Description: Mike Saunders assigned add donate banner to Heiko ( see https://redmine.documentfoundation.org/issues/3867). This donate banner not added it stable release, but you can find it in daily build. > Banner = 1/3 of the Start Center The donate button in this situation will be more active than work wit docs. > Two buttons: Donate, and Dismiss In the screenshot created by Kompilainenn, you cannot see "dismis button". >Show after every update, or once per month As I know, now LibreOffice has a small "donate " banner in documents, which is shown only once when setting up LibreOffice, which is tiny and does not hide context. In this situation, it looks like an annoying ad, which you can see in the worst "free software", such as Thunderbird (a Mozilla product). After every update, it opens a big "donate" page. Why is it needed? Choose another example of Free Software: KDE products. We're here, and when can you see the "donate" button? You can find this button at the head of websites, which does not annoy users, and have information about donating in the "about" dialog window in the apps. Actual Results: Open Homepage and see the bunner. Expected Results: Not seeing it Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: No Additional Info: It is not only me who noticed it. As you can read in Design Group, similar thoughts can be read from Eyal Rozenberg, Roman Kusnetcov (Kompilainenn), Mihai Vasiliu, and one others.
Created attachment 206581 [details] See this banner!
(In reply to Wodsfort from comment #0) > In this situation, it looks like an annoying ad, which you can see in the > worst "free software", such as Thunderbird (a Mozilla product). I guess you meant to say "best" or are you joking? > Choose another example of Free Software: KDE products. > We're here, and when can you see the "donate" button? > You can find this button at the head of websites, which does not annoy > users, and have information about donating in the "about" dialog window in > the apps. False. KDE has solicited for donations via desktop notifications. For example my mother donated due to seeing the desktop ad popup.
> False. KDE has solicited for donations via desktop notifications. For > example my mother donated due to seeing the desktop ad popup. It displayed so rarely that I even forgot this.
I am not against a donation banner per se, but given that a frequent criticism of LibreOffice by users seems to be that it does look old/bad/messy, I want to point out that in its current iteration, the banner does look off. This is due it it not being aligned to any visual grid, the font size being different than any other on the screen and introducing a different background texture than the rest of the window has. Aligning it to grid, chosing the font size of the logo (at least), having a uniform background texture or a clear separation from the rest of the interface elements and, ideally, a slightly smaller size and having an explict button that leads to the donation page insteaed of a fully clickable element would make it fit the rest of the UI better and alleviate the visual clutter.
A fix font size does not work well on scaled content. Consider screens with a high resolution, potentially long donation text, localization with unclear length etc. The current font size starts at 48px and scales down up to 12pt if the text does not fit into the available space.
I believe this banner should be removed _for now_, for several reasons, some of them material and some procedural/matters of principle. Before giving those reasons, let me point out that there is an alternative suggestion, recently made by of John Mills (but previously by others), which is: during a LibreOffice update, while the user is waiting for the update or just as it concludes, present a donation solicitation graphics or banner. As this suggestion is not really the subject of this bug, I'm leaving that aside. Now for the reasoning for removal: 1. Detrimental to usability ------------------------------ A solicitation banner popping up every fixed period of time is a nuisance to the user, unexpectedly interrupting their workflow with the start center. 2. Breaks design principle 'ux-control' --------------------------------------- Arbitrary pop-ups, especially large ones, especially ones that can't be dismissed once and for all, go against most users explicit will. This breaks one of our design principles [1]: "ux-control: Users should always feel like they are in control of their software." 3. Premature commit: before UI/UX discussion -------------------------------------------------------- This change, which has significant UX impact and will be, by design, visible and conspicuous to almost all users, was not discussed in a design team meeting nor even informally on the design chat channel, before being implemented or committed. There was also no work done to obtain feedback elsewhere, even regarding the specifics of the design. 4. Premature commit: Invalid text and graphic --------------------------------------------- This change was committed with some "Lorem ipsum" text and a picture of Mike Saunders' face and a red baloon which says "support" in small font as the solicitation promotion graphic. With due respect to Mike - that was clearly a placeholder. Generally, features are committed to the main branch when they are ready, not in this "put your foot in the door" fashion. 5. Premature commit: before marketing discussion ------------------------------------------------- The Redmine issue in which this was requested does not mention how a decision to request this was taken. Also, AFAICT, the idea to introduce this banner was not presented and approved, or discussed, on the Marketing channel nor on the marketing mailing list(s). 6. Misuse of the Redmine tracker -------------------------------- Suggestions for changes to LibreOffice are tracked on bugs.documentfoundation.org, under the LibreOffice product. The TDF Redmine tracks issues or tasks regarding the TDF and LO as organizations or as community projects. I do not recall another case when an intended UI/UX aspect was tracked on redmine. Focusing on promotion ("marketing") activity solely, let us have a look at the marketing tasks on the redmine instance: https://redmine.documentfoundation.org/projects/marketing/issues?set_filter=1&tracker_id=4 There isn't a single issue requesting a change to LibreOffice code. That is, until this one. It should also be mentioned the last issue of any kind on that redmine subporject was filed 3 years ago. So, filing this request on the redmine all but assures it would be out of sight until closed or resolved. I am also disappointed at those who interacted on that issue, on the redmine instance, without alerting the design mailing list, or telegram channel, about its existence. 7. "We've already got one, you see" --------------------------------------- The Start Center already has a donation solicitation button and image. There is no bug report (AFAICT) about this widget: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/showdependencytree.cgi?id=61914&hide_resolved=1 The only programs I know which have multiple solicitations of payment on the same page are malware or low-quality and short-lived projects with multiple demanding commercial sponsors. 8. Request without a proper justification ----------------------------------------- If we examine the Redmine issue, a justification for effecting this change is not presented by the poster, nor requested by the implementer, nor referred or linked to. Specifically, no justification is presented for a _second_ donation solicitation on the same screen (not even instead of the first, but side-by-side with it). Finally, the combination of items 3,4,5,6 makes it appear as though there was an intent to sneak this in to the code base quickly, setting "facts on the ground", circumventing our process - banking on it being more difficult to get agreement on undoing the change than to raise valid objections to its introduction. I don't like that. Perhaps there's an innoncent explanation here, but - the fair thing would be a back-out/removal, and a discussion of justifications, alternatives, and if this reaffirmed then of aspects of the design. [1]: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Principles
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #6) > I believe this banner should be removed _for now_, for several reasons, some > of them material and some procedural/matters of principle. > > Before giving those reasons, let me point out that there is an alternative > suggestion, recently made by of John Mills (but previously by others), which > is: during a LibreOffice update, while the user is waiting for the update or > just as it concludes, present a donation solicitation graphics or banner. As > this suggestion is not really the subject of this bug, I'm leaving that > aside. > > Now for the reasoning for removal: > > > 1. Detrimental to usability > ------------------------------ > > A solicitation banner popping up every fixed period of time is a nuisance to > the user, unexpectedly interrupting their workflow with the start center. > > > 2. Breaks design principle 'ux-control' > --------------------------------------- > > Arbitrary pop-ups, especially large ones, especially ones that can't be > dismissed once and for all, go against most users explicit will. This breaks > one of our design principles [1]: "ux-control: Users should always feel like > they are in control of their software." > > > 3. Premature commit: before UI/UX discussion > -------------------------------------------------------- > > This change, which has significant UX impact and will be, by design, visible > and conspicuous to almost all users, was not discussed in a design team > meeting nor even informally on the design chat channel, before being > implemented or committed. There was also no work done to obtain feedback > elsewhere, even regarding the specifics of the design. > > > 4. Premature commit: Invalid text and graphic > --------------------------------------------- > > This change was committed with some "Lorem ipsum" text and a picture of Mike > Saunders' face and a red baloon which says "support" in small font as the > solicitation promotion graphic. With due respect to Mike - that was clearly > a placeholder. Generally, features are committed to the main branch when > they are ready, not in this "put your foot in the door" fashion. > > > 5. Premature commit: before marketing discussion > ------------------------------------------------- > > The Redmine issue in which this was requested does not mention how a > decision to request this was taken. Also, AFAICT, the idea to introduce this > banner was not presented and approved, or discussed, on the Marketing > channel nor on the marketing mailing list(s). > > > 6. Misuse of the Redmine tracker > -------------------------------- > > Suggestions for changes to LibreOffice are tracked on > bugs.documentfoundation.org, under the LibreOffice product. The TDF Redmine > tracks issues or tasks regarding the TDF and LO as organizations or as > community projects. > > I do not recall another case when an intended UI/UX aspect was tracked on > redmine. Focusing on promotion ("marketing") activity solely, let us have a > look at the marketing tasks on the redmine instance: > > https://redmine.documentfoundation.org/projects/marketing/ > issues?set_filter=1&tracker_id=4 > > There isn't a single issue requesting a change to LibreOffice code. That is, > until this one. > > It should also be mentioned the last issue of any kind on that redmine > subporject was filed 3 years ago. So, filing this request on the redmine all > but assures it would be out of sight until closed or resolved. I am also > disappointed at those who interacted on that issue, on the redmine instance, > without alerting the design mailing list, or telegram channel, about its > existence. > > 7. "We've already got one, you see" > --------------------------------------- > > The Start Center already has a donation solicitation button and image. > > There is no bug report (AFAICT) about this widget: > > https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/showdependencytree. > cgi?id=61914&hide_resolved=1 > > The only programs I know which have multiple solicitations of payment on the > same page are malware or low-quality and short-lived projects with multiple > demanding commercial sponsors. > > > 8. Request without a proper justification > ----------------------------------------- > > If we examine the Redmine issue, a justification for effecting this change > is not presented by the poster, nor requested by the implementer, nor > referred or linked to. Specifically, no justification is presented for a > _second_ donation solicitation on the same screen (not even instead of the > first, but side-by-side with it). > > > Finally, the combination of items 3,4,5,6 makes it appear as though there > was an intent to sneak this in to the code base quickly, setting "facts on > the ground", circumventing our process - banking on it being more difficult > to get agreement on undoing the change than to raise valid objections to its > introduction. I don't like that. Perhaps there's an innoncent explanation > here, but - the fair thing would be a back-out/removal, and a discussion of > justifications, alternatives, and if this reaffirmed then of aspects of the > design. > > > > [1]: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Principles I agree with him
Created attachment 206587 [details] proposed design
(In reply to Juzemaru from comment #8) > Created attachment 206587 [details] > proposed design This looks sweet) I think that is better)
Created attachment 206725 [details] Screenshot of donation banner with standard controls (In reply to Juzemaru from comment #8) > Created attachment 206587 [details] > proposed design The design has been implemented for bug 171754. It looks less fancy than in the mockup but still is an improvement.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > The design has been implemented for bug 171754. It looks less fancy than in > the mockup but still is an improvement. The multiple reasons to remove this banner - for the time being or permanently - stand.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > Created attachment 206725 [details] > Screenshot of donation banner with standard controls > > (In reply to Juzemaru from comment #8) > > Created attachment 206587 [details] > > proposed design > > The design has been implemented for bug 171754. It looks less fancy than in > the mockup but still is an improvement. And Julemaru attacment looks better than this
I think we should consider if the use of this banner is the best way to solicit for donations? We have an introductory prompt now on UI matters, perhaps this could be amended to include a donation link and description to accompany this? I understand why there is objection to "in your face" advertising by colleagues and believe that a frank discussion on the best way to request donations is warranted. Eyal makes some salient points that others agree with, we should consider some of these along with other monetization activities. I personally believe that a once a month donation request when an update is completed would be appropriate opportunity and not hinder the workflow of the user.
The banner is not anymore in the master now. Can we close this at the moment? Version: 26.8.0.0.alpha0+ (X86_64) Build ID: 279c07f4b4a9e195fe90cd49e18e601e9060513c CPU threads: 16; OS: Linux 6.17; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8); UI: en-US Calc: threaded
(In reply to BogdanB from comment #14) > The banner is not anymore in the master now. Are you sure? Heiko seems adamant about keeping it, and RedMine ticket continues to be active without mention of a back-out. Can you link to the commit in which it was removed?
(In reply to BogdanB from comment #14) > The banner is not anymore in the master now. The banner is shown every 30 days. Today is number 20563 since the dawn of time with a modulo of 13 against 30. IOW, the next occasion to see the banner should be in 17 days.
We discussed the topic in the design meeting. + too many requests of donations have an adverse effect, showing it on update is enough (John) + breaks the ux-control design principle: the user cannot prevent this (even if they donate); solicitation every 30 days is arbitrary, as opposed to on updates (Eyal) + why not wait a release cycle and assess the impact (Heiko) + suggest the update dialog, or another dialog or banner, to show a donation solicitation during update or right after it (John) + sounds good to me but beyond my coding skills (Heiko) + the decision to introduce this banner was made by the TDF team (Heiko) + expect consultation with the design team in case of decisions that affect UX (Eyal) => bug should be marked new (Eyal, John), rather Invalid (Heiko)
LO should attract donations by being such excellent software that people can't help but want to donate - not by being donationware.
(In reply to Justin L from comment #18) > LO should attract donations by being such excellent software that people > can't help but want to donate - not by being donationware. People don't know that there is a need to donate. People don't know that they can donate.
(In reply to Buovjaga from comment #19) > People don't know that there is a need to donate. > > People don't know that they can donate. This is actually one of the points that was in strange agreement in the discussion yesterday: Heiko mentioned that people don't use the start center that much (which is true I suppose), and so may fail to see the donation solicitation; and John and me said that a donation solicitation would probably have more exposure when 'attached' to our periodic updates - so the dialog that comes up while a download and/or update is performed; and if that somehow happens only in the background, then the notification of the update could have a more prominent and meaningful solicitation about donation. And more important than the visibility is the _justification_ from making that appear: It would not be an arbitrary "hey, stop what you were doing and watch this instead!", but a part of the process of an upgrade. Anyway, the majority opinion - considering the discussion on Telegram, here on the bug and in the meeting yesterday (albeit only two-to-one) is an arbitrary semi-pop-up in the start center every 30 days is not the way to go.
I open start center only for bibisecting, when I do ./soffice command. In real life I open conretically calc or writer.
(In reply to Wodsfort from comment #21) > I open start center only for bibisecting, when I do ./soffice command. In > real life I open conretically calc or writer. (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #20) > (In reply to Buovjaga from comment #19) > > People don't know that there is a need to donate. > > > > People don't know that they can donate. > > This is actually one of the points that was in strange agreement in the > discussion yesterday: Heiko mentioned that people don't use the start center > that much (which is true I suppose), this depends on the used platform. On macOS you simply only have "libreoffice", not explicit "LibreOffice Calc" option to open. Hence you open always the Start Center...
(In reply to Dennis Roczek from comment #22) > this depends on the used platform. On macOS you simply only have > "libreoffice", not explicit "LibreOffice Calc" option to open. Hence you > open always the Start Center... Ok, fair point; but... * It was estimated, a couple of years back, that about 90% of our users are on Windows. Not sure what the statistics are now but likely not very far from that. * The alternative suggestion John and myself put forward would be independent of whether one uses the start center or not.
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #23) > * It was estimated, a couple of years back, that about 90% of our users are > on Windows. Not sure what the statistics are now but likely not very far > from that. Sadly not in the latest "state of the project" as stat. 😶