Rant: Microsoft: make up your mind with menus!
-
OK, I'm a little tired and grumpy so maybe this is way out of proportion, but for the love of all things small and furry: Microsoft, PLEASE stop screwing around and making your product UIs inconsistent and hard to use. Office - menus are now ribbons. Except for the quick access menu. And the Where's Wally main menu cunningly disguised as the Office logo IE - Right hand side tucked away in the corner MSN - look closely at to the left of the minimise / maximise buttons and there it is! Sneaky devil. Everything else: To be decided on the day. At least that's how it feels. I can understand if Microsoft wants to make menus better, or easier to find, or more contextually relevant, or even simply better looking. But I don't see any of that. All I see is that every time I switch to a different Microsoft app I have to readjust my fatigued brain and try and work out the UI de jour. Seriously Microsoft. Start acting like a cohesive company and bring back the thing that got you where you are today: consistent, obvious and simple user interfaces with respect for standards and accessibility.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
I totally agree - and changing the UI on each release just because they have doen new research into a better UI does not help anybody - I'd rather have something the same as I am used to and I am sure most users would second this. I cannot stand Office 2007 - how many cryptic icons do we need and the continual change of what is there based on context might seem a good idea but I hate it. And if you have a small screen that ribbon takes most of it - I am blessed with a 20" 1600x1200 but many of my clients still use 800x600 (honest!) you end up with about one line of text in Word after the ribbon gets it's slice
James H wrote:
the continual change of what is there based on context might seem a good idea but I hate it.
This is more profound than it might appear - and what is like by the general user as well. Why do I make this statement? My last position was a (the) programmer for dry-cleaning point-of-sale software. This used touchscreens. Each item had descriptions attached to it (cotton, linen, pleated, etc.) - but not every item had all of them. One didn't have pleated pants, for example. I thought I was doing a good thing by purging the unused items from the display each time and consolidating the view. This was (apparently) a great advantage when one considers that only about 18 could be shown at a time. This saved paging by the user. Not so - according the the owners! They knew their customers. Speed and efficiency were premium items. They had me leave blanks for unused descriptions so that all of them would end up in the same relative position. Why? That's the way users wanted it to avoid errors - and work faster! Things were always where they were supposed to be. In a business with a relatively high employee turnover rate, an easy to learn intuitive UI is beyond essential. So - the whining and ranting that got this started? It's right on the money.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
-
OK, I'm a little tired and grumpy so maybe this is way out of proportion, but for the love of all things small and furry: Microsoft, PLEASE stop screwing around and making your product UIs inconsistent and hard to use. Office - menus are now ribbons. Except for the quick access menu. And the Where's Wally main menu cunningly disguised as the Office logo IE - Right hand side tucked away in the corner MSN - look closely at to the left of the minimise / maximise buttons and there it is! Sneaky devil. Everything else: To be decided on the day. At least that's how it feels. I can understand if Microsoft wants to make menus better, or easier to find, or more contextually relevant, or even simply better looking. But I don't see any of that. All I see is that every time I switch to a different Microsoft app I have to readjust my fatigued brain and try and work out the UI de jour. Seriously Microsoft. Start acting like a cohesive company and bring back the thing that got you where you are today: consistent, obvious and simple user interfaces with respect for standards and accessibility.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
IMHO, you can never go wrong modeling GUI's (regardless of the application type) after the popular development IDE's (applying as appropriate). The "flashy" stuff never lasts.
MrPlankton
-
"consistent, obvious and simple user interfaces with respect for standards and accessibility" Hmmm, have you tried working on a Mac? That is all the above! :laugh:
Interested in answers.
-
James H wrote:
the continual change of what is there based on context might seem a good idea but I hate it.
This is more profound than it might appear - and what is like by the general user as well. Why do I make this statement? My last position was a (the) programmer for dry-cleaning point-of-sale software. This used touchscreens. Each item had descriptions attached to it (cotton, linen, pleated, etc.) - but not every item had all of them. One didn't have pleated pants, for example. I thought I was doing a good thing by purging the unused items from the display each time and consolidating the view. This was (apparently) a great advantage when one considers that only about 18 could be shown at a time. This saved paging by the user. Not so - according the the owners! They knew their customers. Speed and efficiency were premium items. They had me leave blanks for unused descriptions so that all of them would end up in the same relative position. Why? That's the way users wanted it to avoid errors - and work faster! Things were always where they were supposed to be. In a business with a relatively high employee turnover rate, an easy to learn intuitive UI is beyond essential. So - the whining and ranting that got this started? It's right on the money.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
Absolutely, This post, too, is right on the money. There are two schools of thought about how humans operate: cognitivism behaviorism The cognitivists prize our ability to actually reason about the world and they think that user interfaces should be set up intelligently based on the specifics of the task at hand. The behaviorists think that people have automatic behaviors that are triggered by what they see and here -- and that these behaviors are triggered regardless of the logic of the situation. The behaviorist would suggest that the delete button be in the same place on the screen in all GUIs even if in some GUIs it was the only option. The cognitivist would say that in this case, only one button should be shown and it should be in the most convenient place on the screen. The cognitivists are idiots -- as are people who constantly redesign interfaces so that they look prettier. Everyone that I have seen trying to use the latest generation MS Excell hate the interface -- not because it is bad, but because they can't find things that have been confortable with for years.
-
OK, I'm a little tired and grumpy so maybe this is way out of proportion, but for the love of all things small and furry: Microsoft, PLEASE stop screwing around and making your product UIs inconsistent and hard to use. Office - menus are now ribbons. Except for the quick access menu. And the Where's Wally main menu cunningly disguised as the Office logo IE - Right hand side tucked away in the corner MSN - look closely at to the left of the minimise / maximise buttons and there it is! Sneaky devil. Everything else: To be decided on the day. At least that's how it feels. I can understand if Microsoft wants to make menus better, or easier to find, or more contextually relevant, or even simply better looking. But I don't see any of that. All I see is that every time I switch to a different Microsoft app I have to readjust my fatigued brain and try and work out the UI de jour. Seriously Microsoft. Start acting like a cohesive company and bring back the thing that got you where you are today: consistent, obvious and simple user interfaces with respect for standards and accessibility.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Agreed!!! I've got Office 2007 at home and I have a terrible time trying to find a particular task on the new "ribbon bar". At least with the older versions of Office I knew where the things are used were found. Aside from the "prettiness factor" I can't see a single intelligent reason for the UI redesign of Office 2007. Is it easier to use? No! Does it make it easier to find what you want? NO!!! Is it cleaner and neater? No! Is is a Microsoft-only UI? Yes! And that may be the REAL reason for the change! All of the above could also be said of Vista. Go figure.
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, For you are crunchy, and good with mustard.
-
Amen! Go back to what users know. Everyone I have encountered hates the Ribbon. Even new users.
David Veeneman www.veeneman.com
Actually, not everyone dislikes the ribbon. ;) My wife has actually quit bit... err complaining about Word since she has the ribbon and that's saying something. She's still stuck in "Why can't I use WordPerfect?" -- read that as WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS. Personally I don't give a rat's behind about whether or not there is a ribbon or a traditional menu/toolbar -- as long as I can get to my commands with the keyboard! My carpal tunnel and tendinitis really make me hate the mouse. What really drives me crazy is all the knockoffs of the ribbon UI that don't give me keyboard access to things like the system menu <Alt+Space> or the child menu <Alt+-> in a MDI application. And my favorite -- who in there right mind would not use <Alt+F4> to close an application after living with the Windows UI for over twenty years! Microsoft even fscked this up with IE7, <Ctrl+F4> works just fine for closing a tab, why the hell do we need <Ctrl+W> as well? I can't even count the number of times my fingers have accidentally hit <Ctrl+W> instead of <Ctrl+Q>. ARRRGGGHHH! Chris, I think you just stirred the hornet's nest. ;) --Greg
-
Actually, not everyone dislikes the ribbon. ;) My wife has actually quit bit... err complaining about Word since she has the ribbon and that's saying something. She's still stuck in "Why can't I use WordPerfect?" -- read that as WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS. Personally I don't give a rat's behind about whether or not there is a ribbon or a traditional menu/toolbar -- as long as I can get to my commands with the keyboard! My carpal tunnel and tendinitis really make me hate the mouse. What really drives me crazy is all the knockoffs of the ribbon UI that don't give me keyboard access to things like the system menu <Alt+Space> or the child menu <Alt+-> in a MDI application. And my favorite -- who in there right mind would not use <Alt+F4> to close an application after living with the Windows UI for over twenty years! Microsoft even fscked this up with IE7, <Ctrl+F4> works just fine for closing a tab, why the hell do we need <Ctrl+W> as well? I can't even count the number of times my fingers have accidentally hit <Ctrl+W> instead of <Ctrl+Q>. ARRRGGGHHH! Chris, I think you just stirred the hornet's nest. ;) --Greg
Good point. At least when Microsoft moved from DOS to Windows, there was the undeniable (well, at least to most of us) benefits of moving to a GUI to justify the pain and suffering. I don't see where the ribbon adds any additional functionality or ease of use. Most of the Office newbies I've come across have at least a passing familiarity with menus and toolbars. It is a well-known interface. Not the ribbon, and there isn't a clear-cut, widely accepted benefit to making the change. I react to the ribbon the same way I would react to a change of the user interface in my car--a joystick instead of a steering wheel, levers instead of accelleration and brake pedals. What's the point? If it's clearly easier to use, I'll learn the new system. But if I have to climb a learning curve just to get the same functionality I had before, then I'm not going to go with it. In my shop, we have dropped Office for internal use in favor of OpenOffice. If Microsoft wanted to improve usability, why didn't they put the functionality of the Ribbon in task panels? (The panes that appear to the right of your document in previous versions of Office). That approach would have allowed them to retain menus for the majority who were used to them, while providing a simplified command interface for those who need hand holding. In effect, Microsoft broke the old interface to Office when it came out with the Ribbon, without providing an option to use menus instead. They violated one of the basic rules of OO programming by braking an interface that was in widespread use. Chris has a point about inconsistency. Microsoft is reverting back to DOS days, when every program had a different interface, and a new app had a steep learning curve.
David Veeneman www.veeneman.com
-
I second this. All in favour, please say "Aiiiiiii"
------------------------------------------- Don't walk in front of me, I may not follow; Don't walk behind me, I may not lead; Just bugger off and leave me alone!!
-
I second this. All in favour, please say "Aiiiiiii"
------------------------------------------- Don't walk in front of me, I may not follow; Don't walk behind me, I may not lead; Just bugger off and leave me alone!!
-
I second this. All in favour, please say "Aiiiiiii"
------------------------------------------- Don't walk in front of me, I may not follow; Don't walk behind me, I may not lead; Just bugger off and leave me alone!!
AIIIIIIIII x 100
-
Good point. At least when Microsoft moved from DOS to Windows, there was the undeniable (well, at least to most of us) benefits of moving to a GUI to justify the pain and suffering. I don't see where the ribbon adds any additional functionality or ease of use. Most of the Office newbies I've come across have at least a passing familiarity with menus and toolbars. It is a well-known interface. Not the ribbon, and there isn't a clear-cut, widely accepted benefit to making the change. I react to the ribbon the same way I would react to a change of the user interface in my car--a joystick instead of a steering wheel, levers instead of accelleration and brake pedals. What's the point? If it's clearly easier to use, I'll learn the new system. But if I have to climb a learning curve just to get the same functionality I had before, then I'm not going to go with it. In my shop, we have dropped Office for internal use in favor of OpenOffice. If Microsoft wanted to improve usability, why didn't they put the functionality of the Ribbon in task panels? (The panes that appear to the right of your document in previous versions of Office). That approach would have allowed them to retain menus for the majority who were used to them, while providing a simplified command interface for those who need hand holding. In effect, Microsoft broke the old interface to Office when it came out with the Ribbon, without providing an option to use menus instead. They violated one of the basic rules of OO programming by braking an interface that was in widespread use. Chris has a point about inconsistency. Microsoft is reverting back to DOS days, when every program had a different interface, and a new app had a steep learning curve.
David Veeneman www.veeneman.com
Unfortunately, I think we're all in agreement here... As was mentioned earlier, the Office team functions completely independently from the rest of Microsoft. Have you noticed how concepts that actually work in Office eventually make it into the OS -- with the notable exception of Vista. Up until Office 2000, I think, each of the office apps actually used different code for their toolbars because each application team was independent. The spell checkers from each of the apps may use the same code but the UI looks and behaves differently. I have to give Apple a lot of credit for maintaining it's iron grip over the UI. IMHO, it's an elegant and consistent UI and it lives on BSD Unix. :-D If only someone would port PowerShell to BSD/Linux I'd be there in a freakin' heartbeat. --Greg
-
OK, I'm a little tired and grumpy so maybe this is way out of proportion, but for the love of all things small and furry: Microsoft, PLEASE stop screwing around and making your product UIs inconsistent and hard to use. Office - menus are now ribbons. Except for the quick access menu. And the Where's Wally main menu cunningly disguised as the Office logo IE - Right hand side tucked away in the corner MSN - look closely at to the left of the minimise / maximise buttons and there it is! Sneaky devil. Everything else: To be decided on the day. At least that's how it feels. I can understand if Microsoft wants to make menus better, or easier to find, or more contextually relevant, or even simply better looking. But I don't see any of that. All I see is that every time I switch to a different Microsoft app I have to readjust my fatigued brain and try and work out the UI de jour. Seriously Microsoft. Start acting like a cohesive company and bring back the thing that got you where you are today: consistent, obvious and simple user interfaces with respect for standards and accessibility.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
For God's sake don't mention the minimise, maximise, and close toolbox. If it's brought to their attention that it is in the same place in all windows, they'll probably start shifting that all over, too. Signed: Sick to **** of not being able to find anything in MSO 2007.
-
OK, I'm a little tired and grumpy so maybe this is way out of proportion, but for the love of all things small and furry: Microsoft, PLEASE stop screwing around and making your product UIs inconsistent and hard to use. Office - menus are now ribbons. Except for the quick access menu. And the Where's Wally main menu cunningly disguised as the Office logo IE - Right hand side tucked away in the corner MSN - look closely at to the left of the minimise / maximise buttons and there it is! Sneaky devil. Everything else: To be decided on the day. At least that's how it feels. I can understand if Microsoft wants to make menus better, or easier to find, or more contextually relevant, or even simply better looking. But I don't see any of that. All I see is that every time I switch to a different Microsoft app I have to readjust my fatigued brain and try and work out the UI de jour. Seriously Microsoft. Start acting like a cohesive company and bring back the thing that got you where you are today: consistent, obvious and simple user interfaces with respect for standards and accessibility.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
I absolutely love the new 2007 Excel and Word interfaces. And I know I'm the only one in the world that does ... but ... oh well. The only thing I want now is a true SDI Excel. But after decades of hacking through Word and Excel tool bars ... after I took just a little time to learn where stuff is ... well ... I love the new 2007 Office interface. Sorry I can't rant with you guys on this.
g.CoderCat
-
I second this. All in favour, please say "Aiiiiiii"
------------------------------------------- Don't walk in front of me, I may not follow; Don't walk behind me, I may not lead; Just bugger off and leave me alone!!
-
Good point. At least when Microsoft moved from DOS to Windows, there was the undeniable (well, at least to most of us) benefits of moving to a GUI to justify the pain and suffering. I don't see where the ribbon adds any additional functionality or ease of use. Most of the Office newbies I've come across have at least a passing familiarity with menus and toolbars. It is a well-known interface. Not the ribbon, and there isn't a clear-cut, widely accepted benefit to making the change. I react to the ribbon the same way I would react to a change of the user interface in my car--a joystick instead of a steering wheel, levers instead of accelleration and brake pedals. What's the point? If it's clearly easier to use, I'll learn the new system. But if I have to climb a learning curve just to get the same functionality I had before, then I'm not going to go with it. In my shop, we have dropped Office for internal use in favor of OpenOffice. If Microsoft wanted to improve usability, why didn't they put the functionality of the Ribbon in task panels? (The panes that appear to the right of your document in previous versions of Office). That approach would have allowed them to retain menus for the majority who were used to them, while providing a simplified command interface for those who need hand holding. In effect, Microsoft broke the old interface to Office when it came out with the Ribbon, without providing an option to use menus instead. They violated one of the basic rules of OO programming by braking an interface that was in widespread use. Chris has a point about inconsistency. Microsoft is reverting back to DOS days, when every program had a different interface, and a new app had a steep learning curve.
David Veeneman www.veeneman.com
David Veeneman wrote:
If Microsoft wanted to improve usability, why didn't they put the functionality of the Ribbon in task panels? (The panes that appear to the right of your document in previous versions of Office). That approach would have allowed them to retain menus for the majority who were used to them, while providing a simplified command interface for those who need hand holding.
because the number of sidebar panels had grown out of control and was becoming unmanageable. IIRC there was also the problem that if they kept piling more crap into them it would become necessary to rework the UI again to allow for multiples visible at once. If anyone feels like digging them up the office team blogged in detail about why they did what they did and why the existing UI had grown unworkablely large.
-- If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
-
I absolutely love the new 2007 Excel and Word interfaces. And I know I'm the only one in the world that does ... but ... oh well. The only thing I want now is a true SDI Excel. But after decades of hacking through Word and Excel tool bars ... after I took just a little time to learn where stuff is ... well ... I love the new 2007 Office interface. Sorry I can't rant with you guys on this.
g.CoderCat
I've got to agree. While it took some getting used to, I like the new interface. Especially in Outlook, where I no longer have to surf all over the screen to set appointment options. The private appointment toggle is now up with the other settings where it belongs, instead of hiding out down in the lower right hand corner all by itself.
-
I absolutely love the new 2007 Excel and Word interfaces. And I know I'm the only one in the world that does ... but ... oh well. The only thing I want now is a true SDI Excel. But after decades of hacking through Word and Excel tool bars ... after I took just a little time to learn where stuff is ... well ... I love the new 2007 Office interface. Sorry I can't rant with you guys on this.
g.CoderCat
While I do like the new UI in Office 2007, I understand the post to be more about inconsistency of UI between their products. The new UI is nice but it would be good if it were implementing in all the products not just one. There was a day when the idea of a common functionality in applications where key, the focus was to have the same type basic menus for all applications so a person could count on that UI most all Windows software. For example, the File/Edit/Help menus that have been in most software since the early days of Windows. Now those menus do not exist by default in IE or MS Office. Just trying to find the "About" option can be some work ;)
Rocky <>< Blog Post: MVC for ASP.NET! Tech Blog Post: Cheap Biofuels and Synthetics coming soon?
-
While I do like the new UI in Office 2007, I understand the post to be more about inconsistency of UI between their products. The new UI is nice but it would be good if it were implementing in all the products not just one. There was a day when the idea of a common functionality in applications where key, the focus was to have the same type basic menus for all applications so a person could count on that UI most all Windows software. For example, the File/Edit/Help menus that have been in most software since the early days of Windows. Now those menus do not exist by default in IE or MS Office. Just trying to find the "About" option can be some work ;)
Rocky <>< Blog Post: MVC for ASP.NET! Tech Blog Post: Cheap Biofuels and Synthetics coming soon?
RE: File/Edit/Help - yes ... that's a bit of an issue ... however, the "finger/tactile menus" are quite similar. I can do my usual automatic Alt-F-Alt-S or Alt-E-Alt-E etcetera ... and most of the time get the 90% of what I want to do. The big 2007 Word and Excel deals for me: 1) Alt-F "Start" (kind of like the Start button on the desktop) menu which to me would seem to be really helpful for beginners to Word/Excel. But I love it too since it is far more than a “simple menu” click. It has a far more sophisticated selection mechanism and acts as much like a dialog box as a menu. 2) "Quick Access tool bar", that ,when customized to your 90% functions, allows you to minimize the ribbon and concentrate on the document and nothing but the document. 3) Ability to “pin” a document to “recent documents”. I no longer have to manage shortcuts on my desktop. I simply call up Excel or Word … and click on my most used “pinned” document. RE: inconsistency of UI between products: - Regarding Outlook and its role in the business culture … exchange server etc … well I’m pretty sure the MSO design team had very little latitude to change its look and feel. Besides, Outlook is such a bundle of about three or four APPS and more often than not sits on a 2nd monitor as a kind of communication / appointment dashboard. I’m not sure about Power-Point / VISIO (don’t use them) … but again that is a fairly specialized audience with long history of “how it is” and the “way it should be” … similar to the many graphics software packages. I’m not sure it’s true these days that all APPS from a company should have a similar look and feel. In fact, that was the intention of the old interface … toolbars that one could turn on/off or arrange inside or outside the content window as one wanted. IE: a single “toolbar” metaphor that would fit all applications. Boy I spent a lot of time managing my toolbars … and often forgetting where I put something anyway. For some APPS that metaphor is appropriate. I never found it really worked for me in Word or Excel … too much hunting for the right tool bar or menu. The ribbon allows me to simply click a category (all listed), and then the appropriate subsection. The ribbon is also very sophisticated in shrinking and/or expanding it's presentation of commands. The one thing that should be fairly consistent though, is the keystroke command interface. And for 2007 Excel and Word and Outlook … my fingers find it much the same as before.
g.CoderCat
-
OK, I'm a little tired and grumpy so maybe this is way out of proportion, but for the love of all things small and furry: Microsoft, PLEASE stop screwing around and making your product UIs inconsistent and hard to use. Office - menus are now ribbons. Except for the quick access menu. And the Where's Wally main menu cunningly disguised as the Office logo IE - Right hand side tucked away in the corner MSN - look closely at to the left of the minimise / maximise buttons and there it is! Sneaky devil. Everything else: To be decided on the day. At least that's how it feels. I can understand if Microsoft wants to make menus better, or easier to find, or more contextually relevant, or even simply better looking. But I don't see any of that. All I see is that every time I switch to a different Microsoft app I have to readjust my fatigued brain and try and work out the UI de jour. Seriously Microsoft. Start acting like a cohesive company and bring back the thing that got you where you are today: consistent, obvious and simple user interfaces with respect for standards and accessibility.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP