What's wrong with the ribbon control?
-
I know that after a while you get used with it. I mean kind of, can you afford not to? Is there an alternative? Humans get used with almost anything given a slow enough transition; so we got used with corruption in bloated governments. It still looks like some manager's idea (very influential one I must say) was forced into the product. I would like to know who, to put a face on that ribbon. I may see the utility of the ribbon for users that are starting to use Office, or previous light users that are still able to find all their functions in the ribbon. However, for me ... I'm still looking for almost 10 commands that previously I could find easy in the menus or toolbars (as somebody else mentioned). For example working with styles in Word became hell for me, ... anybody else? Why not keep both options menus + toolbars along ribbon and allow switching? Cheers.
giuchici
>> Why not keep both options menus + toolbars along ribbon and allow switching? :thumbsup: I assume you meant one or the other... gawd not both at the same time :thumbsdown:. But yeah, allowing the *user* to choose what they want, what they find most productive would be the way to go. What a concept! Prior to the missus going back to school, we both had Office 2003 installed on our laptops. I still do and I *refuse* to "upgrade", and I use that word quite loosely. Her homework assignments where downloaded off the MTSU website and were in .docx format. The first time she tried open one of those files, she went into a panic. Realizing what the problem was, I uninstalled Office 2003 and installed Office 2007. Now, every few minutes I minutes I'm being asked, "Where is the fill_in_the_blank icon?". She's slowly coming up to speed w/ the interface, but it's not been easy. Whoever came up this ribbon idea should have tied it around their dangles and hung :omg:
modified on Monday, May 30, 2011 10:35 AM
-
>> Why not keep both options menus + toolbars along ribbon and allow switching? :thumbsup: I assume you meant one or the other... gawd not both at the same time :thumbsdown:. But yeah, allowing the *user* to choose what they want, what they find most productive would be the way to go. What a concept! Prior to the missus going back to school, we both had Office 2003 installed on our laptops. I still do and I *refuse* to "upgrade", and I use that word quite loosely. Her homework assignments where downloaded off the MTSU website and were in .docx format. The first time she tried open one of those files, she went into a panic. Realizing what the problem was, I uninstalled Office 2003 and installed Office 2007. Now, every few minutes I minutes I'm being asked, "Where is the fill_in_the_blank icon?". She's slowly coming up to speed w/ the interface, but it's not been easy. Whoever came up this ribbon idea should have tied it around their dangles and hung :omg:
modified on Monday, May 30, 2011 10:35 AM
:D, and yes that's what I meant (keep them both as options). To have menu pads, toolbars and the ribbon would be a bit of an overkill. The only things missing would have been a preview panel as in Outlook and and action panel as in MMC so you're left to edit your document in a 1 sq inch area.
giuchici
-
I like to instead ask, what was wrong with using toolbars? Was the concept "broke" somehow? Also, I don't need a special "Fluent UI" license to use toolbars. BTW, you did obtain a license for those 3rd party ribbon products your using...right? ;) Office Fluent UI licensing[^]
"I like to instead ask, what was wrong with using toolbars? Was the concept "broke" somehow?" Couldn't you ask that about almost ANY old technology? What was wrong with LP's? What was wrong with video? What was wrong with audio tapes? What was wrong with cd's? What was wrong with dvd's? What was wrong with the track pad? What was wrong with the mouse? What was wrong with DOS commands? What was wrong with the non-transparant, non-animated, static windows 95 taskbar? The answer, imo, is essentially "nothing" to all of these questions. Some of the new solutions are "better" (more capacity/faster in case of media, more intuitive in case of trackpad/mouse/touch) and some of the new solutions are "cooler" (like more 'fancy' and 'flashy' in case of the taskbar...) Imo, the ribbon interface is actually quite nice for LOB applications. I for one love to work with it. It centralises all commands and presents them to the user in a modern "flashy" way. I don't think anybody here will deny that a nice app using a ribbon kinda screams "2010" while the classic toolbar/menu app is sooooo 1995. My customers prefer an app that screams 2010. Does it give you any real, 'measurable' surplus in terms of functionality over the classic toolbar/menu combo? Perhaps not (although I could make a case for it, but I admit it's somewhat neglectable). But the opposite most certainly isn't true either. There isn't anything I can do with toolbars/menu's that I can't do with a ribbon. I guess it would also largely depend on the nature of the app you are writing. I for one definatly see good use for the ribbon in most of the apps I make.
-
bob16972 wrote:
I like to instead ask, what was wrong with using toolbars?
IMHO, nothing at all :)
See if you can crack this: b749f6c269a746243debc6488046e33f
So far, no one seems to have cracked this!The unofficial awesome history of Code Project's Bob! "People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
-
Ultimately, it comes down to personal taste. You like it or you don't. The reasons you give (one way or the other) can't be argued, because, well, it's about taste. I can tell you that of all the clients that I do UI work for, only 1 (out of about 20) somewhat likes it. All the rest vary from mildly not liking it to really hating it. The reasons? Well, it's about taste. How could Microsoft ship such a hated UI? The same way they could ship Vista. Their UI testing boils down to asking people with their heads up their asses. They did it with Vista, they did it with the ribbon, and they're about to do it with Windows 8. Why do they do this? Two words: Bill Gates. He ain't there anymore.
Best wishes, Hans
-
"I like to instead ask, what was wrong with using toolbars? Was the concept "broke" somehow?" Couldn't you ask that about almost ANY old technology? What was wrong with LP's? What was wrong with video? What was wrong with audio tapes? What was wrong with cd's? What was wrong with dvd's? What was wrong with the track pad? What was wrong with the mouse? What was wrong with DOS commands? What was wrong with the non-transparant, non-animated, static windows 95 taskbar? The answer, imo, is essentially "nothing" to all of these questions. Some of the new solutions are "better" (more capacity/faster in case of media, more intuitive in case of trackpad/mouse/touch) and some of the new solutions are "cooler" (like more 'fancy' and 'flashy' in case of the taskbar...) Imo, the ribbon interface is actually quite nice for LOB applications. I for one love to work with it. It centralises all commands and presents them to the user in a modern "flashy" way. I don't think anybody here will deny that a nice app using a ribbon kinda screams "2010" while the classic toolbar/menu app is sooooo 1995. My customers prefer an app that screams 2010. Does it give you any real, 'measurable' surplus in terms of functionality over the classic toolbar/menu combo? Perhaps not (although I could make a case for it, but I admit it's somewhat neglectable). But the opposite most certainly isn't true either. There isn't anything I can do with toolbars/menu's that I can't do with a ribbon. I guess it would also largely depend on the nature of the app you are writing. I for one definatly see good use for the ribbon in most of the apps I make.
BubingaMan wrote:
There isn't anything I can do with toolbars/menu's that I can't do with a ribbon
The ribbon layout guidelines tend to restrict how you're allowed to logically group items in tabs and the groups within those tabs. This results in the user interface being less likely to contain the action you need on visible tab, requiring extra steps to make the action visible. So far, when playing around with the MFC Feature Pack Ribbon classes, I have not seen any way for the user to move the action groups from one ribbon tab to another but maybe I'm missing something (wouldn't be the first time). If this turns out to be a limitation of the Office Fluent UI, then it would be something you can do with toolbars that you can't with the ribbon. However, I'll entertain the idea that the functionality is in there and I just have not found it yet. NOTE: Adding a group to the "Quick Access Toolbar" does not seem to help as it normally requires a some dialog box popup anyway.
-
I'm particularly unimpressed by Microsoft making choices for us. If they develop new technology, why not offer both and let the user choose. Some will prefer the new ribbon, some will continue to use the menus, and then some may use one or the other depending on the kind of work and/or the screen size they are currently facing. Alas, MS think they know best, and they often/sometimes/occasionally (pick one) are wrong... :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get.
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they improve readability.
CP Vanity has been updated to V2.3 -
That's just silly. Everyone knows you have to have a dual-abacus setup for maximum developer productivity.
Best wishes, Hans
-
I think people dislike it because it's different and/or because of the screen space it takes up. As a user (Office '07), I really disliked it at first because it seemed to make things harder to find, but as I got used to it I liked it more and more because it put more things within easy reach. At home I use a widescreen laptop with limited vertical screen space. The ribbon occasionally gets in the way in that environment, but I can just temporarily hide it (again, in Office '07) when it becomes a problem.
Most of my users use Word to edit pre-existing documents and use my Addin which appears as a menu item next to the "View" menu item and a small subset of the formating toolbars (Font/Bold,Centre and a few others). Under Word < 2007 all the fuctions the user ever used were available on the one screen, no addition clicks required. Now with the ribbon they must click on the AddIn ribbon to get to our feature and then they lose all their formating functions. Anytime they want to do some minor formatting they must find the right ribbon and select it and find the required function. THE RIBBON INTERFACE MIGHT BE GOOD FOR NEWIES, BUT ONCE THEY BECOME PROFICIENT IT IS COMBERSUM.
-
Jesus man, Microsoft is a saint in this area compared to Apple. This is seriously the worst rebuttal to the ribbon of all the posts I saw. :)
There is no failure only feedback
:confused: I didn't say I liked or disliked the ribbon, my beef is with MS making choices for me they don't have to make, I'm the user here, I know what my preferences are. And I don't need Apple to form my own opinion about MS products; if Apple gets it wrong, that doesn't make MS stuff right.
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get.
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they improve readability.
CP Vanity has been updated to V2.3 -
:confused: I didn't say I liked or disliked the ribbon, my beef is with MS making choices for me they don't have to make, I'm the user here, I know what my preferences are. And I don't need Apple to form my own opinion about MS products; if Apple gets it wrong, that doesn't make MS stuff right.
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get.
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they improve readability.
CP Vanity has been updated to V2.3Your post just struck me as funny because if there is one fault that MS has had over the years it's constantly trying to be everything to everyone resulting in many ills not least of which are hugely bloated OS's with giant amounts of backward compatibility code all in an effort to not be like Apple all autocratic and dictatorial and telling people how they must use their software. I dislike the ribbon but I think it would be extremely difficult to provide both UI's for many reasons that go way beyond the code itself like support, marketing, training etc etc. People vent a lot about Microsoft but this seems like such a minor reason to, they are actually trying to do better with a researched UI that has been provably easier and preferred by new users. As much as we experienced users may hate it it's not a plot to piss us all off it's an attempt to do better. (I swear if Microsoft walked on water people would bitch about how they clearly don't know how to swim.) :)
There is no failure only feedback
-
I know that after a while you get used with it. I mean kind of, can you afford not to? Is there an alternative? Humans get used with almost anything given a slow enough transition; so we got used with corruption in bloated governments. It still looks like some manager's idea (very influential one I must say) was forced into the product. I would like to know who, to put a face on that ribbon. I may see the utility of the ribbon for users that are starting to use Office, or previous light users that are still able to find all their functions in the ribbon. However, for me ... I'm still looking for almost 10 commands that previously I could find easy in the menus or toolbars (as somebody else mentioned). For example working with styles in Word became hell for me, ... anybody else? Why not keep both options menus + toolbars along ribbon and allow switching? Cheers.
giuchici
giuchici wrote:
I may see the utility of the ribbon for users that are starting to use Office, or previous light users that are still able to find all their functions in the ribbon. However, for me ... I'm still looking for almost 10 commands that previously I could find easy in the menus or toolbars (as somebody else mentioned). For example working with styles in Word became hell for me, ... anybody else?
Why not keep both options menus + toolbars along ribbon and allow switching?To introduce a learning curve in software I've been using for years successfully is very irritating. The only software I know that does it are ones that have a lock on the market (e.g., Word, Quicken). In a truly competitive market no one would dare make their product unappealing for their established user base. I get very frustrated at Microsoft when using Word 2010 and I can't find something I did for years using Word XP. Ex[experiences like that multiplied by the number of power users may help (though not completely) explain the very poor reputation of Microsoft among the those in the know.
-
I like to instead ask, what was wrong with using toolbars? Was the concept "broke" somehow? Also, I don't need a special "Fluent UI" license to use toolbars. BTW, you did obtain a license for those 3rd party ribbon products your using...right? ;) Office Fluent UI licensing[^]
-
I get the impression that quite a few developers here are not impressed with the ribbon concept. If so, what's the main gripe with it? We use the DevExpress ribbon in our apps and it's relatively painless to use and easy to write code for. Perhaps there is a serious flaw with ribbon concepts but out-of-the-box it works, it looks quite nice so why are some folk upset with it?
this has got to be the easiest answer "real estate" The crazy thing takes up 1/8 of the screen (in some cases) this is the same issue with some of the earlier versions of ie The future is "context menus" Menus that open only in the context they are needed and are very minimal. Advanced features should be hidden. Anyone who wants advanced functionality will find it.
-
Your post just struck me as funny because if there is one fault that MS has had over the years it's constantly trying to be everything to everyone resulting in many ills not least of which are hugely bloated OS's with giant amounts of backward compatibility code all in an effort to not be like Apple all autocratic and dictatorial and telling people how they must use their software. I dislike the ribbon but I think it would be extremely difficult to provide both UI's for many reasons that go way beyond the code itself like support, marketing, training etc etc. People vent a lot about Microsoft but this seems like such a minor reason to, they are actually trying to do better with a researched UI that has been provably easier and preferred by new users. As much as we experienced users may hate it it's not a plot to piss us all off it's an attempt to do better. (I swear if Microsoft walked on water people would bitch about how they clearly don't know how to swim.) :)
There is no failure only feedback
My point is there isn't a single set-up that will satisfy the majority of users, so why not offer a number of possibilities and give the user a choice. That is what happens in modern software, see some of the recent browsers: they have menus, toolbars (with small or big icons, with or without text, etc), and everything, and you can switch most if not all of them on and off any way you like. One extreme setting would be to turn everything on, which probably is fine and works comfortably provided your monitor is big enough; the other extreme is switching everything off except for the one thing you prefer, be it the classic menu bar, or some tool bar. Browsers nowadays go a long way to save screen real-estate, allowing the user to see as much as possible of the web page. And I raise a similar point about functionality. Over the years, Windows itself has been dumbed down, probably to avoid confusion for non-technical users. The right approach IMO is to offer two or more modes, where one would be the current, dumb, offering; and another would be the we-show-and-tell-it-all mode. Case in point is disk defragmentation: it used to be well explained, displayed graphically, and cancellable; nowadays it is just a button you can click, and then wait (it also no longer moves the files to one side of the partition!). :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get.
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they improve readability.
CP Vanity has been updated to V2.3 -
My point is there isn't a single set-up that will satisfy the majority of users, so why not offer a number of possibilities and give the user a choice. That is what happens in modern software, see some of the recent browsers: they have menus, toolbars (with small or big icons, with or without text, etc), and everything, and you can switch most if not all of them on and off any way you like. One extreme setting would be to turn everything on, which probably is fine and works comfortably provided your monitor is big enough; the other extreme is switching everything off except for the one thing you prefer, be it the classic menu bar, or some tool bar. Browsers nowadays go a long way to save screen real-estate, allowing the user to see as much as possible of the web page. And I raise a similar point about functionality. Over the years, Windows itself has been dumbed down, probably to avoid confusion for non-technical users. The right approach IMO is to offer two or more modes, where one would be the current, dumb, offering; and another would be the we-show-and-tell-it-all mode. Case in point is disk defragmentation: it used to be well explained, displayed graphically, and cancellable; nowadays it is just a button you can click, and then wait (it also no longer moves the files to one side of the partition!). :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get.
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they improve readability.
CP Vanity has been updated to V2.3I know what you mean and as a long time computer user and developer my instincts are the same as yours but it's a terrible habit I've tried hard to break over recent years. The fact is that computer interfaces have grown up tremendously in just the last few years and pc's are falling behind rapidly in that department. Your perspective is informed by knowing the inner workings of what is going on and being interested in it and understanding it from that perspective. It's absolutely not what a new or even the average computer user wants. They want to accomplish a *task* as quickly and easily as possible and they don't under any circumstances want to have to think about how the computer works internally. The only failure in the disk defrag example is that it exists in the first place. Users don't want to have to think about defragging or ever do it. Instead of changing the interface they should have eliminated the need for it entirely. Can you imagine having to defrag your cell phone or your car navigation system? You don't make great software by including endless configuration and customization opportunities, you make great software by taking the time to plan and design and test a great (as in as simple as possible) task oriented interface that takes away the need to even have all those customizations, then you enforce it strictly giving options only where there is absolutely no other way to accomplish the task at hand. Trying to appease everyone is a recipe for mediocrity every time, just look at the modern mainstream tv, music or film industry. They are doing what you advocate and churning out mountains of poor quality middle of the road shit as a result.
There is no failure only feedback
-
I get the impression that quite a few developers here are not impressed with the ribbon concept. If so, what's the main gripe with it? We use the DevExpress ribbon in our apps and it's relatively painless to use and easy to write code for. Perhaps there is a serious flaw with ribbon concepts but out-of-the-box it works, it looks quite nice so why are some folk upset with it?
My problem with it is that, when the window width changes, some of the items move around, and look different. sometimes the text disappears to make room for more controls, or the controls get repositioned somehow so that more of them show up on the screen. although it seems that this would be good, because you have access to more of the controls in a smaller space, the problem is that they're harder to find. Visually, you look for certain controls on the screen because of the way they looked and where they are positions. When that changes, it's kind of like the controls in the cockpit of an airplane moving around on you. Things aren't where you'd expect to be, and it's confusing.
-
I know what you mean and as a long time computer user and developer my instincts are the same as yours but it's a terrible habit I've tried hard to break over recent years. The fact is that computer interfaces have grown up tremendously in just the last few years and pc's are falling behind rapidly in that department. Your perspective is informed by knowing the inner workings of what is going on and being interested in it and understanding it from that perspective. It's absolutely not what a new or even the average computer user wants. They want to accomplish a *task* as quickly and easily as possible and they don't under any circumstances want to have to think about how the computer works internally. The only failure in the disk defrag example is that it exists in the first place. Users don't want to have to think about defragging or ever do it. Instead of changing the interface they should have eliminated the need for it entirely. Can you imagine having to defrag your cell phone or your car navigation system? You don't make great software by including endless configuration and customization opportunities, you make great software by taking the time to plan and design and test a great (as in as simple as possible) task oriented interface that takes away the need to even have all those customizations, then you enforce it strictly giving options only where there is absolutely no other way to accomplish the task at hand. Trying to appease everyone is a recipe for mediocrity every time, just look at the modern mainstream tv, music or film industry. They are doing what you advocate and churning out mountains of poor quality middle of the road shit as a result.
There is no failure only feedback
I can see your point. For simple appiances, the dont-know-dont-care approach is doable, even maybe for tablet computers. For more complex machinery, netbooks, laptops, computers, we aren't there yet, and moving half distance is very bad IMO.
John C wrote:
Your perspective is informed by knowing the inner workings
I'm willing to forget about the inner workings of my computer and see it as just another utensil, but then I don't want to know about backup, about anti-virus, about monthly updates, etc etc. One would hope a computer becomes as simple as a fridge, unfortunately most of the time things move the other way around. The next fridge will want Internet access, my latest television set has needed four software updates already, etc.
John C wrote:
Can you imagine having to defrag your cell phone
The modern solution seems to be to throw it away when the data plan expires. Is that progress?
John C wrote:
Trying to appease everyone is a recipe for mediocrity every time, just look at the modern mainstream tv
In Belgium the public broadcast, as well as the commercial tele companies, each have a number of channels. And that means: the user can choose. Which is my point, they offer a choice, I choose. :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
The quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get.
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they improve readability.
CP Vanity has been updated to V2.3 -
I get the impression that quite a few developers here are not impressed with the ribbon concept. If so, what's the main gripe with it? We use the DevExpress ribbon in our apps and it's relatively painless to use and easy to write code for. Perhaps there is a serious flaw with ribbon concepts but out-of-the-box it works, it looks quite nice so why are some folk upset with it?
-
I get the impression that quite a few developers here are not impressed with the ribbon concept. If so, what's the main gripe with it? We use the DevExpress ribbon in our apps and it's relatively painless to use and easy to write code for. Perhaps there is a serious flaw with ribbon concepts but out-of-the-box it works, it looks quite nice so why are some folk upset with it?
The problem with the ribbon is that, with regard to people using computers for more than a decade, the toolbar and the menu bar concepts have been the only thing available. It is what we had to learn and, IMHO, far simpler to use by comparison. Ribbons (and especially the MS Office ribbons) are far too busy and useless to those of us who have memorized the location of the menu item or toolbar icon required to accomplish a particular task. As a member of the "using computers for 3 decades" club, the ribbon concept has required a brain-reboot of sorts. I can rarely find anything in seconds. It's more like minutes. Or I have to call somebody. And it's not because it isn't right there in front of me; it's more like there's so much junk around what I need and I simply can't see it. Choice would have been a good thing. Give me back my menu and my toolbar. :mad: