Tony Davis : Application Usability and Standards

Tony Davis

Simple-Talk Editor

News, views and good brews

Application Usability and Standards

Published Tuesday, September 16, 2008 1:02 PM

Office 2007's 'ribbon UI', now optimistically renamed 'Office Fluent User Interface', was an act of strange corporate madness by Microsoft.

This may seem an unfair statement, since it looks like a genuine attempt to make the application easier to learn for the novice. However, it broke the rules, and signaled that Microsoft no longer cared about maintaining a consistency in the look and feel of all Windows applications.

History tells us that it is a bad idea to change the interface of an established word-processing application. A similar act of folly caused the demise of Wordstar, for example. Word's menus and shortcuts had been learned by its users for eighteen years, so forcing them to adopt a different metaphor, without the choice of the 'classic view', seems reckless. At least we could switch off the ridiculous animated paper-clip (TFC), their previous attempt to dumb down their flagship applications. However, unless you buy one of the many applications that are designed to put back the classic menus, you are condemned to haunt the Ribbon UI (TFR), looking for that elusive Word Count menu item.

Simple-Talk uses Microsoft Word as the de-facto standard for article submission, and most authors I've spoken to are united in their dislike of the new ribbon UI. It may help the novice, but those of us who have the old menu tattooed into their cerebellums are disinclined to thank Microsoft for suddenly changing all the rules.

Application developers who are creating Windows applications have certain constraints to which they have to work. This has been a consensus amongst application providers since Xerox developed the 'Windows' computer in 1981. We work to strict style guides and deviate only when necessary; this is one of the foundations of good user-interface design.. Leaving to one side the obvious things such as context popup menus or resizing, Windows applications must have a menu, and the menu layout and structure has to adhere to standards. It also has to have keyboard shortcuts so that you can use it without a mouse.

There are good reasons for all this: if all Windows applications work the same way, then the end user can comfortably use several applications at once, and there is less need for retraining. This is in everybody's interests, because the cost of retraining in the corporate setting is one of the highest costs in rolling out an application.

If there is to be anarchy over even the simplest elements of consistency in the user interface, then there is little point in having Microsoft Windows. Following the lead of Office 2007, we can all adopt our own user interfaces, without worrying too much about the cognitive dissonance in the end user. Or we can all use Adobe Air instead.

Nobody objects to innovation: we need to select the good new ideas in user interface design and use them. However, what I and many other do object to is having the established UI standards torn up at the drop of a hat, and the 'new ideas' forced on us without the option of being able to turn them off. To do that is to abuse your monopoly.

Am I being unkind to Microsoft about this? Should we now rewrite all our applications to make them work the same way as TFR (the 'fluent' Ribbon)? Does anyone know where Word Count has got to? What is the point of adhering to standards if the industry leader doesn't want to conform to them? Please let us know: The best comment on the blog will win a $50 amazon voucher, of course.

Cheers,

Tony.

by Tony Davis

Comments

	Jason Haley said: September 16, 2008 9:09 AM
	timothyawiseman@gmail.com said: I partially agree, but this time, I think you are being too harsh in a sense. While it took me a while as a long time user to adjust to the ribbon bars, they are easier for new users to learn and therefore will be superior over the long term. UI innovation cannot always be by consensus else it would be impossible to do major overhauls and we would be stuck with only small evolutions. While I understand your point about the value of standardization, if we are ever to have progress companies need to have the ability to innovate, and Microsoft should not be denied that simply because they are the largest With all of that said, I too would have appreciated a "classic view" feature for a while. September 16, 2008 11:19 AM
	acbups said: I'm all for innovation, and that Ribbon (like Vista) is pretty. I even like the way the letters pop up when you thumb the Alt key and that some multi-key combinations show both letters in the pair right away. But they could have accomplished this major overhaul more gracefully. The lack of a classic view can't have saved enough in the size of the executable (17MB) or the amount of memory used by the app (8.4MB with only a blank workbook open) to justify its absence. More disturbing to me is that they kept part of the previous functionality - try Alt+I+R in Excel. Oh, you'll get your inserted row, but you'll be taunted along the way (once you punch the I) with an "Excel 2003 access key" message to continue typing or hit escape. This says that eventually this key combination will disappear suddenly and mysteriously. Further, the hot-key for Insert is now N, rather than I (presumably to allow for backwards compatibility). Does N now make more sense for the novice than I? Maybe, but read on. In 2007 the insert row combination is Alt -> H -> I -> R. That's right - there's an Insert ribbon, and also an Insert section on the Home ribbon. And just to further torture Poor Mr. Usability, Insert is abbreviated N in one context and I in another. Translate THAT to a novice! September 16, 2008 11:51 AM
	PeterG said: Of course they are being high-handed. Why, otherwise, did they apply for the patent and make it known that no rival wordprocessor would be allowed to use the Ribbon? If it was really done in the interests of the users, why try to enforce conformance, and prevent existing users reverting to the menu? If the ribbon was really such an advance, how come Microsoft and everyone else stuck with the menu system for well over fifteen years without a whimper. There are a number of good programs that give you back the menus, and they really make the whole thing far more usable. I use AddinTools Classic Menu, which works fine, and gives me the classic menu as well as the Ribbon (If i want it- I never do now I have the menu back) September 16, 2008 11:53 AM
	HenryH said: I'm d*mned if I'm going to sacrifice my menus for some pathetic novice users who can't get their brains around the menu system. After being completely de-skilled by the wretched Ribbon, I eventually gave up and installed one of the third-party add-ins that brought all the lovely menus back. The surprising thing was that, against all the Microsoft Spin, I suddenly discovered all the new features that I'd never discovered whilst wrestling with the ribbon. It must be awful for the Microsoft Developers to see all that hard work concealed behind the awful 'Fluent User Interface'. For the first time, a smile broke across my face when using Office 2007. September 16, 2008 12:13 PM
	reeteshjoshi said: This is normal human behavior to show reluctance to new change and especially with software application’s user interface, but at the same time, innovation and changes are the key factor to bring the window at this stage. Moreover, if novice user can adopt the application very easily because of new user-interface then I do not see why seasoned developer or user cannot! September 16, 2008 1:14 PM
	Matija Lah said: Word Count is available on the Review ribbon in the Proofing section. Get with the programme. September 17, 2008 2:05 AM
	cpsagovac said: The "Office Fluent User Interface" has met with nothing but disdain from everyone I know -- including my spouse who also asks questions like "Where is the Word Count?" Because I've been developing Microsoft apps for, ahem I am embarrassed to say, she thinks I know the answer. Which, after an Easter Egg hunt for a few minutes, I do. A few minutes that I cannot have back. It is true that a novice user can learn the interface without difficulties, but the installed user base is huge. That user base must first <it>unlearn</it> a standard that they have been using for years and then learn how to navigate the OFUI. If we add up all of the time that is being spent as a result of their decision (including all of the time that I'm spending writing this and all of the time you're spending reading it), my guess is that it would exceed several lifetimes... what is the installed user base for MS Office? So a so-called "Usability Expert" or whatever they are calling themselves these days has just plinked several people! The bottom line is that it's not the OFUI that is the problem, per se, (though I find its arrangement of items to be non sequitur), it's the installed user base that is the issue -- they have been unceremoniously dumped for what is, in my mind, a marketing gimmick. So no, Tony, I do not think you are being too harsh! BTW I am finding that the alternative Office Suites are actually quite decent and a lot easier to learn. Why? Ironically because they follow a Microsoft standard. Final note: I would jump off a bridge if MS added the OFUI to Visual Studio. September 17, 2008 3:19 AM
	adrianbanks said: Whilst it was cumbersome to use at first because everything was different, the more I use it I do find that the common things (especially dealing with tables) are easier to use. I can see however that people with no time or inclination to learn a new user interface would be frustrated by the change. A good compromise would have been to support both UIs for a release before removing the old UI completely. I currently don't know which I prefer as there are good and bad points with both. One thing that had me stumped for a while in the new UI is the options dialog. To get to this, you have to click on the office pearl in the top left corner and then click a button that is completely separate from the rest of the options. To address the "where is feature X?" problems, Microsoft have a useful site at http://tinyurl.com/y85r6y. Use the old style UI to choose a feature and it will show you where it is in the ribbon UI. Oh and by the way, word count is in the "review" ribbon in the "proofing" area (an icon that says "ABC 123"). September 17, 2008 4:07 AM
	Dowdian said: It's funny to me that there's such a strong resemblance between FUI and the old colloquialism "fooey" which was used in exasperation to mean "I give up". Frankly though, it's not funny to me that so often I run in to folks in the workplace that are resistant to change because "that's the way we've always done it." While I can't defend MS (they could have made the transition easier), I can say that we, the developers, DBAs, and technicians, we of all people should be able to adapt to these new environs. I was the DBA at a hospital until late last year. I also acted as their lead developer (it was a non-profit, what could I do?) which lead me to interview folks all over the organization as part of the design process. The one constant that stood out to me in every single project I architected was not the resistance to change but the reason for that resistance. When asked "why do you not want this to change" the answer was inevitably "because, that's the way we've always done it." I am in this business to change things, to improve things, which is why I don't work there any more. Don't get me wrong, I feel your pain. I own a business now and, along with everything else I do, it is up to me to train my partners (a salesman and a pharmacist...oy vey) and my employees on how to use the FUI. I field questions daily like "where's this?" and "how do I do that?", but I feel that it's worth it, because they are exercising their brains and that's exactly what I need them to do. Even when it's at the cost of immediate productivity because I know that that's the only way to spur creativity and innovation. "That's the way we've always done it", to me, is unacceptable. It stifles business by halting progress, smothering creativity, and tying the hands of those who really could push things forward. Now, thanks to this post and adrianbanks' response, I know of a great new tool I can use toward that end. Thank you. September 17, 2008 5:32 AM
	Phil Factor said: I suspect that the message is not so much 'its got to stay because that's the way we've always done it'. It is more, 'if you're going to change popular software that has a community around it, don't force changes on them, and don't try to patent the new interface. Instead, take the community with you and provide an upgrade path, not an upgrade barrier.' There have been many changes in the user interface of windows applications in the past, but I can't remember a time where one company has steamrollered a change through in such a draconian way. September 17, 2008 6:39 AM
	imassi said: I don't think you're being too harsh at all. I've had to adapt to the 2007 suite in my new job and it has definitely slowed me down. Should we change our menus to look like the ribbon? Only if we want our users to switch to other products... September 17, 2008 7:19 AM
	shovavnik said: History tells us many things, often contradictory, and changing user interfaces is definitely NOT a new thing. Office 2007 is not the first time they've done it. Just one (big) example: DOS -> Win 3.x -> Win95 -> Win98 -> XP -> Vista - every major OS upgrade (coming on average every 3-4 years) has "revolutionized" the desktop UI, to one extent or another. And Microsoft is not the only "culprit". Many vendors have made significant and sometimes earth-shattering changes to their UI's, including Adobe, WordPerfect, Google (Google Groups, for example), not to mention smaller fish like RoboForm and WinZip. Sometimes the transitions were abrupt and sometimes gradual. Microsoft's main argument for the ribbon, by the way, was not to make it easier for the novice user. Rather, their goal was to make it easier for the great majority of experienced Word, Excel and Powerpoint users who, after often more than a decade using Word, didn't know about Word Count and other "buried" features. Microsoft had been talking about the ribbon for at least a year before they released the final product to prepare the industry for the change and and ease the transition. They also made significant changes to the ribbon during the development process IN RESPONSE to community feedback to the betas they released (and did not rely just on internal testing and brainstorming). From my personal experience, the cost of (re-)training actually went down. What took weeks to teach in Word XP and 2003 now takes less than a week, often without guidance, and you can cover topics that were difficult to approach in previous versions (like fancy Excel effects, mail merge, themes, etc.). Why? The paradigm is simpler for novice and experienced (non-geek) users to understand. It just is. I would suggest that the measure of whether a revolutionized UI is hair-brained or stroke-of-genius (or anything in between) is its success in the capitalistic wild. The real question is: Does it work? From what I can see, Office 2007 is the first really truly successful version of Office that didn't cause me to cry out in pain, and the ribbon is a big part of that success. September 17, 2008 7:27 AM
	lionfan1991 said: Despite all of the issues with unlearning the "old" way and learning the new "ribbon way", another big issue I have as a developer is this... As the customers of my custom-developed apps learn the new office "ribbon way", that will become their new standard. However, none of the custom apps use that "standard", so we'll be seen as lagging behind. Eventually there may be a call for updating the custom apps to the ribbon "standard" which won't be an easy (or cheap) effort. September 17, 2008 7:40 AM
	abennear said: I agree completely. MS has to create a reason to upgrade Office when the current version does everything necessary. I think that was the main driver. It might not be as bad if the help files were better. But with every new version of any microsoft product, including SQL, the help become harder to navigate. It's a sad commentary on MS help that I almost always have to turn to Google to find what was unfindable via MS help. I'm somewhat shocked by how recklessly Microsoft has abandoned Windows UI guidelines. See their desktop search for another example. It's UI, and especially configuration dialogue, is utterly incomprehensible. My other big rant is the forcing down our throats of the Office 2007 fonts Calibri and Camrbia. These are optimized for ClearType and look awful if you are not using cleartype. Well, some people don't use clear type and then they are cursed by the new fonts. September 17, 2008 8:29 AM
	Jack the DBA said: I have to admit that, at first, I was against the ribbon, but as I used it I have become comfortable with it. I am not an office power user, so I still don't know where many of the functions are, and I don't really care. My biggest gripes are that it takes more steps to get to Print Preview and it took me months to figure out that the Office Icon in the top left corner was the File menu. Also how come Outlook 2007 doesn't have the ribbon? September 17, 2008 8:30 AM
	tbomberger said: I suspect your question is larger than the specifics you ask. Nevertheless, as previously indicated, the entry can be found where stated in the ribbon. But, why look in the ribbon for the word count? There is an entry in the bottom left corner of the window, in the status bar, labelled appropriately "Words:" (after "Page:")followed by the word count. If you select an area of the document, the entry displays words highlighted/total words (432/2309, for example). Further if you just click on the area of the status bar it will open the same dialog you access through the ribbon. September 17, 2008 8:43 AM
	EvilJ said: I feel like I'm reading the screenplay for 'Grumpy Old Men'. While I completely agree with and support the idea of UI consistency there comes a time when the rules need to be adjusted. Just as Tony mentions in the post, this paradigm has been with us for a million years. Does that make it right or make it the best? Are we doing menus strictly because that is how it's always been done? In the case of Office, Microsoft found the ribbon to be more intuitive for new users... so they put it in. I will admit that I was lost when I first started using it. But it only took me about a month of semi-regular use to figure out where the important stuff is and then somewhere about three months into it my brain 'clicked' (or maybe it reverted back to factory default) and the ribbon made sense. I have absolutely no problem moving between a 'regular' application and the ribbons in Office. I suspect that there is going to be a very long time where apps will be built one way or the other and people will be fluent in both paradigms. Tony acts like this is the first time Microsoft has done this but it clearly isn't. The Windows 3.x to Win95 transition broke UI tradition when they introduced the start button. Then Windows XP broke the start button when it nested All Programs and added the recently used list. People got up in arms about both changes but somehow everyone figured out how to use them. At least in Windows XP Microsoft did provide the ability to set the menu back to 'classic' mode... And that has become a much bigger annoyance than the change itself ever was. As a network admin, I constantly run into users that set their system up in classic mode and I can't find a single thing when I'm trying to support them. It actually takes me longer to support them because Microsoft left classic mode in the start menu. (And, by the way, they broke the start menu again in Vista... they just left out classic mode.) If they had allowed classic menus with Office 2007, 3 years from now, I would be lost trying to support a user that is still hanging onto classic office mode because they are afraid of the ribbon. Is it perfect? No. Are we all going to be sucked into a black hole because of it? No... that will happen because of the LHC. Will we all learn it and use it and get the hang of it? Yes... though I imagine people will gripe about it for years to come. Just wait until everyone sees what WPF does to the rest of the applications! September 17, 2008 8:44 AM
	JonRobertson said: I lived and breathed WordPerfect 5.1 for many, many years. Even when Windows 95 showed up, I still installed my WP51 and created an icon to use WP51 in "full screen" mode. It wasn't until a new job required the use of Office that I switched. And that was Office 2000. Why did I love WP51? Because I'm a keyboard kind of guy. I go to great lengths to avoid moving my hand from the keyboard to the mouse. That darned mouse slows me down tremendously. But, being a keyboard kind of guy, I quickly adapted to shortcut keys that let me pop all over Word's menus. Eventually the menus became intuitive, although some things certainly could have better placement. Six years later I hear about the ribbon and I just wanted to scream. Funny how things change for me. You see, I'm the software developer responsible for (among other things) the Office integration with our product. Not only do I have to use Office, I have to be sure that our product plays well with Office (and that Office plays well with our product). As such, I'm sometimes looked to as the Office expert around here. I'm not an expert, but I do spend more time in Office than anyone else here. :( Just last week, I wrote a proposal for a face lift of our product. One of the changes would be a ribbon interface. Our ribbon would be extremely intuitive, providing the user the most frequently needed options based on the area of the application being used. Our product's menu structure has never changed. Unfortunately, that doesn't make it a good menu. It was thrown together by a couple of programmers based on what made "logical" sense, not based on what made sense to the users. We've got nine years of feedback from our users now, and I think we can create a much better user interface using a ribbon. Now, for the die hard in me, there are some rules that you just don't break with software upgrades. Microsoft broke them. We won't. Don't take anything away. We'll provide both the old menu and the new ribbon and let the user decide which to use. Don't break existing shortcuts. If the old menu is being used, the old shortcuts will work EXACTLY the same. While Microsoft managed to keep most of the shortcuts, they did not keep them all. And I still curse when the shortcut I've used for seven years in Office no longer works. Firefox even broke this rule with FF3 and the developers' response was "well, you'll get used to it." ARGH Today, I actually prefer the ribbon. Not because it is easier to locate things than the menu. (I often get "Hey, do you know how where they moved ... in Word 2007?" questions.) But because it provides a ton of additional functionality, such as "on the fly" formatting previews, that is difficult to live without once you get used to them. :D September 17, 2008 9:13 AM
	paulh said: When my wife bought a new PC it came with Vista pre-installed. She was struggled to use Vista productively because of the bloat and because of the new user interface. I uninstalled the unwanted bloat, and enabled Windows Classic theme, Start Menu etc. Overnight she went from swearing and cursing Vista to being a productive user, quickly getting on with her job. When my wife bought Office 2007 she was spent ages struggling with the Ribbon. I did not have (or did not find at the time) a way to enable Office Classic menus. She was unhappy, and wasted many productive hours unlearning how Office worked and muddling through the new Ribbon. Now, a year later, my wife can just about get buy in Word using the Ribbon, while I am still totally lost as I use Office 2003 in my day job. Assessing the Ribbon honestly, it has made Office harder to use at home. The only saving grace has been that I can often remember and tell her which shortcut keys from Office 2003 and earleir to use when she gets stuck, which bizarrely has been easier to remember than learning the ribbon. September 17, 2008 9:42 AM
	JTKeyes said: While I definitely don't think that change is bad, I like to be able to pick and choose which changes I want to make. (Like wew VS classic menu appearance) I think that Microsoft has brought us to another point where we need to draw another line in the sand, and we need to set another version compatibility level for applications that work with their products. I totally agree with the comments of "Don't take anything away". The ultimate rule of GUI should still be to make things intuitive. The stupidest part of old programs like WordStar and WordPerfect was needing the plastic template to figure out that you needed to hit Shift-F7 to quit the program. Sure that's obvious, I would have guessed that the first try (not). Don't even mention the key combo's to actually save something, The sad thing is that this may be another way of trying to force users to adopt Microsoft's Software as a Service policy. I'm not a Microsoft basher, I make my living creating software with their tools. I'm sure most of us have been through periods where how often we use of programs like Word and Excel changes with our current job duties. At home I stopped buying Enterprise versions with Office Enterprise 2000. I updated some of my tools further with Office XP professional. At this point in time I just don't use Word ot Excel that much at home anymore. I certainly don't need every new bell and whistle. I just need to be able to create and edit documents. If Microsoft fully follows through with the software as service, route; I may not be able to open a document next year, that I created last week without signing up for another year of service. The service model makes sense for Antivirus software where you always need the newest version for it to be effective, but what has Office really added during the last decade, that makes me unable to communicate without it? Do I really want my documents to be held hostage so that I need a yearly fee to be able to use them. That scares me more than the breaking of the interface. September 17, 2008 9:54 AM
	roccogrand said: Tony, At least with Vista, all I need to do to see the word count is glance at the lower left corner in Word. Voila, there it is. And if I want more detail at my fingertips like the number of characters, with and without spaces, paragraphs, and lines, I can add the word count window using a custom button, which takes less than 10 seconds. It does take a little getting used to the ribbon but anything that I can't find is easily customizable, even for a 60-year-old man with glasses. I can also turn off the ribbon and use my own set of pre-Ribbon icons. The only thing that I am still unhappy about is automatic code behind my Access forms and reports. Also, having to set trusted locations on machines is a pain. What you may want to ask Microsoft is, Why didn't the Visio development group get the memo about the ribbon? September 17, 2008 11:49 AM
	word_diva said: Perhaps Microsoft is turning to a new corporate motto "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds"? I have been using Word and Office for years. When Office 2007 came out I eagerly installed it and waited for the magic to happen. Instead, imagine my frustration and angst at having been broken by a word processing application - I work with computers and advanced applications all day. I was stunned. It was almost unusable for me. I felt like I was lost in a maze and unable to find my way around the application. I searched for a 'Take me back' or 'Revert to Classic view' key but found nothing. I finally had to surrender, uninstall Office 2007 and reinstall Office 2003. But like many, I felt I had done something wrong, I was the problem, I just wasn't giving it a chance. So like many relationships, I gave it another go. I reinstalled Office 2007 and began again, hoping it would be different this time. But it wasn't. Soon after I started using it again, the name calling and recriminations began. Keys were mashed and curses started flying. Either I was to blame or Word was at fault. It didn't matter, we just couldn't work together. So I 'Removed' again, determined not to fall for the Microsoft siren call again. September 17, 2008 2:01 PM
	Jimmy said: Am I the only one cynical enough to think this is an attempt to set a new standard, whose "improvements" are primarily in enhancing MS's ability to generate licencing revenue from the patents and/or use them to exclude competitors ? If an improved user (especially new user) experience was the goal thye'd've done something about the @#$%^ auto-indenting and numbering "features". September 17, 2008 8:37 PM
	Louis Somers said: In my opinion MicroSoft is not trying to set a new standard, but getting the new generation of computer users hooked to their new interface, making competitors software harder to adapt. If you get VisualStudio today, you will not get any "new-standards fancy ribbon menu controls" for free with it. You'll either have to copy-cat develop them yourself or get some from DeveloperExpress or somewhere else. I wouldn't upgrade to a new version of anything just because it has a new interface. I still use Word97 which has enough features to get my job done. I also use PaintShop Pro 5 more often than 12 (which I only use when I really need some new features). Changing an established and popular GUI can never be good idea, even if it is changing in the direction of more conformity to other software or "standards". Applications usually benefit from deviating from standards rather than adapting them. Take for example the old version of SCALA. Clicking the right mouse button meant toggling between full-screen editing or filling half of the screen with tabbed panels full of options. (The right mouse button would never adapt its behavior depending on what was under the mouse cursor). Once used to this Amiga-like non-PC-standard rightclick behavior one would never want it to change (until screen resolutions got larger than 1600x1200). I personally loved the commandline-like input of AutoCad. Once used to it, I would never use the (later added, but not replaced) toolbar. Though with the toolbar it is also possible to learn keyboard-shortcuts, the commandline- thing made it easy to copy and paste actions or objects, almost as if running a script. Autodesk was clever enough not to force the toolbar on us. All software for a specific professional industry has its quirks and deviations. Adobe InDesign for example makes distinction between the two enter keys; the one on the numeric keyboard inserts a page-break. The list can go on and on. Deviating from standards may mean a steeper learning curve, but in the end it is worth the higher productivity of trained users. September 18, 2008 3:36 AM
	stevegs said: OK. Before I go into any kind of ranting, a few observations: 1. I scrounged to find a system to replace my home computer (died Sunday evening) with one loaded with XP. I sacrificed my principles to buy from Walmart, the only vendor with old-enough inventory. 2. I still drive a stick shift. My intent was to teach my children how, but they've shown no interest in learning. The unforeseen advantage? I don't have to share my car. 3. While I've explored the new social networking venues and even play games on one, it's been more to keep an eye on my kids rather than because I truly enjoy this 'new' environment. Tony, you mentioned that Wordstar changed their UI and died. What did we transition to? Wordperfect had one way of doing menus, MS had another. Philosophically different, but basically an apples to apples comparison. I've not seen the ribbons, but I've been walking into client sites for so long now, asking where does it hurt, what tools can I use, and how long do I have to make the pain go away, that another tool is exactly that - another tool. Did you know Mercedes now makes an automobile without a steering wheel (I think for about US$150k)? - a joystick for those kids who believe that driving is just another video game. Unfortunately, there's no reset button after the crash replacing the body shop. DRIVE me to the moon! Abuse of a monopoly? When's the last time you played that game? M$ has the ability/resources to reinvent, recreate, still dominate, screw up, do it over again and still dominate. I know you're not jealous, but what happend to your youthful exuberance? Green and growing, are are you beginning to overripen? If nothing else, you got a venting editorial out of this new 'product' (using its predecessor, I assume). On a more serious bent, has anyone published any research on comparative learning curves? Are the ribbons easier to learn, out of the box? Is it the grandchild of the paperclip? Or an analogy taken from the wiring inside the box (those ribbon cables connecting I/O storage to motherboard)? Back in my 'younger' day, Big Blue was the gorilla in the industry that everyone loved to hate. I've been forced to overcome my racial prejudices, or at least to transfer them to the new gorilla out on the west coast. Was the new product used on an 'XP' machine or Vista? Is this M$'s effort to salvage Vista by deflecting onto Word? Can you imagine that the development was more of a 'let's see if we can do this' rather than trying to make money? Of course, having to 'start over' learning a new product creates tremendous economic opportunity - for trainers, book writers, etc. It's only the old school old fogies like us who have to 'suffer' through this change. By the way, once you get past the cutlure chock of the changed gui, was there any substantive change to the internals? Is it just a matter of finding the capability, or did they actually make some things disappear instead of just deparacate them? September 24, 2008 9:52 AM
	randyvol said: I could not agree with you more! NO! You are not being unkind. A cohort of mine here at work loaded the 'new' Office on his PC and was giddy over it, wanting to show me all the neat, new, nifty stuff. He could tell immediately I was not sharing his enthusiasm and asked me why. I replied that while I'm all in favor of 'new, improved' there generally should be a very good reason. Then I skewered his enthusiasm with "Have you considered how our user-base is going to respond to having to go through a brand new learning curve to continue using Word?" Since he knows as well as I do: 1) the user-base is not all that saavy, and 2) they hate change that impacts their productivity; he was immediately in 'uh-oh' mode. Then, just for grins, I threw him the killer question - If we are all going to have to re-learn Office, and throwing in the cost to upgrade for this privilege, what would stop the President from suggesting that we look at alternatives, perhaps OpenOffice? (I know we won't, we consider Office the 'de facto standard used to interchange documents with our suppliers and customers, but I just wanted to see his reaction to the question). I enjoyed watching the emotions running over his face as he pondered the possible downside of the thing he was so excited about. I cannot fathom why the engineers didn't take into consideration how the installed base would feel about RElearning a product that many of us have been using for over a decade. September 26, 2008 2:43 PM
	No More Office Ribbon? said: PingBack from http://www.microsoftweblog.com/no-more-office-ribbon/ September 28, 2008 11:51 PM
	David Connell said: So are you all saying let's stiffle inovation let's not risk rocking the boat let's keep the User Interface looking like Word 2 then? I guess I would have liked some backward compatability mode like they did with Win95 and FileManager & XP with the control panel etc... Perhaps they have but I couldn't find it? However surely you've got to allow things to move forward, Yes of course its really annoying when you start Word for the first time. For example I could not find word count either, but then after a bit you get used to it and in the end I found it on the bottom status bar. Then I come to the conclusion that although I did not like the change, (I don't like change that is created by someone else) but perhaps the new version is better. I must admit I am suprised that people complain about the Ribbon Bar as most people complain that Microsoft does not inovate enough, yet when the do try something look what they get.... October 1, 2008 8:35 AM

You need to sign in to comment on this blog

Opinion Home

Opinion Pieces (123 articles)

Geek of the Week (46 articles)

Tony Davis - Editor (6 articles)

Phil Factor (46 articles)

Damon Armstrong (8 articles)

Douglas Reilly (40 articles)

Adrian Furnham (1 articles)

Claire Brooking (1 articles)

Richard Morris (48 articles)

Tim Gorman (1 articles)

Jesse Liberty (5 articles)

Sarah Blow (1 articles)

Anna Larjomaa (1 articles)

Gaidar Magdanurov (2 articles)

Regular Columnists (1 articles)

Ben Hall (5 articles)

Larry Gonick (15 articles)

Blogs Home

September 2008

Niklaus Wirth: Geek of the Week

It is difficult to begin to estimate the huge extent of the contribution that Niklaus Wirth has made to... Read more...

Building an Exchange Server 2007 environment

Of course, changing a 32,000 mailbox system, based in 40 Exchange Servers, to a centralised 25,000... Read more...

Manage Stress Before it Kills You

The key to a long career in IT is in learning how to cope adaptively with stress. Matt Simmons, like... Read more...

Expecting the Worst

Optimists are often disappointed Read more...

To Boldly Ask IT for Development Work

Phil has always been mystified by the way that, in Science-Fiction films, the crew of space-ships are... Read more...

Site map | Become an author | Contact us

Tony Davis

Application Usability and Standards

Comments

Jason Haley said:

timothyawiseman@gmail.com said:

acbups said:

PeterG said:

HenryH said:

reeteshjoshi said:

Matija Lah said:

cpsagovac said:

adrianbanks said:

Dowdian said:

Phil Factor said:

imassi said:

shovavnik said:

lionfan1991 said:

abennear said:

Jack the DBA said:

tbomberger said:

EvilJ said:

JonRobertson said:

paulh said:

JTKeyes said:

roccogrand said:

word_diva said:

Jimmy said:

Louis Somers said:

stevegs said:

randyvol said:

No More Office Ribbon? said:

David Connell said: