before the 3.5.0 is
out (few days..), I've added a few words about latest/previous version
to the download page.

When the 3.5.0 is there, I suggest:
at the top (3.5.0)
   "This is the Our latest, feature rich version,
    has a bit more glitches"
below (3.4.5)
   "for conservative use, without the latest features"
(and maybe add a link to archives for 3.3.4?)


--
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
italovignoli italovignoli
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

On 2/11/12 10:55 AM, Cor Nouws wrote:

> When the 3.5.0 is there, I suggest:
> at the top (3.5.0)
>   "This is the Our latest, feature rich version,
>    has a bit more glitches"

I would write "this is our latest and greatest, feature rich version"

> below (3.4.5)
>   "for conservative use, without the latest features"

I would write "for conservative users, thoroughly tested, without the
latest features"

> (and maybe add a link to archives for 3.3.4?)

Is it really necessary?

--
Italo Vignoli - [hidden email]
mob +39.348.5653829 - VoIP [hidden email]
skype italovignoli - gtalk [hidden email]

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Italo Vignoli
Director - The Document Foundation
drewjensen drewjensen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by Cor Nouws
On Sat, 2012-02-11 at 10:44 +0100, Cor Nouws wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Recently we discussed the need to improve the download page (on the
> marketing list).
> Christoph was so kind to help us to find again the existing wiki page on
> the subject with the mockups, Download page whiteboard page:
>   http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/Download_Page
>
> Without doubt, this is the best we have at this stage. However, with
> discussions from the last months in mind, I've been thinking and looking
> a while about some possible improvements: How to offer our latest
> greatest as much as possible, though in a responsible way, and soon?
>
>
> The idea:
> --------
> So:
>   a. how to show the default / other download
>   b. when do we switch the development lines 'default' <> 'other'
>
> AD a
>    - The intention is to get people download the latest as soon as
> reasonable safe.
>    - Condition: the version can be installed by all, without trouble,
> and no problems in basic use
>    - How: Start with labelling 3.5.x asap as default, possibly already
> the 3.5.0, + a clear link nearby, explaining the availability of the
> 'more conservative release'.
>    - Rationale: that should be enough for people with some understanding
> about software. And the people that do not understand it, probably make
> use of so little features, that there is no problem for them that the
> 3.5.0/1 has some more glitches :-)
>
> AD b
>    - Basically is answered with a.: the version can be installed by all,
> without trouble and we show a clear link leading to information.

I would strongly argue in the reverse.

They likely use less of the application and therefore:
- are least likely to benefit from the new features
- least likely to appreciate the value of new features they find
- least able to deal with any stability issues found
-- unable to quickly recognize workarounds on their own
-- least capable of giving quality feedback in the form of entering
issues into the bug tracking system
-- most likely to abandon the application out of frustation

The more capable users are the ones likely to exercise more aspects of
the application and therefore:
-- recognize the new features, enhancements
-- best able to work around any stability issues in early version
releases
-- most likely to give useful feedback via the bug tracker

In other words I feel that it is the casual user that should be directed
to the trailing release 3.4.5 at this time, and the exception (for lack
of a better term) treatment to direct our experienced users to the
latest feature release 3.5.0.

IMO this offers the best experience for both the end users and the
efforts of the foundation as it avoids frustrating those least able to
deal with the leading edge, and maximizes the likelihood of getting
timely, useful and quality feedback into the QA/developer loop.

Thanks,

//drew

>
> Result:
> -------
> I think we must distinct between three situations/phases
>   1. 3.5.x must be promoted but with care
>      (might be 3.5.0, maybe 3.5.1 or might even be skipped)
>
>   2. 3.5.x considered good enough
>      for non-expert installation and use
>      (might be 3.5.0, maybe 3.5.1)
>
>   3. 3.5.x is simply default
>      (for probably 3.5.1 or 3.5.2 and up)
>
>
> I've done three simple, rough mockups and added them to the wiki
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/Download_Page#Mockups_2012
>
> Compared to the previous mockups (1), I suggest to skip the explaining
> texts. Those are always debatable, and we link to a page (popup?) with
> some more words for understandable explanation.
>
> The ideas for download buttons, offering help packs  (windows/Linux) and
> Language packs/OS (Linux) as suggested in the previous mockups are OK,
> must haves.
>
> Also links for/to 'we've guessed wrong', 'handy resources' should be
> there too.
>
>
> Can this be done?
> -----------------
> So ... I hope this is technically possible.
> Of course this makes it necessary that we discuss about the status of
> (earlier) releases in order to get the download page in proper shape.
> But we have those discussions anyway ;-)
>
>
> Cheers,
> Cor
>
> 1) Linked from the wiki
>   - windows default example:
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/7/7c/2011-07-01_DownloadPage_Default_Windows_Collapsed.png
>   - Linux download page example
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:2011-07-01_DownloadPage_Features_Linux_Expanded.png
>
> --
>   - Cor
>   - http://nl.libreoffice.org
>
>



--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Document Foundation Mail Archives
Luc Castermans Luc Castermans
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by Cor Nouws
Op 11-02-12 10:55, Cor Nouws schreef:

> Cor Nouws wrote (11-02-12 10:44)
>
>> Can this be done?
>
> For in case the new download page may not be there before the 3.5.0 is out (few days..), I've added a few words about
> latest/previous version to the download page.
>
> When the 3.5.0 is there, I suggest:
> at the top (3.5.0)
>   "This is the Our latest, feature rich version,
>    has a bit more glitches"
> below (3.4.5)
>   "for conservative use, without the latest features"
> (and maybe add a link to archives for 3.3.4?)

Nice pictures on the white board!   Nevertheless I think optically we should
provide one button to the version we want to download at that moment in time.
We could provide other means, links, to other versions we want to offer at that
moment in time.

At present we show two versions on the download pages, consequently I propose
to drop the second download, per today this is version 3.3.4   Simplification
is achieved by removing the latter.

Like KDE we could have one download page with "old versions". Like Firefox
we ought to show only one version to download.

Regards

Luc

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Olav Dahlum Olav Dahlum
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by Cor Nouws
2012/2/11 Cor Nouws <[hidden email]>

> Cor Nouws wrote (11-02-12 10:44)
>
>  Can this be done?
>>
>
> For in case the new download page may not be there before the 3.5.0 is out
> (few days..), I've added a few words about latest/previous version to the
> download page.
>
> When the 3.5.0 is there, I suggest:
> at the top (3.5.0)
>  "This is the Our latest, feature rich version,
>   has a bit more glitches"
> below (3.4.5)
>  "for conservative use, without the latest features"
> (and maybe add a link to archives for 3.3.4?)
>

Scaring, insulting, and driving away customers/users won't promote or sell
LibreOffice. Instead, highlight the features in the various versions.
Meaning, market 3.5 for what it is; a faster generation etc etc, and 3.4 as
something more of a LTS release. Corporate users love those messages. Sell
like hell, sort of speaking …

– Olav

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by drewjensen
Hi Drew, all,

drew wrote (11-02-12 14:39)

>>     - Basically is answered with a.: the version can be installed by all,
>> without trouble and we show a clear link leading to information.
>
> I would strongly argue in the reverse.

Ah, sad. I had hoped (dreamed prolly) that with my idea we had found the
sheep with 5 legs (and then the international equivalent of that ;-) )

But of course we must be able to find a working solution for another
direction/choice too.
Let me first put your arguments to the test ;-)

> They likely use less of the application and therefore:
> - are least likely to benefit from the new features
> - least likely to appreciate the value of new features they find

Well, that of course depends the features we are talking about.
I think improved import for PPTX and Visio are attractive enough.

> - least able to deal with any stability issues found

Yes. Those should be really exceptional. And are so in my experience
(which is invalid, since I work with Linux ...)

> -- unable to quickly recognize workarounds on their own
> -- least capable of giving quality feedback in the form of entering
> issues into the bug tracking system
> -- most likely to abandon the application out of frustation

If they got stuck: probably.

> [...]
> In other words I feel that it is the casual user that should be directed
> to the trailing release 3.4.5 at this time, and the exception (for lack
> of a better term) treatment to direct our experienced users to the
> latest feature release 3.5.0.

Well, you may have understand from my initial post, that me/we are
wrestling with the question how to get enough people work fast enough
with 3.5.0

> IMO this offers the best experience for both the end users and the
> efforts of the foundation as it avoids frustrating those least able to
> deal with the leading edge, and maximizes the likelihood of getting
> timely, useful and quality feedback into the QA/developer loop.

Would like to read what others choose ?
(I can think about different mockups in the mean time, for just in case
that ;-) )

Cheers,

--
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by Cor Nouws
Hi Anders,

Anders Holbøll wrote (11-02-12 21:24)

> I believe that 3.5.0 should be advertised as the default recommended
> version. If it isn't ready for that, I would assume that the developers
> had put out another release candidate!

I guess the developers think it's ready for the release.
Compared with the unhandy situation around the 3.4.0 and because of
changes in the process, more QA, and since the project/developed evolved
quite a bit, we may expect that.
Still, that's my impression and I'm not a really involved developer.

> I think we can assume that the project will get quite some press
> coverage for the 3.5 release (at least more than for the 3.5.1 release).
> So it makes no sense to spoil that, by saying to people that it isn't
> quite ready after all, when they come to download the software.

Agree.

> That will just cause confusion and insecurity.
>
> I would think that the newest major release is for end-users and the
> previous major is for "enterprises" (and if they want the previous
> release, they will know, know why and know to look for it). But I have
> been confused by LibreOffice's messaging on this, even though I am a
> developer (not a LO-dev, just a end-user).

As you may notice, we look for ways how to bring this message to our
download pages. Which already tend to be cluttered because of
unavoidable extra download links / choices.

Thanks for your input on this. And the technical stuff in the other mail
too! (which I hope others will pick up.)

In cane you have the 'one cures all' solution for our download page,
feel welcome to share :-)

Regards,


--
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by italovignoli
Italo Vignoli wrote (11-02-12 11:44)
> On 2/11/12 10:55 AM, Cor Nouws wrote:
>
>> When the 3.5.0 is there, I suggest:
>
> I would write "this is our latest and greatest, feature rich version"

Agree.

>> below (3.4.5)

> I would write "for conservative users, thoroughly tested, without the
> latest features"

I see someone wrote "previous version" which is even better IMO.

>> (and maybe add a link to archives for 3.3.4?)
>
> Is it really necessary?

Well, somewhere people must be able to find the archives. Could be
simply added at the list at the bottom.

Thanks!

--
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by Luc Castermans
Hi Luc, *,

Luc Castermans wrote (11-02-12 20:26)

> Nice pictures on the white board! Nevertheless I think optically we should
> provide one button to the version we want to download at that moment in
> time.

Thanks!
Alas I fail to see how to predict what kind of user is running the
browser, which is needed to show one of the two possible versions ...

> We could provide other means, links, to other versions we want to offer
> at that moment in time.
>
> At present we show two versions on the download pages, consequently I
> propose  to drop the second download, per today this is version 3.3.4
> Simplification  is achieved by removing the latter.
>
> Like KDE we could have one download page with "old versions". Like Firefox
> we ought to show only one version to download.

Ah, but then a message (for the time that we offer say 3.5.0 and maybe
3.5.1) to inform business users that they would rather use the 'old
version' is needed?

Interesting by the way, that where I was a bit in the middle between the
initial mockups on the wiki and what also Drew writes  (offer 3.4.5 as
default) and the idea from developers (get 3.5.0 out as much as fast as
possible - if I got that right), you and also Anders go indeed are fully
at that side.

Regards,

--
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by Olav Dahlum
Hi Olav,
Olav Dahlum wrote (11-02-12 22:07)

> Scaring, insulting, and driving away customers/users won't promote or sell
> LibreOffice. Instead, highlight the features in the various versions.
> Meaning, market 3.5 for what it is; a faster generation etc etc, and 3.4 as
> something more of a LTS release. Corporate users love those messages. Sell
> like hell, sort of speaking …

Would indeed be nice to have some wordings as 'long term' which means
'stable' to the reader.
'Thoroughly tested' as Italo wrote implicitly means that 3.5.0 would not
be. Hmmm.
Maybe just LTR, Long term release ?

--
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
marcpare4 marcpare4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

Le 2012-02-11 16:56, Cor Nouws a écrit :

> Hi Olav,
> Olav Dahlum wrote (11-02-12 22:07)
>
>> Scaring, insulting, and driving away customers/users won't promote or
>> sell
>> LibreOffice. Instead, highlight the features in the various versions.
>> Meaning, market 3.5 for what it is; a faster generation etc etc, and
>> 3.4 as
>> something more of a LTS release. Corporate users love those messages.
>> Sell
>> like hell, sort of speaking …
>
> Would indeed be nice to have some wordings as 'long term' which means
> 'stable' to the reader.
> 'Thoroughly tested' as Italo wrote implicitly means that 3.5.0 would
> not be. Hmmm.
> Maybe just LTR, Long term release ?
>
I thought I read somewhere (on some mailing list) that the devs were
recommending using the term LTR only for the 3.5.x family later when it
is more stable. It was suggested not to use the term LTR for the 3.4.x
versions for some reason. So with this reasoning in mind, we would start
throwing around the "LTR" label for the 3.5.x version sometime after the
release of the 3.6.x version.

Cheers,

Marc

--
Marc Paré
[hidden email]
http://www.parEntreprise.com
parEntreprise.com Supports OpenDocument Formats (ODF)
parEntreprise.com Supports http://www.LibreOffice.org


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Christoph Noack Christoph Noack
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by Cor Nouws
Hi Cor, hi Luc, all!

Great to see the recent activity concerning that topic :-)

Am Samstag, den 11.02.2012, 22:51 +0100 schrieb Cor Nouws:

> Hi Luc, *,
>
> Luc Castermans wrote (11-02-12 20:26)
>
> > Nice pictures on the white board! Nevertheless I think optically we should
> > provide one button to the version we want to download at that moment in
> > time.
>
> Thanks!
> Alas I fail to see how to predict what kind of user is running the
> browser, which is needed to show one of the two possible versions ...

Mmh, maybe I'm blind, but wasn't the idea of having a "default version",
and thus a download page for one version only, the solution for to
"provide one button to the version we want to download"?

Looking at the new proposals at [1], the major difference (I seem to be
able to spot) is the decision to present "LibO 3.5.0 Early Adopters" as
the default download page.

[1]
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards/Download_Page#Mockups_2012


> > We could provide other means, links, to other versions we want to offer
> > at that moment in time.
> >
> > At present we show two versions on the download pages, consequently I
> > propose  to drop the second download, per today this is version 3.3.4
> > Simplification  is achieved by removing the latter.
> >
> > Like KDE we could have one download page with "old versions". Like Firefox
> > we ought to show only one version to download.
>
> Ah, but then a message (for the time that we offer say 3.5.0 and maybe
> 3.5.1) to inform business users that they would rather use the 'old
> version' is needed?

Given the requirements / constraints on that page, my assumption was
that we will offer the versions that are "valid" - that might be a
combination of "early adopters version and default version", but it may
just be a "default version". Thus, the button bar at at the bottom is
made scalable (e.g. remove the features version, or even add a version
for extremely conservative users). But at the end - one version is the
default that is presented to the users.

A second design decision was to handle older versions and other stuff
(e.g. the older DVD versions) at "All Downloads".

To me, our thoughts seem very similar - which I consider helpful :-)

> Interesting by the way, that where I was a bit in the middle between the
> initial mockups on the wiki and what also Drew writes  (offer 3.4.5 as
> default) and the idea from developers (get 3.5.0 out as much as fast as
> possible - if I got that right), you and also Anders go indeed are fully
> at that side.

To me, it is not that much mockups related, but the basic question "how
many versions will be offered at the same time", and "who decides what
version is the default".

Good night everyone!

Christoph


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
marcpare4 marcpare4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by drewjensen
HI Drew et al

Le 2012-02-11 08:39, drew a écrit :

> I would strongly argue in the reverse.
>
> They likely use less of the application and therefore:
> - are least likely to benefit from the new features
> - least likely to appreciate the value of new features they find
> - least able to deal with any stability issues found
> -- unable to quickly recognize workarounds on their own
> -- least capable of giving quality feedback in the form of entering
> issues into the bug tracking system
> -- most likely to abandon the application out of frustation
>
> The more capable users are the ones likely to exercise more aspects of
> the application and therefore:
> -- recognize the new features, enhancements
> -- best able to work around any stability issues in early version
> releases
> -- most likely to give useful feedback via the bug tracker
>
> In other words I feel that it is the casual user that should be directed
> to the trailing release 3.4.5 at this time, and the exception (for lack
> of a better term) treatment to direct our experienced users to the
> latest feature release 3.5.0.
>
> IMO this offers the best experience for both the end users and the
> efforts of the foundation as it avoids frustrating those least able to
> deal with the leading edge, and maximizes the likelihood of getting
> timely, useful and quality feedback into the QA/developer loop.
If I am not mistaken, this has already been said previously somewhere
and I find this logic sound. It is unfortunate that the 3.5.x may have
more interesting features, but I also agree with you. Most people would
prefer a solid product than having to fiddle around with the software.
They are already spending too much time worrying about virus/spyware
checking, and, having another potentially (even if slightly) glitchy
version of LibreOffice is not what most are looking for.

I also vote for archiving the 3.3.x versions. We should only carry 2
versions on the Download page.

Otherwise, we would only carry one version of the product.

Cheers,

Marc

--
Marc Paré
[hidden email]
http://www.parEntreprise.com
parEntreprise.com Supports OpenDocument Formats (ODF)
parEntreprise.com Supports http://www.LibreOffice.org


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
drewjensen drewjensen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

On Sat, 2012-02-11 at 17:56 -0500, Marc Paré wrote:

> HI Drew et al
>
> Le 2012-02-11 08:39, drew a écrit :
> > I would strongly argue in the reverse.
> >
> > They likely use less of the application and therefore:
> > - are least likely to benefit from the new features
> > - least likely to appreciate the value of new features they find
> > - least able to deal with any stability issues found
> > -- unable to quickly recognize workarounds on their own
> > -- least capable of giving quality feedback in the form of entering
> > issues into the bug tracking system
> > -- most likely to abandon the application out of frustation
> >
> > The more capable users are the ones likely to exercise more aspects of
> > the application and therefore:
> > -- recognize the new features, enhancements
> > -- best able to work around any stability issues in early version
> > releases
> > -- most likely to give useful feedback via the bug tracker
> >
> > In other words I feel that it is the casual user that should be directed
> > to the trailing release 3.4.5 at this time, and the exception (for lack
> > of a better term) treatment to direct our experienced users to the
> > latest feature release 3.5.0.
> >
> > IMO this offers the best experience for both the end users and the
> > efforts of the foundation as it avoids frustrating those least able to
> > deal with the leading edge, and maximizes the likelihood of getting
> > timely, useful and quality feedback into the QA/developer loop.
> If I am not mistaken, this has already been said previously somewhere
> and I find this logic sound. It is unfortunate that the 3.5.x may have
> more interesting features, but I also agree with you. Most people would
> prefer a solid product than having to fiddle around with the software.
> They are already spending too much time worrying about virus/spyware
> checking, and, having another potentially (even if slightly) glitchy
> version of LibreOffice is not what most are looking for.
>
> I also vote for archiving the 3.3.x versions. We should only carry 2
> versions on the Download page.
>
> Otherwise, we would only carry one version of the product.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Marc
>


Well I wrote the email first thing this morning and I am still, in
general, behind the concept, however, after reading everything on list
today and spending most of the day running 3.4.5 and 3.5.0 _and_ then
reading your post, specifically, referencing the chatter from some
developers to start thinking of the 3.5 branch as the first LTR (for a
working term) candidate...

I would change my, or have changed my mind, regarding this moment in
time. I think given everything that 3.5.0 should be the default, over
3.4.x.

But I would really like to see us have a more detailed discussion,
before we get to 3.6 in order to flesh out the ideas in general about,
how we designate 'the default' going forward.

Hope that makes sense.

Thanks,

//drew


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Document Foundation Mail Archives
Olav Dahlum Olav Dahlum
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by Cor Nouws
On 11/02/12 22:56, Cor Nouws wrote:

> Hi Olav,
> Olav Dahlum wrote (11-02-12 22:07)
>
>> Scaring, insulting, and driving away customers/users won't promote or
>> sell
>> LibreOffice. Instead, highlight the features in the various versions.
>> Meaning, market 3.5 for what it is; a faster generation etc etc, and
>> 3.4 as
>> something more of a LTS release. Corporate users love those messages.
>> Sell
>> like hell, sort of speaking …
>
> Would indeed be nice to have some wordings as 'long term' which means
> 'stable' to the reader.
> 'Thoroughly tested' as Italo wrote implicitly means that 3.5.0 would not
> be. Hmmm.
> Maybe just LTR, Long term release ?
>

Indeed, we need a similar approach as the one Mozilla have with Firefox 3.6.
Predictability for certain users are the key … We do make software for
people,
and they don't care much about translated comments in the source code
etc. ;-)

– Olav

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Olav Dahlum Olav Dahlum
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving download page

In reply to this post by marcpare4
On 11/02/12 23:46, Marc Paré wrote:

> Le 2012-02-11 16:56, Cor Nouws a écrit :
>> Hi Olav,
>> Olav Dahlum wrote (11-02-12 22:07)
>>
>>> Scaring, insulting, and driving away customers/users won't promote or
>>> sell
>>> LibreOffice. Instead, highlight the features in the various versions.
>>> Meaning, market 3.5 for what it is; a faster generation etc etc, and
>>> 3.4 as
>>> something more of a LTS release. Corporate users love those messages.
>>> Sell
>>> like hell, sort of speaking …
>>
>> Would indeed be nice to have some wordings as 'long term' which means
>> 'stable' to the reader.
>> 'Thoroughly tested' as Italo wrote implicitly means that 3.5.0 would
>> not be. Hmmm.
>> Maybe just LTR, Long term release ?
>>
> I thought I read somewhere (on some mailing list) that the devs were
> recommending using the term LTR only for the 3.5.x family later when it
> is more stable. It was suggested not to use the term LTR for the 3.4.x
> versions for some reason. So with this reasoning in mind, we would start
> throwing around the "LTR" label for the 3.5.x version sometime after the
> release of the 3.6.x version.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Marc
>

Assuming adoption of LibreOffice will pick up pace due to usage on Android
and iOS, this would be the right time to figure this out, and actually
do it.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
italovignoli italovignoli
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

URGENT Re: [libreoffice-website] Improving download page

In reply to this post by Christoph Noack
Apologies, I did not realize what was happening on the download page.
Sorry for jumping in so late.

On 2/11/12 11:54 PM, Christoph Noack wrote:

> Looking at the new proposals at [1], the major difference (I seem to be
> able to spot) is the decision to present "LibO 3.5.0 Early Adopters" as
> the default download page.

Please take away the Early Adopters from the button. The button should
read "Download LibreOffice 3.5". Nothing less, nothing more.

The other button should read: "Download LibreOffice Previous Version",
but the button should be smaller (but I am more flexible on the second one).

At the moment, the two buttons are not in line with the announcement of
LibreOffice 3.5, which is taglined "the best free office suite ever",
and might create some confusion.

LibreOffice 3.4 was in a completely different situation, and we had to
face it telling users that it was not ready for corporate adoption.

LibreOffice 3.5 is more mature and more stable. The press release is
explaining to end users what they should do.

Thanks, Italo

--
Italo Vignoli - [hidden email]
mob +39.348.5653829 - VoIP [hidden email]
skype italovignoli - gtalk [hidden email]

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Italo Vignoli
Director - The Document Foundation
Olav Dahlum Olav Dahlum
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: URGENT Re: [libreoffice-website] Improving download page

On 12/02/12 00:34, Italo Vignoli wrote:

> Apologies, I did not realize what was happening on the download page.
> Sorry for jumping in so late.
>
> On 2/11/12 11:54 PM, Christoph Noack wrote:
>
>> Looking at the new proposals at [1], the major difference (I seem to be
>> able to spot) is the decision to present "LibO 3.5.0 Early Adopters" as
>> the default download page.
>
> Please take away the Early Adopters from the button. The button should
> read "Download LibreOffice 3.5". Nothing less, nothing more.
>
> The other button should read: "Download LibreOffice Previous Version",
> but the button should be smaller (but I am more flexible on the second one).
>
> At the moment, the two buttons are not in line with the announcement of
> LibreOffice 3.5, which is taglined "the best free office suite ever",
> and might create some confusion.
>
> LibreOffice 3.4 was in a completely different situation, and we had to
> face it telling users that it was not ready for corporate adoption.
>
> LibreOffice 3.5 is more mature and more stable. The press release is
> explaining to end users what they should do.
>
> Thanks, Italo
>

Also, the big buttons should be replaced with some slick graphics not
occupying so much of the screen. The second entry could probably be
simplified even further, like just «Download the previous version»,
and later «Old and archived versions».

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: URGENT Re: [libreoffice-website] Improving download page

In reply to this post by italovignoli
Hi all,

This thread is because:
- the download page is nominated for improvement some time already;
- the mockups and wording at the wiki (from June/July last year)
represent the idea to hide the new version (currently 3.5.0) and use the
old as 'stable'
- we want to be 3.5.0 to be strongly promoted. If not as default, then
in any case very visible and attractive.

See the introduction at the top op my initial mail:
http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/msg07141.html

The rough mockups that I made, were just to show three possible
situations. Situations that we have seen, and have been discussing.
  1- the release must be promoted but with care ;
  2- the release is considered good enough for non-expert installation
and use
  3- the release is simply default
See the explanation at the right side of the mockups.

The colors I used are bad. The visual representation wrecked, the
wording open for improvement :-)

If Devs/QA decide that 3.5.0 is simply default, OK, then we simply have
'design' 3.
And if in the future, we never need 'design' 1 and 2: so much the better :-)

There are of course many similarities with Christophs far better looking
mockups. But the discussion is in the differences.

Cheers,
Cor

Italo Vignoli wrote (12-02-12 00:34)

> Apologies, I did not realize what was happening on the download page.
> Sorry for jumping in so late.
>
> On 2/11/12 11:54 PM, Christoph Noack wrote:
>
>> Looking at the new proposals at [1], the major difference (I seem to be
>> able to spot) is the decision to present "LibO 3.5.0 Early Adopters" as
>> the default download page.
>
> Please take away the Early Adopters from the button. The button should
> read "Download LibreOffice 3.5". Nothing less, nothing more.
>
> The other button should read: "Download LibreOffice Previous Version",
> but the button should be smaller (but I am more flexible on the second one).
>
> At the moment, the two buttons are not in line with the announcement of
> LibreOffice 3.5, which is taglined "the best free office suite ever",
> and might create some confusion.
>
> LibreOffice 3.4 was in a completely different situation, and we had to
> face it telling users that it was not ready for corporate adoption.
>
> LibreOffice 3.5 is more mature and more stable. The press release is
> explaining to end users what they should do.
>
> Thanks, Italo
>


--
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Next » 12