>" But that does not mean the new features are a "failure" (except motion interpolation)."
See, that is a perfect example of how people are different. I absolutely HATE motion interpolation. I hated watching the "high framerate" Hobbit in the theaters, and I hate what interpolation does on my TV (and it is turned off). It makes everything look like it was shot on a handheld camcorder:)
When I was at a friend's house and they were showing a 24P movie with that frame interpolation turned on, I actually asked if he would turn it off because it ruined the experience for me.
Probably a lifetime of watching 24P means I am ruined and can't adjust very well. Actually, I can tolerate a very mild amount of interpolation, probably up to a virtual 30p or so. Seems the younger people can adjust to it easier. And many people can't even tell the difference, which is amazing to me.... speaking of which...
4K is generally a scam. I would love to do a study of people at normal viewing distance, just to prove to the nay-sayers that 99.9+% of people would not be able to tell if it was 2K or 4K.
>"But some viewers will be sad to see the feature go."
That would be me. I am glad my Samsung TV supports 3D (I had to jump to a higher end/significantly more expensive 7100 series model to get it in August of 2015 because the feature was disappearing on most models). I enjoy watching the occasional 3D Bluray movie. In fact, the only Blurays I own are 3D and I would buy more if more were made (and were decently mastered).
3D shot/rendered correctly does add to the enjoyment of a film for many people. But, sadly, too much poorly shot 3D was released and helped to ruin the market.
>"it appears that Assange will not hand himself in to the Department of Justice"
And that surprises anyone? I see it now: "Oh, I said pardon, not reduced sentence." "Oh, I meant immediately." "Oh, I meant within 5 minutes of it being announced." "Oh, I only meant if the record was expunged completely too". Whatever.
>"So, markdavis, nice job of malicious ignorance. Viagra was developed to improve heart health, and you object because it's a cash cow that makes possible more pharmaceutical research"
So, ChrisMaple, nice job of malicious replies. How many dollars went into all ED drug research, validation, studies, etc, regardless of the origin? My point is perfectly valid- tons and tons of money is spent on drugs that have high marketability. Antibiotics are way low on the totem pole.
>"Antibiotic-resistant infections can happen anywhere. Data show that most happen in the general community; however, most deaths related to antibiotic resistance happen in inpatient healthcare settings, such as hospitals and nursing homes"
And that is mostly because the people in healthcare settings are already sick and have compromised or weakened immune systems.
>"...have been warning us for decades and nobody cared to listen."
Actually, lots and lots and lots of people listened and acted. But it was not enough and too late. For many years, good physicians have been restricting antibiotic use and there has been a huge educational push telling people they MUST take all their antibiotics, exactly as prescribed. And healthcare facilities have been using all kinds of new techniques to hold down infections and transmission- silver, UV light sterilizers, better cleaning techniques, ozone generators, along with screaming about universal precautions and other education.
One of the main problems has been the lack of development of new antibiotics. We rested on our laurels for too many years while the bacteria have not (and evolved). This is a problem that won't just go away, we have to continuously develop new medications.... but until it is profitable, drug companies aren't interested. They would rather pour their money in high-dollar-return crap like Viagra.
>"Normal users just seem to be experiencing battery life consistently around half of the advertised 10 hours instead of occasionally varying above."
Which pretty much matches the advertised battery life for every model and brand of computer and tablet I have ever purchased or used (from any company). In fact, I actually tell people- take what the manufacturer claims and cut it in half and that is a more realistic starting point.
>"Gartner predicts Apple will ship more iOS and macOS devices in 2017 than Windows-powered devices"
So? That includes phones so it is not much of a metric.
You want to mop the floor and talk about "devices"? Then count how many devices ship with any form of Linux.... that would DWARF both Apple and MS. Android phones, Chromebooks, DVR's, cars, watches, TV's, tablets, routers, appliances, servers, etc, etc. When you look at that, Apple and MS are both just drops in an ocean.
>"It also makes me think of how we've disarmed good people in "gun free" zones so that they cannot defend themselves against someone that violated that law on not bringing in guns."
+1
I am sure this shooting has the anti's lined up to make propose more laws trying to strip guns from good, law-abiding people and create more so-called "gun-free" zones. Because, you know, that evil shooter in the airport really paid attention to the laws.
>"There's no way to open it for those trustable app stores and disallow it for other app stores."
Sure there is, it is called self-control! "Regular" people shouldn't be adding third party repos anymore than just downloading random apps from off the web and installing them. And those who do enable outside sources should know the difference between potential malware and not. Although I agree it would be nice to have more options and settings, including ones that would help in this case.
>"Nobody is being punished for not signing up for autopay. People who do sign up for autopay are being rewarded."
Oh really? Seems like it is the same thing to me. It is the outcome that matters, not the wording. Try this: "We are going to lower rates for everyone except those who do not enroll in autopay". To those who don't want to use autopay, it certainly sounds like a punishment.
This is not good news for customers like me. I don't need a lot of data, and the only time I do use significant data are the rare times when I tether- and I need it FAST at that point. So now that type of consumer will have to pay even more for less! And pay every month for the privilege, even when it is rarely needed (but important when it is needed). Yes, I am grandfathered in right now, but if I were looking at switching to T-Mobile, this would be a huge negative.
And they are going to punish people who do not want to sign up for autopay (we will have to pay more than people who enroll in it)! How is THAT a good thing? Especially for consumers like me who always pay correctly and on-time!
>"It seems to me that if more people sued when patents were not implemented, we might have less patents out there making every developers life worse. "
1) Most software patents are bogus, almost completely. This would be one of those. They really shouldn't exist in the first place.
2) I do agree, however, that patent holders should attempt to actually use and create with their patents in a "reasonable" timeframe or automatically lose them.
3) Suing companies for NOT doing something to make up for stupidity- I certainly draw the line there. We should not attempt to create a system where everyone else is responsible for a person's stupid decisions and free will. I don't want to live in such a world.
I have to admit that Spotify is exactly what we had needed for years prior. Huge music collection, reasonable pricing, free alternative with non-over-the-top advertising, great audio quality, clients for all kinds of devices (phones, tablets, web, amplifiers) and works great with Firefox under Linux with no software required.
I have even noticed when I searched for a few albums that were missing over the last year.... they were eventually added. So they even seem responsive to what people are trying to find.
I will never stop relying on the old model of purchase/rip/local music. I like "owning" my collection and being completely non-dependent on the 'net. I have some older and obscure music that will NEVER show up on streaming. But that doesn't mean Spotify isn't a great augment to what I do/use; especially for music that I wouldn't otherwise buy. And more importantly, it is a great thing that I now recommend to all the non-technicals out there (and they WAY outnumber us). Regular people that just want a way to enjoy music without trying to understand or deal with ripping, proprietary music services like Apple's, or resorting to physical media. I am probably responsible for referring over 100 new Spotify customers a year through word-of mouth, demos, and friend-of-a-friend discovery. Two new customers just yesterday, as the sister of one of my friends complained to me that Apple revoked her ability to access the few dozens songs she bought from them (a story I have heard NUMEROUS times).
Pandora still has Spotify beat for just "radio station" type listening, even though their collection is much smaller. Even so, I have discovered lots of new music through Spotify with their recommendations. And that is something Spotify could improve- they need to allow users to directly rate songs (like Pandora does) so it can learn what we like and offer more recommendations. And the other is a better "radio station" type mode, like Pandora has.
>"psychologist at Temple Universitywho wants the voting age lowered to 16."
Insane. I propose we raise the age of adulthood to 20 and shouldn't try to have second-class citizens from 18-20 who can't drink, can't buy a handgun, can't serve as an elected official, etc. 20 for everything, by then they should be pretty well baked and have hopefully been on their own a bit, and perhaps even paid some significant taxes. That way "teens" are teens and we have consistency and logic in the age of being an "adult."
Of course, this would require a Constitutional Amendment, so it will never happen.
>"You can't blame Obama for not doing enough to work with the Republicans. When they didn't get their way they shut down the fucking government. You can't reach any kind of sane deal or consensus with people willing to see the country burn just to get their way."
Wow, it sounds a lot like the Democrats running around screaming that Trump didn't get the popular vote (even though it doesn't matter because that isn't the game) or "is not my president" (even though he will be). Or who launched a filibuster to end all filibusters, shutting down the Senate, trying to force irrational gun control down everyone's throats when it was/is clear the vast, vast majority don't want it. Who seemingly control most of the mass media and wield it as a weapon of distorted information throughout the last year and even still.
I guess when they don't get their way they spur hatred, riots, and looting and try to shut down the government. You can't reach any kind of sane deal or consensus with people willing to see the country burn just to get their way. Wow, doesn't that sound familiar?
>"dom.ipc.processCount Does what you're asking for"
yes it does... for now. Until they disable or remove it. They have done that before with other things we rely on, often without real discussion and sometimes with no warning. That is what worries me.
>"Oh please can the hardware run IE 8 and Chrome 1.0 circa 2009? If yes then you're fine. Firefox is now catching up to IE 8 security and performance which is why I left it"
That is ridiculous.
1) Running IE under Linux is not realistic. 2) Saying Firefox security and performance is at 2009 levels is just completely false. 3) Implying that I could use Chrome to do what Firefox does is equally false... especially Chrome 1.
I used affinity to try and tame/control Java, since it has the same problem. It worked, but using affinity, you can only lock a process to a particular cpu core... you can't limit it to just 1 of any core. And this leads to the system being unbalanced. The best I could do was a script that chose a core at random.
>"Furthermore firefox SHOULD still have options in about:config to limit the number of open tabs alowed which will help you keep both memory and cpu utilization under control."
I expect it does and will for a while, but it is my experience they like to deprecate such settings after a while, and often with no notice or documentation.
>"Stop being lazy with your administrative duties and it should be plenty possible to make even the latest version of firefox deal with the contraints you need it set against."
Please don't presume to know what my duties are, how much time I have spent on it, or what we have had to deal with in the past. Thanks
>"All the discussions I've read so far imply that they want to only use as many as makes sense for the number of cores on your system (they also plan to continue using threads as much as possible). This implies that you'll be able to control how many processes Firefox tries to use, even if it's more than it was before e10s."
What scares me is that it is what THEY think it appropriate for the system, depending on what THEY think is the use case. They simply can't know that and will make assumptions that could be wrong. As long as they give the admin some control through settings, it will probably be OK. One of the most powerful would be something that could could simply limit ALL use to no more than X cores.... so setting it to "1" would allow old behavior, when necessary, "2" could expand it, "0" could be automatic of some sort.
>" So really it's quite early to sound the doom sirens."
It is never too early to be concerned. Lots of things have happened in Firefox that made life miserable for me in our unusual environment in the past. I don't see that as changing. As my Mom says "planning for the worst but hoping for the best".
Unfortunately there are some users who are going to be greatly adversely affected by Firefox moving to full multi-process. I am one of those. At work we make use of Firefox under Linux thin client environments, running on a centralized server. This type of change opens the door for Firefox to completely overrun all our CPU resources, no matter what we throw on it. Why? Because I am certain the Firefox developers won't give us an "off" switch for this new functionality (or if they do, it will be taken away eventually). See, if you are running on your own dedicated computer, it might be perfectly OK to unleash the browser to take over all your resources. But when it is a shared environment on a multiuser system, this can be horrible. Believe it or not, we do lots and lots of other things on that system at the same time. There aren't enough OS tricks available to deal with it. "Nice" just isn't enough (for a variety of reasons... none of which I have the time to explain right now). We are already having problems just trying to limit memory usage in Firefox (it would be the same with any browser) because ulimits don't apply correctly with certain types of threaded applications, just causing either no effect or crashing; and Firefox doesn't have good settings to deal with that either).
Yes, I know what we do is a little unusual and old-fashioned, but it actually works pretty good and has a lot of advantages. I certainly don't want to hold Firefox back, but I do wish that the developers would consider the fringe cases and give us persistent options to prevent Firefox from taking over more than X number of cores. Choice, options, and settings are key, that way, everyone could "win".
>"The problem with what they are doing is that it makes documentation and support a huge mess."
+1
And I say that as one who administers HUNDREDS of LibreOffice users. Trying to document something or train people for something that have a constantly CHANGING UI is a disaster on a plate.
I understand the need for customizing, but the ribbon concept was, IMHO, a failure. Emulating it might make it easier for some people to point to LO as looking "modern" but I really believe it would just lower everyone's productivity, including people having to support the users.
>"I wish more applications would use a sidebar - with monitors spreading horizontally for video display reasons, there is an awful lot of whitespace that isn't used by most word documents, webpages etc. Vertical space is getting to be a premium now."
Or, maybe you are a user like me that doesn't want every freaking window to be maximized. I really wish more applications (and web sites) would stop trying to FORCE me to use up more horizontal space when what I ACTUALLY want to do is have more than one thing visible at the same time!
Slashdot Mirror
>" But that does not mean the new features are a "failure" (except motion interpolation)."
See, that is a perfect example of how people are different. I absolutely HATE motion interpolation. I hated watching the "high framerate" Hobbit in the theaters, and I hate what interpolation does on my TV (and it is turned off). It makes everything look like it was shot on a handheld camcorder :)
When I was at a friend's house and they were showing a 24P movie with that frame interpolation turned on, I actually asked if he would turn it off because it ruined the experience for me.
Probably a lifetime of watching 24P means I am ruined and can't adjust very well. Actually, I can tolerate a very mild amount of interpolation, probably up to a virtual 30p or so. Seems the younger people can adjust to it easier. And many people can't even tell the difference, which is amazing to me.... speaking of which...
4K is generally a scam. I would love to do a study of people at normal viewing distance, just to prove to the nay-sayers that 99.9+% of people would not be able to tell if it was 2K or 4K.
>"But some viewers will be sad to see the feature go."
That would be me. I am glad my Samsung TV supports 3D (I had to jump to a higher end/significantly more expensive 7100 series model to get it in August of 2015 because the feature was disappearing on most models). I enjoy watching the occasional 3D Bluray movie. In fact, the only Blurays I own are 3D and I would buy more if more were made (and were decently mastered).
3D shot/rendered correctly does add to the enjoyment of a film for many people. But, sadly, too much poorly shot 3D was released and helped to ruin the market.
>"it appears that Assange will not hand himself in to the Department of Justice"
And that surprises anyone? I see it now: "Oh, I said pardon, not reduced sentence." "Oh, I meant immediately." "Oh, I meant within 5 minutes of it being announced." "Oh, I only meant if the record was expunged completely too". Whatever.
>"Oracle America paid white male workers more, leading to pay discrimination against women, African American and Asian employees."
Please, if you are going to be politically correct, do it equally for everyone:
"Oracle America paid European American male workers more, leading to pay discrimination against women, African American and Asian American employees."
>"So, markdavis, nice job of malicious ignorance. Viagra was developed to improve heart health, and you object because it's a cash cow that makes possible more pharmaceutical research"
So, ChrisMaple, nice job of malicious replies. How many dollars went into all ED drug research, validation, studies, etc, regardless of the origin? My point is perfectly valid- tons and tons of money is spent on drugs that have high marketability. Antibiotics are way low on the totem pole.
>"Antibiotic-resistant infections can happen anywhere. Data show that most happen in the general community; however, most deaths related to antibiotic resistance happen in inpatient healthcare settings, such as hospitals and nursing homes"
And that is mostly because the people in healthcare settings are already sick and have compromised or weakened immune systems.
>"...have been warning us for decades and nobody cared to listen."
Actually, lots and lots and lots of people listened and acted. But it was not enough and too late. For many years, good physicians have been restricting antibiotic use and there has been a huge educational push telling people they MUST take all their antibiotics, exactly as prescribed. And healthcare facilities have been using all kinds of new techniques to hold down infections and transmission- silver, UV light sterilizers, better cleaning techniques, ozone generators, along with screaming about universal precautions and other education.
One of the main problems has been the lack of development of new antibiotics. We rested on our laurels for too many years while the bacteria have not (and evolved). This is a problem that won't just go away, we have to continuously develop new medications.... but until it is profitable, drug companies aren't interested. They would rather pour their money in high-dollar-return crap like Viagra.
>"Normal users just seem to be experiencing battery life consistently around half of the advertised 10 hours instead of occasionally varying above."
Which pretty much matches the advertised battery life for every model and brand of computer and tablet I have ever purchased or used (from any company). In fact, I actually tell people- take what the manufacturer claims and cut it in half and that is a more realistic starting point.
>"Gartner predicts Apple will ship more iOS and macOS devices in 2017 than Windows-powered devices"
So? That includes phones so it is not much of a metric.
You want to mop the floor and talk about "devices"? Then count how many devices ship with any form of Linux.... that would DWARF both Apple and MS. Android phones, Chromebooks, DVR's, cars, watches, TV's, tablets, routers, appliances, servers, etc, etc. When you look at that, Apple and MS are both just drops in an ocean.
>"It also makes me think of how we've disarmed good people in "gun free" zones so that they cannot defend themselves against someone that violated that law on not bringing in guns."
+1
I am sure this shooting has the anti's lined up to make propose more laws trying to strip guns from good, law-abiding people and create more so-called "gun-free" zones. Because, you know, that evil shooter in the airport really paid attention to the laws.
>"There's no way to open it for those trustable app stores and disallow it for other app stores."
Sure there is, it is called self-control! "Regular" people shouldn't be adding third party repos anymore than just downloading random apps from off the web and installing them. And those who do enable outside sources should know the difference between potential malware and not. Although I agree it would be nice to have more options and settings, including ones that would help in this case.
>"Nobody is being punished for not signing up for autopay. People who do sign up for autopay are being rewarded."
Oh really? Seems like it is the same thing to me. It is the outcome that matters, not the wording. Try this: "We are going to lower rates for everyone except those who do not enroll in autopay". To those who don't want to use autopay, it certainly sounds like a punishment.
This is not good news for customers like me. I don't need a lot of data, and the only time I do use significant data are the rare times when I tether- and I need it FAST at that point. So now that type of consumer will have to pay even more for less! And pay every month for the privilege, even when it is rarely needed (but important when it is needed). Yes, I am grandfathered in right now, but if I were looking at switching to T-Mobile, this would be a huge negative.
And they are going to punish people who do not want to sign up for autopay (we will have to pay more than people who enroll in it)! How is THAT a good thing? Especially for consumers like me who always pay correctly and on-time!
All this, and still no 700Mhz service in my area.
>"It seems to me that if more people sued when patents were not implemented, we might have less patents out there making every developers life worse. "
1) Most software patents are bogus, almost completely. This would be one of those. They really shouldn't exist in the first place.
2) I do agree, however, that patent holders should attempt to actually use and create with their patents in a "reasonable" timeframe or automatically lose them.
3) Suing companies for NOT doing something to make up for stupidity- I certainly draw the line there. We should not attempt to create a system where everyone else is responsible for a person's stupid decisions and free will. I don't want to live in such a world.
I have to admit that Spotify is exactly what we had needed for years prior. Huge music collection, reasonable pricing, free alternative with non-over-the-top advertising, great audio quality, clients for all kinds of devices (phones, tablets, web, amplifiers) and works great with Firefox under Linux with no software required.
I have even noticed when I searched for a few albums that were missing over the last year.... they were eventually added. So they even seem responsive to what people are trying to find.
I will never stop relying on the old model of purchase/rip/local music. I like "owning" my collection and being completely non-dependent on the 'net. I have some older and obscure music that will NEVER show up on streaming. But that doesn't mean Spotify isn't a great augment to what I do/use; especially for music that I wouldn't otherwise buy. And more importantly, it is a great thing that I now recommend to all the non-technicals out there (and they WAY outnumber us). Regular people that just want a way to enjoy music without trying to understand or deal with ripping, proprietary music services like Apple's, or resorting to physical media. I am probably responsible for referring over 100 new Spotify customers a year through word-of mouth, demos, and friend-of-a-friend discovery. Two new customers just yesterday, as the sister of one of my friends complained to me that Apple revoked her ability to access the few dozens songs she bought from them (a story I have heard NUMEROUS times).
Pandora still has Spotify beat for just "radio station" type listening, even though their collection is much smaller. Even so, I have discovered lots of new music through Spotify with their recommendations. And that is something Spotify could improve- they need to allow users to directly rate songs (like Pandora does) so it can learn what we like and offer more recommendations. And the other is a better "radio station" type mode, like Pandora has.
>"psychologist at Temple Universitywho wants the voting age lowered to 16."
Insane. I propose we raise the age of adulthood to 20 and shouldn't try to have second-class citizens from 18-20 who can't drink, can't buy a handgun, can't serve as an elected official, etc. 20 for everything, by then they should be pretty well baked and have hopefully been on their own a bit, and perhaps even paid some significant taxes. That way "teens" are teens and we have consistency and logic in the age of being an "adult."
Of course, this would require a Constitutional Amendment, so it will never happen.
>"You can't blame Obama for not doing enough to work with the Republicans. When they didn't get their way they shut down the fucking government. You can't reach any kind of sane deal or consensus with people willing to see the country burn just to get their way."
Wow, it sounds a lot like the Democrats running around screaming that Trump didn't get the popular vote (even though it doesn't matter because that isn't the game) or "is not my president" (even though he will be). Or who launched a filibuster to end all filibusters, shutting down the Senate, trying to force irrational gun control down everyone's throats when it was/is clear the vast, vast majority don't want it. Who seemingly control most of the mass media and wield it as a weapon of distorted information throughout the last year and even still.
I guess when they don't get their way they spur hatred, riots, and looting and try to shut down the government. You can't reach any kind of sane deal or consensus with people willing to see the country burn just to get their way. Wow, doesn't that sound familiar?
>"dom.ipc.processCount Does what you're asking for"
yes it does... for now. Until they disable or remove it. They have done that before with other things we rely on, often without real discussion and sometimes with no warning. That is what worries me.
>"Oh please can the hardware run IE 8 and Chrome 1.0 circa 2009? If yes then you're fine. Firefox is now catching up to IE 8 security and performance which is why I left it"
That is ridiculous.
1) Running IE under Linux is not realistic.
2) Saying Firefox security and performance is at 2009 levels is just completely false.
3) Implying that I could use Chrome to do what Firefox does is equally false... especially Chrome 1.
I used affinity to try and tame/control Java, since it has the same problem. It worked, but using affinity, you can only lock a process to a particular cpu core... you can't limit it to just 1 of any core. And this leads to the system being unbalanced. The best I could do was a script that chose a core at random.
>"Furthermore firefox SHOULD still have options in about:config to limit the number of open tabs alowed which will help you keep both memory and cpu utilization under control."
I expect it does and will for a while, but it is my experience they like to deprecate such settings after a while, and often with no notice or documentation.
>"Stop being lazy with your administrative duties and it should be plenty possible to make even the latest version of firefox deal with the contraints you need it set against."
Please don't presume to know what my duties are, how much time I have spent on it, or what we have had to deal with in the past. Thanks
>"All the discussions I've read so far imply that they want to only use as many as makes sense for the number of cores on your system (they also plan to continue using threads as much as possible). This implies that you'll be able to control how many processes Firefox tries to use, even if it's more than it was before e10s."
What scares me is that it is what THEY think it appropriate for the system, depending on what THEY think is the use case. They simply can't know that and will make assumptions that could be wrong. As long as they give the admin some control through settings, it will probably be OK. One of the most powerful would be something that could could simply limit ALL use to no more than X cores.... so setting it to "1" would allow old behavior, when necessary, "2" could expand it, "0" could be automatic of some sort.
>" So really it's quite early to sound the doom sirens."
It is never too early to be concerned. Lots of things have happened in Firefox that made life miserable for me in our unusual environment in the past. I don't see that as changing. As my Mom says "planning for the worst but hoping for the best".
Unfortunately there are some users who are going to be greatly adversely affected by Firefox moving to full multi-process. I am one of those. At work we make use of Firefox under Linux thin client environments, running on a centralized server. This type of change opens the door for Firefox to completely overrun all our CPU resources, no matter what we throw on it. Why? Because I am certain the Firefox developers won't give us an "off" switch for this new functionality (or if they do, it will be taken away eventually). See, if you are running on your own dedicated computer, it might be perfectly OK to unleash the browser to take over all your resources. But when it is a shared environment on a multiuser system, this can be horrible. Believe it or not, we do lots and lots of other things on that system at the same time. There aren't enough OS tricks available to deal with it. "Nice" just isn't enough (for a variety of reasons... none of which I have the time to explain right now). We are already having problems just trying to limit memory usage in Firefox (it would be the same with any browser) because ulimits don't apply correctly with certain types of threaded applications, just causing either no effect or crashing; and Firefox doesn't have good settings to deal with that either).
Yes, I know what we do is a little unusual and old-fashioned, but it actually works pretty good and has a lot of advantages. I certainly don't want to hold Firefox back, but I do wish that the developers would consider the fringe cases and give us persistent options to prevent Firefox from taking over more than X number of cores. Choice, options, and settings are key, that way, everyone could "win".
>"The problem with what they are doing is that it makes documentation and support a huge mess."
+1
And I say that as one who administers HUNDREDS of LibreOffice users. Trying to document something or train people for something that have a constantly CHANGING UI is a disaster on a plate.
I understand the need for customizing, but the ribbon concept was, IMHO, a failure. Emulating it might make it easier for some people to point to LO as looking "modern" but I really believe it would just lower everyone's productivity, including people having to support the users.
>"I wish more applications would use a sidebar - with monitors spreading horizontally for video display reasons, there is an awful lot of whitespace that isn't used by most word documents, webpages etc. Vertical space is getting to be a premium now."
Or, maybe you are a user like me that doesn't want every freaking window to be maximized. I really wish more applications (and web sites) would stop trying to FORCE me to use up more horizontal space when what I ACTUALLY want to do is have more than one thing visible at the same time!