[Hassan i Sabbah]

Hmm. I see what you mean, but I'm not convinced you're comparing like with like.

Firstly, I wasted HOURS trying to find out how to get rid of the document elements bar in print layout view in Word. I'm not just whining because it's trendy. I use Word for my work, for hours every day, and I really want to get rid of that waste of space— it's pointless. When I'm on my MacBook, which is a lot, I want as much of the document visible as I can get.

And secondly: a word processor just isn't like a mail app, or iTunes. Those buttons, not being essential to the operation of the thing, the very reason you need the app in the first place, aren't the same.

Mail spawns windows constantly and only requires nine buttons with well-defined functions, which you use constantly. They're tools for generating and dealing with a very specific kind of content, which is always similar.

iTunes is like Ye Olde Tape Machine. Plays music. Press buttons. That's what it's for. Don't pretend it wouldn't be a royal pain in the arse to go to the heading 'Playback' in the menu bar every time you wanted to stop and start a tune.

Crunching words is different. I never, ever use document elements. That bar isn't essential to my work. If I could, I'd turn it off. The menu bar's perfect for that kind of thing. I make my own controls by having a little palette window for the things I really need.

Sprawling explanation. In short: iTunes and Mail would be annoying as fuck without those buttons. Word would be better.

[addabox]

I don't use Office on Windows, so I've never really known: is there anything at all about the "Ribbon" that makes it, you know, "ribbon-like"? Can it be that it's just a big menu/icon area and MS got fanciful naming it? I remember when I first heard about it, I assumed that it, I dunno, did shit? Like scrolled horizontally or came swooping out genie effect like or, fuck, wrapped it all up with a pretty bow, for all I know.

Ribbon just seems like a sort of active name for "moar buttons."

[JohnnyTheA]

Originally Posted by Brad If you don't want the changes that the new versions offer, why upgrade? Just stick with what you have.

Thats what I do at home, but at work the IT department likes to jump on everything MSFT puts out. They don't let us normal people make such decisions..

[Banana]

Originally Posted by JohnnyTheA Thats what I do at home, but at work the IT department likes to jump on everything MSFT puts out. They don't let us normal people make such decisions..

I have to say your company must be quite in the minority because most of time it's the IT department that's "Uh uh, not so fast. We gotta test this sucker. It'll be four years before we'll even get around to thinking about upgrade."

Lame nonetheless.

[Maciej]

Yeah, after the Vista debacle, it is taking forever for our IT to deploy Windows 7.

[drewprops]

Agree WTR to the IT guys... it must be a smallish firm for them to be so upgrade happy.

With regard to the "ribbon"....

I believe that they mean that it's deployed in a horizontal ribbon. In architecture they refer to a horizontal band of windows as a "ribbon", and that seems to be the same notion here.


...

[joveblue]

Originally Posted by addabox I don't use Office on Windows, so I've never really known: is there anything at all about the "Ribbon" that makes it, you know, "ribbon-like"?

Not really. But it's quite different to a traditional toolbar too, in that:[list][*]it's tabbed[*]it's fatter and not organised in rows[*]it replaces the menu bar (in Windows), contains every feature/option/etc. available in the software for editing the document[*]buttons are grouped in panels on each tab of the ribbon, many of which have preference panes for further options[*]many options have 'live previews', showing you what clicking something would do in the document if you mouseover an option

Nothing fancy or animated or ribbon-like about it, but it's certainly a whole new concept that needs its own name.

Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah Crunching words is different. I never, ever use document elements. That bar isn't essential to my work. If I could, I'd turn it off. The menu bar's perfect for that kind of thing. I make my own controls by having a little palette window for the things I really need.

I think everyone would agree that the 'Documents Elements' bar in 2008 is a useless piece of crap that should never have been put there.

In 2007 if the Ribbon is getting in your way you can click on the tab that's open to hide the contents of the ribbon and just show the tab at the top and do some "word-crunching" (or even have it so that it's closed by default and only opens when you click on a tab and then closes again once you've selected something). In Windows though, it doesn't really take up any more space than 2000, with a title bar, menu bar, and a couple of rows of menus. So it's not a downgrade in that respect.

[addabox]

Originally Posted by drewprops Agree WTR to the IT guys... it must be a smallish firm for them to be so upgrade happy. With regard to the "ribbon".... I believe that they mean that it's deployed in a horizontal ribbon. In architecture they refer to a horizontal band of windows as a "ribbon", and that seems to be the same notion here. ...

Unlike Word 03, that had those elements vertically?

Originally Posted by joveblue Not really. But it's quite different to a traditional toolbar too, in that:[list][*]it's tabbed[*]it's fatter and not organised in rows[*]it replaces the menu bar (in Windows), contains every feature/option/etc. available in the software for editing the document[*]buttons are grouped in panels on each tab of the ribbon, many of which have preference panes for further options[*]many options have 'live previews', showing you what clicking something would do in the document if you mouseover an option Nothing fancy or animated or ribbon-like about it, but it's certainly a whole new concept that needs its own name.

I guess. After mostly just hearing tell, I guess I was expecting something a little more interesting than more buttons with tabs. Live previews are nice, I suppose.

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by Brad Yeah, I really don't understand why anyone would duplicate menu items as a bar of buttons on top of each window. Oh, wait. [pics]

Well.... exactly? The whole point of the toolbar is to make it easier to get to commonly used functionality. The ribbon is just an excuse to throw everything into the toolbar, which is a no-no. There is nearly twice as much space for crap between the top of the window and the workspace in Office 2011 as in Pages '09.

Power users are going to kill the toolbar/ribbon anyways, so what were really talking about is helping the novice. Shoveling everything into the toolbar like that isn't helpful. What would be helpful is if Microsoft took the time to figure out what functionality their users need most and then carefully designing the toolbar to have that functionality, and no more.

I guarantee you that the number of users who use styles isn't even close to being big enough to merit that huge chunk of space right in the center of the window be dedicated to them.

[joveblue]

Originally Posted by Kraetos I guarantee you that the number of users who use styles isn't even close to being big enough to merit that huge chunk of space right in the center of the window be dedicated to them.

I never did before, but I do now

[Hassan i Sabbah]

Originally Posted by Kraetos I guarantee you that the number of users who use styles isn't even close to being big enough to merit that huge chunk of space right in the center of the window be dedicated to them.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by joveblue In 2007 if the Ribbon is getting in your way you can click on the tab that's open to hide the contents of the ribbon and just show the tab at the top and do some "word-crunching" (or even have it so that it's closed by default and only opens when you click on a tab and then closes again once you've selected something).

OK, well that's a relief.

[CitizenTony]

Originally Posted by joveblue I never did before, but I do now

It's the same for me. Putting everything in the ribbon has made my use of Office much better. I've never liked having to go digging in menus for stuff, and even the best laid out menus are still hiding functionality from users. Why not rethink the entire need for menus? It's one of my favorite things about Windows right now. If you don't like it, hide the ribbon and keep using Office in the same way that you always have.

Adding back in the file tab was a smart move. They had it hidden in the little orb, which was somewhat confusing.

At least they didn't go the iMovie '08 and QuickTime X route of stripping functionality for ease of use.

(How about a discussion on why that menubar in the first pic is a solid glossy white? )

[Moogs]

It's the same exact bullshit spin EVERY time with these guys.

"We listened to customers and improved the user experience by changing the interface to be more Mac-like and/or improved compatibility with the Windows version of office!"

Never mind the fact that by FAR the worst complaints about Office 2008 were the justified claims of it being an unstable, unbearably slow piece of shit. Even today it takes like 4 or 5 seconds to save a simple 10 page, text only document on my Mac Pro!

And all the bugs and poor integration with Spaces, etc went on for a good 8 or 9 months before they really started to stabilize things with bug fixes, etc. There is zero innovation here AFAICT, other than the written from the ground up version of Outlook, replacing Entourage. All I wanted to hear from them was "we heard you about the performance and stability, and we've nailed it, plus the most requested tweaks to the User interface." If that happens to be the Ribbon, fine. But instead of real we get the usual.

This is a CLEAR sign that Microsoft's intent is to spend as little money as possible from one upgrade to the next, and just milk it for all it's worth. Definitely going full-time iWork with next release. I'm still unclear on when that is... all we heard during the iPad demo was a version for that device, nothing about a new Mac-specific suite, right? Anything at Macworld?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Moogs Never mind the fact that by FAR the worst complaints about Office 2008 were the justified claims of it being an unstable, unbearably slow piece of shit.

It makes iWork look fast, though.

Originally Posted by Moogs And all the bugs and poor integration with Spaces, etc

The Spaces bug was on Apple's end.

Originally Posted by Moogs All I wanted to hear from them was "we heard you about the performance and stability, and we've nailed it, plus the most requested tweaks to the User interface."

Sadly, one cannot sell a product with the claim "it's more stable, faster and smoother than the previous version… uh, well, that's pretty much it! $399!"

Originally Posted by Moogs all we heard during the iPad demo was a version for that device, nothing about a new Mac-specific suite, right? Anything at Macworld?

Correct. No Apple announcements at Macworld. I expect iLife '11 and iWork '11 to be announced this summer; their new schedule appears to be 18 months, not 12 months.

[Moogs]

Not sure I buy the theory that the "it is much faster and more stable" bit would not sell upgrades. For many existing users, it's frankly all they give a rip about anymore. We have all the functionality we could possibly need as far as formatting and all the rest. What we don't have is an efficient and predictable user experience. For my money, I won't buy Office 2011 based on what they're saying now, but I absolutely would buy a version that has kick-ass performance (something that's been missing for years, even on high end hardware). Without hesitation.

For new users probably not, but I have to believe that number is dwindling with every upgrade anyway. Most people who are switching to Mac are likely using iWork, especially if it's bundled. The Office import/export is pretty good in my experience and that's all that really matters. Also, iWork is becoming a more and more mature product, which was its weak point so MS is playing with fire here. There will come a point in the near future where users will just abandon Office Mac all together and run Windows office via Bootcamp if they have to, or use iWork.

MS is taking for granted people will always upgrade. I think they're in for a rude awakening. Or maybe that's what they want (Mac users running Windows office via bootcamp)?! What the hell do I know but they certainly act like they don't give a shit what people really want.

[CFP]

In my last job, I asked the IT dept to roll back my version of Windows Office to the previous one because I couldn't stand the newer. I can't remember the version I liked better, but it was the one prior to the ribbon developments.

I'm torn between getting iWork or Office 2011 when I finally get my new MBP. I've never used iWork before. It's significantly cheaper though, and I like the idea of steering clear of MSFT products as much as possible. I want to make the switch, but I suspect that when the time comes, my cautious human nature will prevail and I'll reluctantly order Office. I tried to exclusively use AppleWorks when I began uni years ago, but compatibility issues eventually made me go back to Office. Plus Appleworks was, to me, a little basic.

I guess I'm waiting to find a productivity suite good enough to finally dump Office, but I haven't found it yet.

(BTW, can iWork open old AppleWorks documents? I'd guess it should be able to. That could help swing it.)

[screensaver400]

Originally Posted by CFP (BTW, can iWork open old AppleWorks documents? I'd guess it should be able to. That could help swing it.)

Yes: http://www.apple.com/support/appleworks/faq/

I'd try iWork's free trial before buying Office—they give you 30 days. I can't stand Word now that I've figured out Pages, and Keynote is far better than PowerPoint.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Kraetos The whole point of the toolbar is to make it easier to get to commonly used functionality. The ribbon is just an excuse to throw everything into the toolbar, which is a no-no. [...] Shoveling everything into the toolbar like that isn't helpful. What would be helpful is if Microsoft took the time to figure out what functionality their users need most and then carefully designing the toolbar to have that functionality, and no more.

Have you actually used Office with the ribbon?

Microsoft didn't just willy-nilly shovel everything into the toolbar without any rationale as you imply. The ribbon is grouped functionally and ordered by most likely use cases, and when you resize the window, the groups expand and collapse to show more or fewer options while keeping the most important items visible.

Originally Posted by Kraetos I guarantee you that the number of users who use styles isn't even close to being big enough to merit that huge chunk of space right in the center of the window be dedicated to them.

And that's probably the next section to collapse when resizing the window down. Problem solved?

Originally Posted by CitizenTony It's the same for me. Putting everything in the ribbon has made my use of Office much better. I've never liked having to go digging in menus for stuff, and even the best laid out menus are still hiding functionality from users. Why not rethink the entire need for menus? It's one of my favorite things about Windows right now. If you don't like it, hide the ribbon and keep using Office in the same way that you always have.

This is why I think the ribbon is potentially a good (*gasp*) idea: discoverability. Kickaha may disagree, but I think the ribbon shows an interesting and not entirely bad solution to navigating feature bloat.

Originally Posted by chucker Sadly, one cannot sell a product with the claim "it's more stable, faster and smoother than the previous version… uh, well, that's pretty much it! $399!"

Well, it worked for Apple and Snow Leopard, if you overlook the price disparity. Besides, Office for Mac, unless you want the kitchen sink edition, costs $150, not $400.

Originally Posted by Moogs Not sure I buy the theory that the "it is much faster and more stable" bit would not sell upgrades. For many existing users, it's frankly all they give a rip about anymore.

Microsoft Office users aren't the only consumers clamoring for "faster and more stable". See also: Adobe CS users. Oh, the joy that would be felt 'round the world for a good maintenance-only release of CS! At least they're trying that out with Flash 10.1.

Originally Posted by Kickaha And I agree re: Pages. OTOH, I'm continually asked by family members where to find things in it... they keep forgetting about the inspector.

Hell, even I have a hard time remembering where stuff is in that inspector and occasionally find myself clicking back and forth and back and forth through the options trying to find something. The tiny, near-meaningless "tab" icons don't help the situation. People complain about Microsoft shoveling everything into the ribbon, yet then they turn around and praise Apple for iWork with its inspectors? I do generally enjoy using Pages and Keynote, but good lord the inspector needs to get taken out back and shot.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Brad Well, it worked for Apple and Snow Leopard, if you overlook the price disparity. Besides, Office for Mac, unless you want the kitchen sink edition, costs $150, not $400.

I didn't mean to make a statement for Office in particular, and I think Snow Leopard's low price is proof that an upgrade focusing on stability and performance is a hard sell at the regular price.

Originally Posted by Brad Hell, even I have a hard time remembering where stuff is in that inspector and occasionally find myself clicking back and forth and back and forth through the options trying to find something. The tiny, near-meaningless "tab" icons don't help the situation. People complain about Microsoft shoveling everything into the ribbon, yet then they turn around and praise Apple for iWork with its inspectors? I do generally enjoy using Pages and Keynote, but good lord the inspector needs to get taken out back and shot.

It needs a search. The menu bar has a decent search UI in the Help menu, so surely they can do this for the Inspector, too.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by chucker It needs a search. The menu bar has a decent search UI in the Help menu, so surely they can do this for the Inspector, too.

Ugh, no. You can't be serious. Menu bar search is bad enough and requires the user to know exactly the terminology for the feature they're looking for, as opposed to being able to discover and recognize the term in a well-designed UI. That's an incredibly weak bandaid solution to the problem of a bad layout.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Brad Ugh, no. You can't be serious. Menu bar search is bad enough and requires the user to know exactly the terminology for the feature they're looking for, as opposed to being able to discover and recognize the term in a well-designed UI. That's an incredibly weak bandaid solution to the problem of a bad layout.

Wha?

How does menu bar search require anything? Obviously, having a search is not an excuse to screw up on a good hierarchy. It does not mean that you should suddenly have four layers of submenus (I'm looking at you, Adobe). A search function is not a substitute for discoverable UI. It does, however, mean that in the case where you fail to find something, you have an additional means.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by chucker How does menu bar search require anything?

You have to know what the item is called in order to search for it. AFAICT, it doesn't do any sort of "intelligent" searching on menu items by using definitions, phrases, or synonyms. Chances seem pretty good that if you don't know where an item is that you also don't know what it's called, thereby making the menu search useless.

Originally Posted by chucker A search function is not a substitute for discoverable UI.

That seemed to be what you were suggesting, though, since you were giving search as a solution/substitute for iWork's confusing inspector layout.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Brad This is why I think the ribbon is potentially a good (*gasp*) idea: discoverability. Kickaha may disagree, but I think the ribbon shows an interesting and not entirely bad solution to navigating feature bloat.

Interesting? Yes. Not *entirely* bad? Eh, I'll give you that too.

So amazingly awesome that MS is correct in feeling it can replace menus completely? Not even close.

It's like they took a toolbar, said "You know what, our icons really suck at getting across what the actual feature is..." (which is absolutely true) "... let's be innovative and add *WORDS*!" "Um... we already do that, with menus..." "No, no, NO! No one likes menus, they're too complicated!" (actually, people just don't like *your* menus because you make them a mess, but it's easier to just blame the UI widget rather than your designers, isn't it?) "The ribbon is *all new*! See, it's *modal*!" "So are menus." "It has *words!*" "So do menus." "But it has *pictures too*!" "Like a toolbar." "DAMMIT, SHUT UP THIS IS ALL NEW SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP! WE'RE INNOVATING HERE!"

Yup, that's pretty much what I figure the design meeting was like.

I just don't see what Ribbons really add, other than as maybe a cleaned up toolbar system. If they'd clean up their menus, OTOH, most of what the Ribbon is supposed to do would be redundant. But golly, this way they sure get to *look* innovative, because, like, y'know, it's *visual*.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Brad You have to know what the item is called in order to search for it. AFAICT, it doesn't do any sort of "intelligent" searching on menu items by using definitions, phrases, or synonyms. Chances seem pretty good that if you don't know where an item is that you also don't know what it's called, thereby making the menu search useless.

Normally I'd agree with you, but with MS's menus? *Finding* the damned thing is an exercise in frustration most times, even when you know exactly what it is you're looking for.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Brad You have to know what the item is called in order to search for it.

I know this.

Originally Posted by Brad AFAICT, it doesn't do any sort of "intelligent" searching on menu items by using definitions, phrases, or synonyms. Chances seem pretty good that if you don't know where an item is that you also don't know what it's called, thereby making the menu search useless.

Actually, chances are pretty good that if I don't know where to find how to set a font to Italic, I can type that in and hit enter and it'll not only do that for me, but also show me where to find it the next time.

You're right, though, it needs synonyms. I didn't call it "great"; I called it "decent". It's got plenty of room for improvement, but it's already saved me a lot of time.

Originally Posted by Brad That seemed to be what you were suggesting, though, since you were giving search as a solution/substitute for iWork's confusing inspector layout.

Uh, no? I was toying with the idea of giving the Inspector a search field, much like the menu bar has one. How you read "the Inspector will go away" or "chucker doesn't think discoverability matters" into that is beyond me.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by chucker Uh, no? I was toying with the idea of giving the Inspector a search field, much like the menu bar has one. How you read "the Inspector will go away" or "chucker doesn't think discoverability matters" into that is beyond me.

Cuz he's korrupt?

[drewprops]

Our Korruption Kommittee is Keeping Klose Kontakt in regard to Teh Brad's evilness on this topik. Worry not your headniks. Okaysky?


...

[joveblue]

Originally Posted by Moogs There is zero innovation here AFAICT,

They're just completely redesigning the entire UI from the ground up. Nothing to see here folks, move along.

All I wanted to hear from them was "we heard you about the performance and stability, and we've nailed it, plus the most requested tweaks to the User interface."

I could've sworn I read that they're re-building everything in Cocoa but I can't find anything now, it must just be Outlook. Still, I suppose having the whole suite rebuilt from scratch in 3 years is unrealistic. And for those who use it, Outlook is supposed to be a pretty big deal.

This is a CLEAR sign that Microsoft's intent is to spend as little money as possible from one upgrade to the next, and just milk it for all it's worth.

Is that what you got from completely redesigning the UI from the ground up and adding in a completely new piece of software into the suite (Outlook) to replace Entourage in another programming language that they haven't really used before. OK.

Originally Posted by Moogs MS is taking for granted people will always upgrade. I think they're in for a rude awakening.

Yeah, coz 2011 is like, exactly the same as 2008.

Originally Posted by Brad Have you actually used Office with the ribbon? Microsoft didn't just willy-nilly shovel everything into the toolbar without any rationale as you imply. The ribbon is grouped functionally and ordered by most likely use cases, and when you resize the window, the groups expand and collapse to show more or fewer options while keeping the most important items visible. And that's probably the next section to collapse when resizing the window down. Problem solved? This is why I think the ribbon is potentially a good (*gasp*) idea: discoverability. Kickaha may disagree, but I think the ribbon shows an interesting and not entirely bad solution to navigating feature bloat. Well, it worked for Apple and Snow Leopard, if you overlook the price disparity. Besides, Office for Mac, unless you want the kitchen sink edition, costs $150, not $400. Microsoft Office users aren't the only consumers clamoring for "faster and more stable". See also: Adobe CS users. Oh, the joy that would be felt 'round the world for a good maintenance-only release of CS! At least they're trying that out with Flash 10.1. Hell, even I have a hard time remembering where stuff is in that inspector and occasionally find myself clicking back and forth and back and forth through the options trying to find something. The tiny, near-meaningless "tab" icons don't help the situation. People complain about Microsoft shoveling everything into the ribbon, yet then they turn around and praise Apple for iWork with its inspectors? I do generally enjoy using Pages and Keynote, but good lord the inspector needs to get taken out back and shot.

*like*

Originally Posted by Kickaha I just don't see what Ribbons really add, other than as maybe a cleaned up toolbar system. If they'd clean up their menus, OTOH, most of what the Ribbon is supposed to do would be redundant. But golly, this way they sure get to *look* innovative, because, like, y'know, it's *visual*.

A lot of what they've done with the Ribbon simply couldn't be done properly through a menu system. Take the live previews for instance.

You have actually used it before right? Like, for more than 2 minutes...

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by joveblue A lot of what they've done with the Ribbon simply couldn't be done properly through a menu system. Take the live previews for instance.

You're right - and it's a huge step above and beyond the god-awful *modal* style changes they've had in the past. Click to bring up dialog, select change, click OK. If not right, repeat ad nauseum. Live preview is great - as long as it isn't in the way the entire time.

But in that they're attempting to replace the menus altogether? You lose a lot in that transition as well. Menus are compact, out of the way, and still navigable... if organized well - if not, then they're just painful. And that's where MS has fallen down, traditionally. They haven't produced well thought out menus, so users have been trained that menus = bad. Hence, they're looking for a replacement. It makes them look innovative, and it gives users something new to learn. ie, upgrade treadmill. Win/win. (It also gives them a great PR bit for making any non-Ribbon using UI look 'old' artificially.)

And to make it worse, it's not *just* menus that they're trying to replace, but menus, toolbars, panels, inspectors...

For the record, I *LOATHE* UIs that are in your face all the time, yet don't add anything meaningful in the way of discoverability or real usability. Eclipse is a prime example of this, and so is Office. Toolbars, toolbars, everywhere, and yet nothing in the way of explanation as to what you're looking at. The Ribbon adds minimal explanation, and it adds live preview, both of which are great - for a UI that's designed for the novice.

*IF* MS also cleaned up the menus and other UI elements such that they were a viable and workable pro-level interface, that'd be one thing. But, as usual, they're trying to slam several user groups into the same UI... and it just doesn't really work, IMO. Live Preview is doable through a number of other ways, for instance.

It's a try at something different, but it just feels like different for different's sake to drive an upgrade churn cycle, not a move towards a better thought out UI plan.

You have actually used it before right? Like, for more than 2 minutes...

Ayup.

Edit:
The thing that strikes me as bonkers about the Ribbon approach, *as MS has implemented it*, is that it takes several orthogonal UI elements such as menus, toolbars, and panels, each of which has strengths and weaknesses, and seems to absorb the weaknesses of each without improving on the strengths. In other words, it's a lesser solution to each set of behaviors and constraints that the other approaches provide. It's trying to be everything to everyone, in one UI widget, and not only do I think that's unattainable, I think it's absolutely asinine from an interface behavioralist point of view, and it really makes me wonder what the hell they're smoking in Redmond, that this even got greenlit as the new primary UI approach. It smacks of desperation more than innovation. "Oh shit, um, make something *completely new* quick!"

Innovation doesn't mean different. It means better. I haven't seen how the Ribbon is demonstrably even a decent replacement for the other UI elements we already have, other than maybe the toolbar.

I'm all for making UIs that are appropriate to the audience, but when you're trying to make your audience 'everyone'... you're going to fail. The Ribbon isn't quite self-explanatory enough for the novice, and it isn't streamlined enough for the pro. It sits in the unhappy valley of mediocrity. But, then, MS has made billions by staking out that swampland, so... what the hell.

[Banana]

Many has been said about the ribbon but I figure I'd point out my gripes. I'm no UI professional or even an UI aficonado.Forgive me if I have misused some of concept tossed around. Also this is completely by my (unreliable!) Memory so do correct me if I'm talking nonsense. I really should check on the computer but I am pretty far away...

Anyhoo-

Discoverability

I think ribbon is worse than menus because of what we need to do to scan. With menus its across then down. With ribbon its still across first time then its across again and maybe it could be either down or across. Ribbon layout allows for either a large button, a box dividing dmall buttons either vertically or horizonally. This makes it slighty more unpredictable in the scan and I feel that I have to invest in more efforts in verifying my scan was thorough compared to passing through the menus.

Redunancy

On some ribbon layout, it may present several buttons that perform similar function but differ slightly such as the option to use a wizard or not or different kinds of same concept. Many times I have clicked wrong button because they were too similar despite them being large and had to backstep to get the right button that was just next.

I realize this is an attempt to solve the quandry of modal dialogs but when I end up writing up my custom ribbon to eliminate most of those buttons... I think it says something.

Contextual tabs

This is arguably the best feature of ribbon - this eliminate the need for modal dialogs or deeply nested submenus and those were practically untouched when I wrote my ribbon replacement. The nicest thing is that as long you have this object for which the tab applies open, the tab stays up there and you could work on several objects at same time. Definitely an improvement here.

Focus

Unforunately, the best feature is plagued by a demon - "auto-focus". Its kind of expected that the focus will be set to the contextual tab upon it comes into scope. Perfectly reasonable. However, if you do something unrelated, the focus moves away to home tab or so, necessitating an extra click to return to the tab for whhich it should not be needed. Please don't try and second guess users' intention - let them ask for it first.

Office button / backstage

When I first worked on Office 2007 it actualy never occurred to me that the circular button with Office logo on top left was actually a button. I remember being very frustrated because I couldn't find a simple Save As button. That's where I think Kickaha nails it - it wasn't an idea awesome enough to suddenly toss aside the menus. As I showed earlier, they replaced this button with a File tab.

However the whole idea of backstage in Office 2010 certainly makes a lot sense. In past incantations, if you wanted to deal with file or project or meta-something operations it was split up in either File or Tools menus. In 2007, its either on the ribbon or on the office button. On the 2010, its now in single place -- backstage accessible via the File tab. They finally separated operations that dealt within the file from those that was for the file. Former is what we do the most in our working while we do latter as part of setting up or wrapping up. This meant less hunting which was a step in the right direction.

Unforunately, I don't think they went far enough -- there's still an Option dialog. I'd expect that backstage replace the Option dialog entirely or at least move out the settings pertaining to file (e.g. Specifying the defaults and templates) into the backstage and make the Option dialog deal with settings for the application exclusively.

The ultimate point being made here is that I think we should remember our grandmother's rule for stocking the pantry - "A place for everything and everything in its place!" Splitting between two places is never a good idea and I tend to think that having too many different ways of doing same thing is bad. I can see the need for say, contextual menu, which is technically redundant. A dialog and a tab that overlaps in the scope and thus split the operations between them... Not a good idea.


That's all I can think of.