Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #406142

Re: spreadsheet ergonomics

Show all headers | View raw

Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 4/4/17, 7:05 PM, in article javz903.abu@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/4/17, 6:14 PM, in article avx89zb.f8c9a@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/4/17, 3:38 PM, in article ahbiz003.buyr@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>>>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> ... 


>> 
>> How long does it take in Numbers to create a sheet with 52000 tables
>> with locked formulas and labels (A-Z with 2000 tables in each column,
>> each table with a label{#} at the top, and a sum the bottom, summing 10
>> rows)?  And how long does it take to navigate to a specific such table?
>> 
>> 2.57 seconds here with sc.
> 
> I assume you are sending it instructions with some script... but even if I
> did that I am SURE Numbers would take much longer. That is the type task
> Numbers sucks at -- no argument here. And I also realize that there are many
> instances where people DO want spreadsheets similar to what you speak of to
> deal with large amounts of data and number crunching.
> 

Well, try it and let's see the results.


>>>>> For that matter, did you ever even get a set of tables on a single sheet
>>>>> where you can update any table and have it flow through without flickering?
>>>>> If so would love to see how.
>>>> 
>>>> You are aware that sc only presents one sheet at a time.  It is necessary
>>>> to use multiple sheets to have floating tables.
>>> 
>>> Yes... I know of that limitation of it.
>>> 
>>>> This has been shown to you multiple times already, and, aside from the Mack
>>>> fluff, ever functional aspect has been addressed.
>>> 
>>> What do you mean by "fluff" -- can you be specific?
>> 
>> Emphasis on style instead of substance.
> 
> You tend to label things which benefit usability as "fluff" or just "style"
> when they, often, are key to how tools are used.
> 

To Mack, everything is a flyer.

> ...
>>>>> LOL! Yeah, no assuming you have enough common sense to figure out people do
>>>>> not want to lose data. Repeatedly.
>>>> 
>>>> Where is the "common sense" in renaming an open file?
>>> 
>>> Has already been discussed MANY times with me giving specific examples of
>>> when I have done so. Just off the top of my head:
>>> 
>>> * Downloaded a video and opened it... then realized it is was in the place I
>>> store it nor with the name (or label) I prefer. No reason to close it just
>>> to rename and move it (and add a label)!
>>> 
>>> * Opened files named "[Whatever] - New" and "[Whatever]" and, as I worked
>>> with them, realize I had related files with a different naming scheme... and
>>> saved in different folders. So renamed them to "[Whatever]" and "[Whatever]
>>> - OLD" and also moved them to their correct folders.
>> 
>> None of that represents "common sense."
> 
> So it makes more sense to close the files, rename them, move them, and then
> open them? Heck, even if you do it that way it is STILL easier on macOS --
> you can (for most programs) just use the recent items lists!
> 
> So even doing that rather non-intuitive, inefficient, workaround for a lack
> of a simple ability to rename and move files without closing them Linux
> still does not do a very good job.
> 

Nobody even cares to do that.  Mack is only a small percentage of
computers, and it's the only one that does that insanity.

>>> Why in situations such as that, as well as any other similar one, would you
>>> want to HAVE to close the file just to rename it or move it. That is a
>>> pretty big limitation!
>> 
>> "Save As..." 
> 
> That creates a copy.
> 

So?

>> And I believe I read something about people complaining about not having a
>> "Save As..." and so they put it back, along with a "Duplicate" choice.  The
>> Apple crew is just a bunch of clods.
> 
> I think it is good to have both available -- they do different things and
> both are of value!
> 

So "duplicate" deletes the original?

>>> 
>>> Right... your solution for one program, not built in and never explained,
>>> and with the video with bizarre zooming (curious why you did that... does
>>> not really hurt it but just weird).
>>
>> It may remain a mystery.  I keep some magic to myself.
> 
> Meaning faked or, more likely, some significant weaknesses you will not
> share. OK.
>  

It's not faked.  It's very real.  And by the way that "bizarre zooming"
is xmag, which has been around since the dawn of time.  I'm surpised you
didn't recognize it.  My window manager doesn't support zooming, so I use
xmag.


>>> But it shows your thinking in terms of one program
>> 
>> Once again you try to move the goal posts.  Your specification was for doing
>> it LibreOffice. 
> 
> The idea is to have it be, largely, system wide. And I have noted where the
> macOS environment, while doing a better job at it, is far from perfect.
>

That's the idea *now*. 
 
 
>>> and not the system... while showing something I did not expect you to so,
>>> sure, well done. Curious why you never shared it... I suspect you had
>>> different instances of LO or other weaknesses.
>> 
>> Nope.
> 
> If there was not a significant weakness you would happily share it. Not
> going to play guessing games to try to figure out what, but clearly there
> is.
>

Wouldn't want you to get a virus.

 
>>> If nothing else you cannot just drag and drop from your file browser.
>> 
>> My browser?
> 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_manager>
>     -----
>     A file manager or file browser is a computer program that provides a
>     user interface to manage files and folders. The most common
>     operations performed on files or groups of files include creating,
>     opening (e.g. viewing, playing, editing or printing), renaming,
>     moving or copying, deleting and searching for files, as well as
>     modifying file attributes, properties and file permissions. Folders
>     and files may be displayed in a hierarchical tree based on their
>     directory structure. Some file managers contain features inspired by
>     web browsers, including forward and back navigational buttons.
>     -----
> 
> This is a common way of moving and renaming files. And, of course, with
> Linux if you do that without closing a file first you are far more likely to
> run into problems.
> 

Nope.


>>>>>> It is your responsibility to detail everything you expect from a solution.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The assumption of basic common sense is included in everything I say.
>>>> 
>>>> A written specification represents the totality of the requirments.
>>> 
>>> So you do not assume and take into consideration common sense with your
>>> work. Fair enough. That is just one other way we look at things differently.
>>> For me common sense and thinking in terms of risks is important and just
>>> comes naturally. For you that is not the case.
>> 
>> You wrote the specification.  It's your FAIL.
>> I can't help it if you are unable to put a coherent request to paper.
> 
> As I said, I made the assumption of common sense from you... and, yes,
> clearly that was my failure.
> 

Nope.  You just fucked up your specification.  Simple as that.
 

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-03 10:53 -0700
  Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-03 19:38 +0000
    Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-03 13:01 -0700
      Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-03 20:54 +0000
        Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-03 14:16 -0700
          Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-04 02:30 +0000
            Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-03 20:26 -0700
              Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-04 04:45 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-04 09:29 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-04 20:49 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-04 14:20 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-04 22:38 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-04 18:05 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 01:14 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-04 18:41 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 02:05 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-04 19:27 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 03:59 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-04 21:32 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 05:23 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 08:30 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 20:39 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 15:01 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 00:08 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 18:23 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 01:46 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 18:54 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 02:01 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 19:08 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2017-04-06 05:51 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 14:39 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-06 09:00 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-04 20:30 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 04:14 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-04 21:33 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 05:08 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 08:23 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 21:06 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 14:57 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 22:05 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 15:25 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 22:52 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 16:15 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 00:12 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 18:14 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 01:34 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 18:48 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 01:54 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 19:03 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-04-05 11:55 -0400
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 09:03 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-05 21:17 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 15:15 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 01:49 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 18:55 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 02:00 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-05 19:04 -0700
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Silver-Tongued Heel <sl@im.er> - 2017-04-06 08:48 -0400
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-04-05 22:01 -0400
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-04-05 22:17 -0400
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 12:38 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-04-06 10:46 -0400
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 02:44 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-04-06 09:51 -0400
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-06 14:26 +0000
                Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-06 09:03 -0700

csiph-web