'Re: Applications categories'

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List: koffice-devel
Subject: Re: Applications categories
From: Sven Langkamp <sven.langkamp () gmail ! com>
Date: 2009-02-27 14:12:34
Message-ID: 478b087a0902270612v487c4a4bjc9db91f467577ca5 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Jaroslaw Staniek <staniek@kde.org> wrote:

> 2009/2/26 Alexandra Leisse <leisse@kde.org>:
> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 17:39, Cyrille Berger <cberger@cberger.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >> But, it was noted that having almost all applications in one category
> was a
> >> bit silly, and defeat the point on having categories, so it was also
> >> suggested that "Productivity Applications" would be restricted to the
> >> "classical" three core office suite applications. Which lead to those
> >> categories:
> >>
> >> Productivity Applications: kword, kspread, kpresenter
> >> Creativity Applications: karbon14, krita
> >> Management Applications: kplato, kexi, kivio
> >> Supporting Applications: kchart, kformula
> >
> > I like those. Make total sense to me. The colours are good to go if
> > you ask me. :)
>
> First, let me say wow and thank you to everyone involved in the recent
> artwork, marketing and web site activities within KOffice.
> I am referring to this proposal:

>
> > Productivity Applications: kword, kspread, kpresenter
> > Creativity Applications: karbon14, krita
> > Management Applications: kplato, kexi, kivio
> > Supporting Applications: kchart, kformula
>
> Well,
> The choice now looks a bit artificial to me. It has always looked like
> that but after the proposed change it is even a bit more artificial...
> In such cases I try to think about translating the categories to my
> native language and I simply fail. What is not good, since I guess
> translation will be needed anyway, and IMHO it would be better to send
> common message to the user base, not affected by terminology
> differences between languages.
>
> Speaking of Kexi as a management app, I have three notes:
> 1. Kexi is not database manager in the same sense pgAdmin or MySQL
> Admin is. It is a pure productivity, and I feel that one can think
> about Kexi not in productivity app mainly because this type of app is
> less frequently used statistically.
>
> 2. "Database management" (not a feature in Kexi anyway) is not the
> same "management" as in case of KPlato.
>
> 3. Even is "management" term can be applied to Kexi, it would be "data
> management", and that is what we refer to, sometimes. But going this
> way, KSpread is also a typical "data manager" nowadays.
>
> But it's going to be a pure philosophy, hmm...

Yes, the word "management" is very generic. The whole discussion on IRC was
mainly around the different meanings of it.
But so far nobody came up with a better word for that.

>
> I am not even sure it is good choice to emphasize the existence of the
> categories.
> I believe that e.g. many people will consider Krita to be GIMP
> replacement, which is (for many of us) a pure productivity app. From
> my daily office work I also recall that what MS Visio (i.e. Kivio)
> means differ from case to case: it is a somewhat more intelligent
> vector graphics app (so productivity). Project manager can use it from
> time to time, but depending on standards in the company, she/he can
> use, say, KWord to create document and embed Kivio object in it.

Right, many users will use Krita as productivity app. But still for Krita it
makes still sense to emphase the creativity part, because many artists see
office suites as pretty boring stuff.
Users tend to associate it with stuff the know, so they don't expect that an
office suite like MS Office or OpenOffice contains an app like GIMP,
Photoshop etc.

> I think that having a single sentence describing each app is not that bad
> idea.
> If we agree that people will use whatever suits them, categorizing
> would add extra noise to our message...
>
> If we really have to keep the categories, how about keeping the
> original or at least the 1st proposal?
> > Productivity Applications: kword, kspread, kpresenter, kexi, kivio
> > Creativity Applications: karbon14, krita
> > Management Application: kplato
> > Supporting Applications: kchart, kformula
>

The only reason against this was that the Productivity category would be
quite big and could be confusing for users. The advantage is that is solves
the "management" problem.
This system would be fine for me and I think is better than having no
categories at all.

Defineing the categorys is a bit more urgent, than giving them names.

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Jaroslaw Staniek &lt;<a href="mailto:staniek@kde.org">staniek@kde.org</a>&gt; \
wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, \
204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> 2009/2/26 Alexandra Leisse \
&lt;<a href="mailto:leisse@kde.org">leisse@kde.org</a>&gt;: <div \
class="Ih2E3d">&gt; On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 17:39, Cyrille Berger &lt;<a \
href="mailto:cberger@cberger.net">cberger@cberger.net</a>&gt; wrote: &gt; 
&gt; [snip] 
&gt; 
&gt;&gt; But, it was noted that having almost all applications in one category was \
a &gt;&gt; bit silly, and defeat the point on having categories, so it was \
also &gt;&gt; suggested that &quot;Productivity Applications&quot; would be \
restricted to the &gt;&gt; &quot;classical&quot; three core office suite \
applications. Which lead to those &gt;&gt; categories: 
&gt;&gt; 
&gt;&gt; Productivity Applications: kword, kspread, kpresenter 
&gt;&gt; Creativity Applications: karbon14, krita 
&gt;&gt; Management Applications: kplato, kexi, kivio 
&gt;&gt; Supporting Applications: kchart, kformula 
&gt; 
&gt; I like those. Make total sense to me. The colours are good to go if 
&gt; you ask me. :) 
 
</div>First, let me say wow and thank you to everyone involved in the recent 
artwork, marketing and web site activities within KOffice. 
I am referring to this proposal:</blockquote><div> </div><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt \
0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div class="Ih2E3d">&gt; Productivity \
Applications: kword, kspread, kpresenter &gt; Creativity Applications: karbon14, \
krita &gt; Management Applications: kplato, kexi, kivio 
&gt; Supporting Applications: kchart, kformula 
 
</div>Well, 
The choice now looks a bit artificial to me. It has always looked like 
that but after the proposed change it is even a bit more artificial... 
In such cases I try to think about translating the categories to my 
native language and I simply fail. What is not good, since I guess 
translation will be needed anyway, and IMHO it would be better to send 
common message to the user base, not affected by terminology 
differences between languages. 
 
Speaking of Kexi as a management app, I have three notes: 
1. Kexi is not database manager in the same sense pgAdmin or MySQL 
Admin is. It is a pure productivity, and I feel that one can think 
about Kexi not in productivity app mainly because this type of app is 
less frequently used statistically. 
 
2. &quot;Database management&quot; (not a feature in Kexi anyway) is not the 
same &quot;management&quot; as in case of KPlato. 
 
3. Even is &quot;management&quot; term can be applied to Kexi, it would be \
&quot;data management&quot;, and that is what we refer to, sometimes. But going \
this way, KSpread is also a typical &quot;data manager&quot; nowadays. 
 
But it&#39;s going to be a pure philosophy, hmm...</blockquote><div> Yes, the word \
&quot;management&quot; is very generic. The whole discussion on IRC was mainly around \
the different meanings of it. But so far nobody came up with a better word for \
that. </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid \
rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> I am not even \
sure it is good choice to emphasize the existence of the categories. 
I believe that e.g. many people will consider Krita to be GIMP 
replacement, which is (for many of us) a pure productivity app. From 
my daily office work I also recall that what MS Visio (i.e. Kivio) 
means differ from case to case: it is a somewhat more intelligent 
vector graphics app (so productivity). Project manager can use it from 
time to time, but depending on standards in the company, she/he can 
use, say, KWord to create document and embed Kivio object in \
it.</blockquote><div> Right, many users will use Krita as productivity app. But \
still for Krita it makes still sense to emphase the creativity part, because many \
artists see office suites as pretty boring stuff. Users tend to associate it with \
stuff the know, so they don&#39;t expect that an office suite like MS Office or \
OpenOffice contains an app like GIMP, Photoshop etc. </div><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt \
0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> 
I think that having a single sentence describing each app is not that bad idea. 
If we agree that people will use whatever suits them, categorizing 
would add extra noise to our message... 
 
If we really have to keep the categories, how about keeping the 
original or at least the 1st proposal? 
&gt; Productivity Applications: kword, kspread, kpresenter, kexi, kivio 
&gt; Creativity Applications: karbon14, krita 
<div class="Ih2E3d">&gt; Management Application: kplato 
&gt; Supporting Applications: kchart, kformula</div></blockquote><div> The only \
reason against this was that the Productivity category would be quite big and could \
be confusing for users. The advantage is that is solves the &quot;management&quot; \
problem. This system would be fine for me and I think is better than having no \
categories at all. Defineing the categorys is a bit more urgent, than giving \
them names. </div></div>

_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 