Amit wrote:
The main problem here is that the user does not know wheher the next release is more stable than previous one or not. And the user will get caught in the conflict in the sense that he will think that may be if he does not upgrade then he might be losing out on some features. This conflict makes him try to use the new release and then he gets frustrated. The same thing had happened to me when I was using Open Office. I ENDED UP BUYING MICROSOFT OFFICE BECAUSE OPENOFFICE WAS NOT STABLE.
A customer can compromise on fetaures but not on stability. A stable release with less formatting options is much more desirable than an unstable software with lots of formatting options.
I fully agree with Amit. I'm "just" a user, not a developer. As a user, my primary concern is knowing my program will do what I need faithfully and without bugs. I will gladly substitute advanced features for stability. And, it really frosts me to see a new release resurrect bugs that had been previously fixed. Nothing feels worse than going backwards with a program.
Until recently, like many, I was confused by the LO release cycle, always thinking that the latest release would be the best and most stable. But, recently, I saw the graph showing how it all works. It appears to me as if, with LO, we users are doing the testing that commercial companies do in-house. I honestly don't like it and I suspect that this way of doing things will drive users away.
Virgil -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] 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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
