Re:LibreOffice 4.4, the Most Beautiful LibreOffice Ever
by scholia on Thursday January 29, 2015 @11:35AM
(#8967133)
I'd love to have answers to the same questions, but it will vary a lot according to what is being done and who is doing it.
If you're just typing simple text documents, the current Word is not going to save a massive amount of time over WordStar, but it will save some thanks to spelling corrections etc. And even a few seconds per hour per worker can represent a lot of value for large organizations.
If you're doing an essay or a brochure with headlines in different fonts, double-column text, embedded pictures, math equations etc, then the time savings will be massive. Just the ability to move a pic while text flows around it provides huge benefits.
When my son was in his early teens, I watched him use Microsoft Office to create complex documents that would have taken an IBM PROFS mainframe user weeks, or might have been impossible. His homework looked more professional than IBM's corporate documents.
I guess there are plenty of workers who use Word at the same level as they used WordStar, or who reckon that (back on topic!) LO is just as good. (Yes, LO is almost as good as Word if you just want to replace WordStar.)
But are those our criteria? Should we ignore the fact that people who have open minds and a willingness to explore (like children) can quickly and easily do new things that they can't?
If you're just typing simple text documents, the current Word is not going to save a massive amount of time over WordStar, but it will save some thanks to spelling corrections etc. And even a few seconds per hour per worker can represent a lot of value for large organizations.
If you're doing an essay or a brochure with headlines in different fonts, double-column text, embedded pictures, math equations etc, then the time savings will be massive. Just the ability to move a pic while text flows around it provides huge benefits.
When my son was in his early teens, I watched him use Microsoft Office to create complex documents that would have taken an IBM PROFS mainframe user weeks, or might have been impossible. His homework looked more professional than IBM's corporate documents.
I guess there are plenty of workers who use Word at the same level as they used WordStar, or who reckon that (back on topic!) LO is just as good. (Yes, LO is almost as good as Word if you just want to replace WordStar.)
But are those our criteria? Should we ignore the fact that people who have open minds and a willingness to explore (like children) can quickly and easily do new things that they can't?