Subject: Just Hackers? [was Re: Topic: Tables and 1.0]
From: Ron Ross (ronross@colba.net)
Date: Fri May 04 2001 - 08:21:36 CDT
Joaquin Cuenca Abela <cuenca@celium.net> writes:
[...]
> If we want a word-processor that *just works* for this market, we really
> need some sort of tables support. And Martin hack doesn't do the work.
> It may do the work for some very patient hacker that wants absolutely to
> use abi, and still needs a table, but I don't want to see the head of a
> church secretary when starts a table like that:
> +------+------+
> |I | |
> +------+------+
> And [s]he starts writing something as:
> +------+------+
> |Monthly SalI |
> +------+------+
>
> and suddently realizes that the vertical bar has disappeared. That's
> not just work (but anyway is a nice hack for hackers, and our current
> market is currently mainly dominated by hackers, so is a useful hack).
I think your market can include a lot more than hackers, at least
potentially, with the features that are complete or in process of
development now. But I think you raised an important point, in that a
contradiction exists in the proposed decision to exclude tables and
certain other features and yet make a general, definitive release aimed
at the general public.
I've been mulling over these discussions, as others have. I have several
draft posts and replies that have never been sent (a good thing, that),
some of which is distilled here, in what I hope constitutes an argument
cogent enough not to be considered a waste of your time (or an
embarrassment to myself;-). And while I put a lot of emphasis on a
certain view point, this is certainly not meant as a tract. After all,
I've changed my mind several times during the course of the discussion
and might still again.
I broach the subject of tables mainly because it underscores the issue
of AbiWord's target audience, which is what this message is about. It is
obvious to me, now, that "full" table support is too tough a call for
any release in the near future. This has been brought home by those very
much in the know, AW's main developers. It has also been brought home
that AW has much to offer _now_, or in some quite foreseeable,
well-coded amelioration of now.
However, I'd like to contest the notion that the lack of table support
will somehow not be an impediment for the average user, and to describe
what I see as the possible consequence. Bill Carpenter, in a message
posted a day or two ago (between keeping up with discussion here and my
all-night work sessions, I'm loosing track of time), pointed out how
prevalent tables are in everyday documents. I couldn't stress this
enough. The average user uses -- and over-uses -- tables. Just as tables
quickly took over web layout in HTML, they are used in the most spurious
ways in wp documents. I've often seen single-cell tables used simply to
block off a paragraph; many tables could be replaced by setting a few
tab stops. But for many, many users, it is *much* easier to produce a
table in current mainstreem word processors than it is to set tab stops
(which most don't know or don't want to know anything about -- sorry
Martin ;-) although I personally would love to play with your nifty hack
and I admired the screen shot. If the resulting "table" could be
exported as such to RTF, that would be great, since advanced word
processors allow you to convert well formed tabular structures into
tables, and vice versa... but how many users do you suspect know about
this feature or even how to make a well-formed tabular column?), or to
format a paragraph or define a paragraph style with proper indentation
and/or border decoration. Come to think of it, tables, lists and _text_
_boxes_ are probably the only structural features that the average user
knows about (or cares to know about) when creating documents in a word
processor.
There are also many, quite common and valid reasons for using tables as
well, for which one does not have to have any specialized background or
work in a specialized field. I could give common, everyday examples, but
others have made the point.
Therefore, if you *must* have a major, defining release in the near
future and you cannot produce tables in that release, then _forget_
about attracting hoards of "normal users" -- as Bill and others have
said, you're competing with WordPad (of whose existence many Windows
users are not even aware -- and not terribly impressed when I point it
out to them).
Of course, AbiWord is much more than that. It is cross-platform; its
format is standards-based XML, it *will* ship with wide-ranging
multilingual support, both for spell-ckecking and user interface; it can
read and write an increasingly impressive array of file types; it has
all and more of the editing and (soon?) picture handling functionality
of Wordpad (not such a small feat when you consider that Wordpad is an
intentionally crippled adjunct to functionality built into the OS); it
is _Open Source_, offering the user more opportunities for feedback and
participation than they could dream of (of course, Normal People don't
usually dream of this;-). More can probably be said, but... for the
average user, not much of this is very significant.
So let's offer something different.
The "Normal User". As you point out, and as Erik Sink did before, if you
are reading this, you are not one. I would go further to argue that
AbiWord users, now and for some time to come, will, _de facto_, be a
breed of curious/inquisitive/maverick/academic/geeky users. For your
main release, embrace the fact, and forget about competing _directly_
with the mainstreem word processing market. Find your niches, and hone
them. With a product that works flawlessly, or at least really well;
one, moreover, that offers the geeky/academic/un-ordinary user something
extra, something he/she can really appreciate. Here is a rather
preliminary and general list of what I mean:
- A small, relatively fast word processor that offers lots of one's
basic editing needs in a pleasing, configurable and unencumbered
interface.
- *Scripting capability* comes to mind, together with the prospect of
all the interoperability offered by *XML*.
- If there is a burgeoning interest in AbiWord in the academic
community, then you had better not produce _The Release_ without
*footnote and endnote support*. (Incidentally, most of the documents
I receive do not contain tables, because they are largely essay-like
contributions to journals and catalogs -- that _do_ use footnotes and
endnotes. A contributor to the Abi user list just posted statistics
about feature use in his sample of documents. Interesting to note
that while over a third of his documents -- of a technical nature --
contained tables, none contained footnotes or endnotes. I haven't had
time to conduct such an analysis yet, but in my case tables are
probably present in 5% and foot/endnotes in 30%).
- *Multilingual support* -- in spell-checking, in UI, in character
handling -- is also crucial, for academia and various professionals,
for countries all over the world looking to give needy populations a
free alternative, for groups and organizations anywhere attempting to
do the same, for most of Europe.
- And among those open-minded users who will even _consider_ venturing
out of the MS Word domain, *stylesheet* usage will most likely be
well above normal; I think 1.0 should give you the ability to modify
and create arbitrary style definitions.
- Among those same users, who are also most likely to touch different
operating systems and environments, again, easy interoperability and
versatility in terms of file format and character handling will be a
godsend.
Obviously, from what I gather on this list and from my own increasingly
satisfying experience with AW, this app is well on the way to fulfilling
many people's needs. Not doing tables definitely restricts the target
user base. But so what?
So you _do_ have to push the bar higher in other directions.
For all its missing features, AbiWord is a really *smart* program,
reflecting the work of many smart people, and is most accessible,
mentally, to users having a minimum awareness of their computing
environment. This doesn't exclude anybody, per se, and indeed, because
it has and will have a friendly, consistent, and intuitive interface
that Just Works, those as-yet less computer-savvy users who often
approach their computing needs with an at least liminal sense of
intimidation (they are _many_) will hopefully find it a comfortable
working space. And those who do really need those other features -- this
definitely includes the business and technical sectors, but also most of
the rest of us at least some of the time -- will either appreciate the
special qualities of the program and come back to it when they're ready,
or they won't, in which case they should be of no immediate interest to
you either. But if AW can become essential for certain people (or at
least tremendously appreciated), as it has already, at times, for me,
outdoing WordPerfect and StarOffice for some file transfers between
Linux and Windows, then "those people" will carry the app further into
the wider market and sustain it with their own contributions. One thinks
of how the graphics professionals had no small part to play in
sustaining Apple through difficult times. Abiword's core sustaining
users are less defined, but can be just as real.
Sorry for the long post, and thanks if you've reached this far.
Ron
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sat May 26 2001 - 03:51:02 CDT