Office 2007 — Better But a Tough Switch 484
Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "Office 2007, coming out Jan. 30, is a 'radical revision,' writes the Wall Street Journal's Walter S. Mossberg. 'The entire user interface, the way you do things in these familiar old programs, has been thrown out and replaced with something new. In Word, Excel and PowerPoint, all of the menus are gone — every one. None of the familiar toolbars have survived, either. In their place is a wide, tabbed band of icons at the top of the screen called the Ribbon. And there is no option to go back to the classic interface.' He adds, 'It has taken a good product and made it better and fresher. But there is a big downside to this gutsy redesign: It requires a steep learning curve that many people might rather avoid.'"
Great. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
A woman: without her, man is nothing.
Re:Great. (Score:5, Insightful)
See http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2005/10/27/
Yeah, you know what they replaced it with (Score:5, Funny)
I'm crossing my fingers in the hope that they replaced the entire user interface with a giant version of Clippy.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Yeah, you know what they replaced it with (Score:5, Funny)
You appear to be having trouble with crossing your fingers. Would you like some assistance?
CTRL-F1 cuts the ribbon (Score:2, Informative)
CTRL-F1
But when you have a week when you're not under intense deadlines, give it a chance. I've really learned to like it, and think it does add some clarification to UI that was the definition and punchline of "Bloatware"
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why? It's like getting into a car and finding that the UI you have come to love to hate has changed to something completely different. Gone is the steering wheel as you know it, gone are the foot pedals, and gone are the buttons that operate the comfort controls. In its place you have a foreig
re: loss of productivity (Score:2)
So yes, you will have to "stop what you're doing and relearn something else". But apparently, your I.T. department and management decided that was a worthwhile task. (If they didn't think so, they'd opt not to upgrade, or would consider a different product, right?)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
IBM still sells SmartSuite with WordPro. WordPerfect is still available. There are even shareware and freeware solutions out there like OpenOffice.
It constantly amazes me how where I work, everyone goes into "panic mode" as soon as they receive an email attachment that can't be opened by MS Office with a double-click. Typically
Re: (Score:2)
Well ... I haven't tried the new Office interface (I'm still using Office 2000), but in regard to your car analogy, I can see cases where it might make sense.
I've seen a few cars that are doing "drive by wire" where they replace the steering wheel a
Re:CTRL-F1 cuts the ribbon (Score:5, Insightful)
Bash office if you wish, I won't defend it. If you have real criticism of the ribbon, post it. But don't make-up stupid insults about a UI you've never seen or used.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There's actually one in the original article: "It's as if Toyota decided to switch the position of choices on the automobile shift lever, or Motorola decided to rearrange the buttons on the cellphone key pad."
Cars aside, imagine a world where keypads went 789, 456, 123, 0. Man, that would SUCK.
Oh, no, wait... it would FUCKING RULE if the keypads on my phones, computer, ATM, etc. were all the same. Ever use a computer's keypad to ent
Re:CTRL-F1 cuts the ribbon (Score:5, Interesting)
Change is only good if it is the RIGHT change (Score:4, Insightful)
A "context-sensitive dashboard"? What a horrible idea! Another poster very insightfully responded with a comparison to iDrive on BMWs and a few other high-end cars. General consensus is that it is total garbage--annoying at best and dangerous at worst. Why is that? Well, in a car the driver is the primary user of the dashboard and the driver is generally looking at the road ahead. The dashboard should NOT be "context-sensitive" or otherwise dynamic in nature. IT SHOULD BE STATIC. The important functions of a dashboard should ALL be visible, in the same place, ALL THE TIME (even better there should be a tactile element as well--buttons, knobs and such should be raised).
Drivers need to be able to use such an interface using quick glances and/or by feel. iDrive's ever-changing, and largely non-tactile user interface is much too distracting to the driver...it was so poorly conceived that Microsoft had to simplify the interface navigation and make the little knob have better tactile feedback in the next revision because as it was in its introduction it was almost totally unusable unless the driver was able to pull over, and users wanted many iDrive functions to be safely accessible while driving. Add to that the software bugs that caused such things as radio to go on and off at whim, trunks to open spontaneously and so on and iDrive has been a disaster.
I haven't yet tried out these "ribbon" things, though I've on a couple of occasions seen live demonstrations of the user interface. While almost anything could be better than the horrid menu system Office has traditionally had such a drastic change is pretty risky--they didn't even leave the wheel and pedals (to carry on the analogy)--it is more like they replaced the wheel with a joystick and the pedals with thumb-and-trigger buttons. Everything is in different places and WORKS differently--it doesn't matter if some study deems that technical advantages exceed disadvantages or that it is easier to learn--the fact is there are a billion people out there who know the old way of driving.
It is true that a desktop isn't a car and that the analogy isn't TOTALLY valid, however there are some universal principals of designing for usability that MS repeatedly insists on violating. The biggest of these is making things too "automatically dynamic". They've been doing this since sometime not long after NT4 came out: First they hide rarely-used start menu items...AUTOMATICALLY...WITHOUT user's input on how or when to do it. THEN they release XP and hide the old menu items under an added layer...and put FREQUENTLY used items out front...again without much control given to the user. I guess at least they threw us a *little* bone and let us "pin" icons and clear them out totally at will, but they re-appear (or don't) on what seems like a total whim.
Now they have this new MS Office with its "ribbons" and context-sensitivity and reorganisation and my first impression is that they KEEP ON HIDING AND MOVING STUFF for us. Much of the new interface is clever and makes navigation much less cumbersome. However, then they go and mess with your head again with these "dynamic" elements (galleries) and obscurity (putting what are basically file management functions in "another start menu" indicated only by a goofy little "office system" logo). I would've preferred a somewhat different approach--one that allowed a bit more user configure-ability. In any case I'll have a more informed opinion once I actually have to use it rather than sitting and watching a demo of it.
Perhaps someone can confirm to me whether or not my concerns is valid--has MS learned anything or are they still pushing the user around by doing too may user-interface alterations automatically?
Re:Change is only good if it is the RIGHT change (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:CTRL-F1 cuts the ribbon (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know why I chose your post over the MANY others of you who are bitching and moaning, but here I am.
Your comment above sounds *exactly* like someone who has never seen the interface. I've been using it for months now and would *hate* to go back to the "old" office setup. Everything I've ever looked for (page formatting options, etc) are *exactly* where one would expect them to be.
This is one of the things I hate about the direction the Human Race. "I got used to it this way and, even though the new way is probably FAR more intuitive, I'm going to sit here and complain about how much productivity is going to go down, belly-aching the entire time."
Do some research. Spend TWO MINUTES looking over the NUMEROUS web pages that have lots of screen shots. I know that many of you don't like "software by focus group", but I think MS got it right this time (if they used a focus group for the UI, that is. They probably did...)
Keyboard shortcuts? (Score:3, Insightful)
I moved to Pittsburgh from Caifornia for work reasons and although the work reasons have worked out well, observing a culture so resistant to change and new ideas has been a huge shock. So much so that I've been trying to figure
Re:Keyboard shortcuts? (Score:4, Informative)
Is there an equivaent to this on the ribbon? It seems almost entirely mouse dependent based on the pictures.
This was what I most wanted to touch on. From what few keyboard shortcuts I did know (cut, paste, Italics, Bold, etc), they all have the same shortcut. If, however, you wish to know what shortcut a particular option has, all one has to do is hover the mouse over the "button" that activates the option and some help text will pop up, including the keyboard shortcut (if that option has one).
Thank you for at least asking, instead of bashing it blindly.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Keyboard shortcuts? (Score:4, Insightful)
The gene pool is not supplied by the people who succeed financially, who buy that lovely $1,500,000 house in Woodside or glorious $3,500,000 beach cottage in Newport Beach. People like that have between one and two kids, trending towards one. Or even zero.
They are no match for the deeply conservative, creationist couple in the Midwest that struggles to get by with a $96,000 house, drives a rusty pickup instead of a gleaming Tesla roadster [teslamotors.com] and has six children.
It's the people who have six kids who determine the gene pool. And they are the "resistant to change" types, not the "embrace change" types. In fact, many of the "embrace change" types have embraced the "zero population growth" idea halfway to extinction.
That might have been a bit too deep for this discussion, but I think it's something worth thinking about when you start talking about gene pools. The people you think are winning may in fact be losing. Big-time.
I'll bet a lot more Slashdotters are Tesla Roadster/Woodside house types than five children types. I know I am.
Anyway, on the much more trivial (but on topic) subject of the ribbon, I suspect this will at least somewhat reduce the use of keyboard shortcuts because they are not "in your face". At the same time, I remember that Word version 5.5 had a very easy to use style/formatting system and version 6 made it about double the complexity without any significant benefit. A return to a simpler style sheet system that's less confusing will help virtually everyone using Word.
I just hope they fix the crummy font rendering on the Mac. My favorite font (Optima) looks terrible in Word, glorious on Pages. Guess which word processor I use.
D
Re:This might be Microsoft's best gift to FOSS (Score:5, Insightful)
Everyone is always moaning about the training costs involved in moving people from Windows to Linux. Both Office 2007 and OpenOffice will require training, but which way will be cheaper?
More Like Apple? (Score:2)
Surprising (Score:2)
no option to go back? (Score:3, Insightful)
I've seen radical departure in Microsoft's IE7, couldn't completely figure it out.
I've seen a radical departure in Gaim's interface, still scratching my head.
I've seen an amazing myriad of Windows Media Player interfaces. I've completely given up even trying to use that.
I remember a heated discussion once during a design session on a major application we were writing for a "large telcom". The gist of the discussion was we "had to have" a file menu, and it had to be on the top left of the application even though there was no notion of "File" for this application. The rationale? Because that's the way Microsoft did all of their applications.
I give Microsoft credit for taking a chance on a radical departure from what I've always thought was a stilted and stupid "required" interface (menus)... I hold little hope they get (got) it right considering Microsoft carried the old standard into the 21st century.
I find it curious they offer no way to use the old menu system. I'd be inclined not to want the old way, but for the sake of familiarity, it'd seem the more sane thing to do to offer the old menu interface as an option.
Re: (Score:2)
Simpler design, simpler solution, concentrate on "one good way" - less code per function, and less cross-hooks means less ways to screw it up internally and create new vulnerabilities. This is especially important since they appear to have completely re-written everything, meaning this is mostly fresh code.
Much bigger, I think, I the dropping of Outlook from the "home" version. Charging people $109 may make some of them ta
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
People will bitch and moan, and then start u
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if it's so Microsoft can set MSN back as the default homepage, and the average user can't figure out how to change it.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a big advantage, though, to having some generalized standards to the interface, even if they're just conventions. Users are comfortable that any Web browser is likely to have an icon in the upper-right corner with visual feedback for activity. It w
It's about increasing switching costs... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's not that mysterious really... just another tactic to increase lock-in:
1) Add new, idiosyncratic interface to commoditised application
2) Use monopoly to compel market to 'upgrade' to new version
3) Wait for users to accept the new interface as the default
4) Use IP laws to prevent FOSS competitors from cloning interface
5) Switching to FOSS suddenly becomes much more difficult
It's all about increasing switching costs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Since you obviously haven't used a Linux d
Been Using 2007 for about 2 weeks (Score:3, Interesting)
And that dosen't seem to appealing to the corporate customers they're trying to sell this to. I think its an issue of an unnecessary GUI overhaul once again to make an incrimental product seem new.
Re:Been Using 2007 for about 2 weeks (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Been Using 2007 for about 2 weeks (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
But now I'm finding that it's much more intuitive. Especially dealing with some layout features, fonts, styling and such.
I've bee using Beta 2 since sometime in the summer (Score:4, Interesting)
Word is also better, I like the UI stuff they've done when you highlight and the font menu automatically appears. E-mail editing is tied in well with outlook, which didn't get as much update to the UI as the others, but still looks and works great. Amazingly, even for a beta, I rarely run into stability issues. I crashed it once, but I don't remember what I did, and I really think it wasn't a crash, but something locked it running in the background that just was taking a real long while to run, so I got impatient and set it to the land of Ctrl-alt-del.
-Ed
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In Office2k3 (I'm unsure of earlier versions) you can do this. Under "Slide Show" and "Set Up Show", you can select which monitor to show the slides on. You can also check "Show Presenter View" which gives you a slide
Solid Design (Score:2, Interesting)
And they did a good job, the fact that I had to add the 'Save As' button was the only quirk that bothered me.
Re: (Score:2)
Moo (Score:2, Funny)
Phew!
The menus, icons, and buttons are helpful, but keyboard commands are where Microsoft really shines. X (or rather, the Window Managers) still has a long way to go in that area. I'd actually think if MS changes the keyboard shortcuts it would be a real issue, but for the icons, people will learn them easily enough and move on.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean the applications.
Time for Open Office (Score:2, Insightful)
This is probably a good time for OSS advocates in the corporate enviroment to bring the alternative up. Radical changes mean retraining, and retraining means wasting money. You might also push th
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Does it though? If Office 2007 makes users far more productive than previous iterations, wouldn't the retraining ultimately *save* money?
Same old, same old doesn't necessarily mean better, as you seem to think.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
i want some thought put into each new version of my software. if it will make my software easier/more powerful to use then i want a new and radical interface. i want some progress to be made each time i upgrade my software.
honestly, think about how many hours people at microsoft have spent over the last 15 years making sure that new versions of their software are "compatible" from a hardware, software and user interface perspective with previous versions?
why did they waste time on t
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I did some back-of-the-envelope calculations in September '05 for some work at the time about this [bfccomputing.com] and came up with $3500 per user for an Office 2007 upgrade and about $750 per user for an Open Office side-grade.
Those numbers might look a bit different today but they're probably similar. And no doubt I'll get responses from the "you can't measure anything by acquisition costs" cabal - I'll just ignore those preemptively here with the "you
Yes (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:4, Insightful)
And now you can say that the free one is more like the Office you are using now than the new MS Office.
Re: (Score:2)
Out with the old -- FINALLY (Score:3, Interesting)
People to whom I've shown the new interface have had a few complaints, but they've been more about how it's different, not how it's bad. The quick access to items that used to be buried in menus (unless you wanted to clutter your toolbar with more buttons) actually made a number of people much happier once they got a chance to play with it. These are not Office experts, either, and the learning curve did not seem to be all that great.
Shortcuts (Score:2)
Retraining (Score:5, Informative)
Doesn't sound great to me.
Think of the costs (Score:2)
And I don't think my guestimates are thatfar out. The $40ph is based on my (UK) costings - not my wages, what it costs the company I work for to employ me. The ten hours is plucked from the void but I don't think anyone who's worked on desktop support will feel it's that un
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That's why new software comes out. That's why we upgrade. Because new stuff takes time to learn, but in return does something cool, or new, or saves us time.
blah, blah , blah (Score:3, Insightful)
Really not that hard (Score:2)
Ugh. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's an office application. I don't need a redesign, I don't care if it's "fresher" - people just need to be able to sit down and type a letter, or put together a spreadsheet.
There shouldn't be a learning curve involved with what amounts to commodity software.
Re: (Score:2)
So now we know (Score:5, Insightful)
"We want microsoft software at any cost"
Otherwise, all those arguments mean that they cannot use the latest version of Word.
This really is a characteristic Microsoft fault (Score:2)
Microsoft is really much worse than
MS just removed one roadblock to Linux switch (Score:2)
OpenOffice is not a bad suite, it's just as good as MS office for most people.
Switching from Windows to Linux would mean going through a learning curve, and most
of that would involve OpenOffice, the programs that you'd be using instead of MS Office.
Now with a new Windows AND a new Office hitting the streets about the same time anybody
having to make a decision of not upgrading, upgrading and re-training, or switching to
Linux and
Does being accustomed to a bad UI make it good? (Score:5, Insightful)
You might have a legitimate grievance if the new UI is worse than the old one, but complaining just because it's different is annoying and stupid. Did you think that you'd never have to learn another UI, ever? Get over it.
Driving a car is very different than driving a team of horses, but that doesn't mean I'm upset that we're not riding in horse-drawn carriages. Sometimes different is GOOD.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I think you have it wrong. A change in UI always imposes additional transition costs. It is, therefore, a negative on the product. It may be enough better in the long run to justify that, and the vendors job is
Re:Does being accustomed to a bad UI make it good? (Score:5, Insightful)
At the moment, no. But criticizing a product that the vendor attempts to sell as an upgrade because of a weakness it has in that role is not out of line merely because you are not forced to upgrade to it. Then again, in the post you responded to, I didn't say a darned thing about the product at all, merely the basis used to attack a criticism of it, which was completely nonspecific to the product or its features.
One would think that criticism of the upgrade implied that there was, indeed, nothing wrong with continuing to use existing software in preference to the new thing that the vendor is trying to sell.
No, what I want is, assuming someone wants to sell me a new product for a role I already have essentially filled with something that is workable if not ideal, provide adequate improvements in the functionality I care about to outweigh whatever costs (dollar, transitional familiarity, document conversion, etc.) it imposes.
Things that break familiarity are, in that analysis, a negative strike for unfamiliarity. If they provide a benefit that outweighs that, they may be worthwhile. To address the particular product at issue, though that's tangential to my earlier point, I've seen no reason to believe that, for me, MS's UI redesign provides such benefits.
So did the interface on WordStar for DOS, and most major office products from now to then (and before, for that matter.)
I'm not as excited as you obviously are by the new UI's buzzword compliance, or the fact that if you've internalized its structure you don't need to think about it much (which is true of any UI.)
If your idea is that people should not discuss the positive or negative qualities of a product in a forum like Slashdot, but instead simply vote with their wallets by buying or not buying it, then its odd that you should make such impassioned arguments about the qualities of the new UI.
Have you considered practicing what you preach?
If by steep learning curve... (Score:2)
Sharepoint (Score:2)
Is it patented? (Score:4, Insightful)
If it happens to be an improvement, and if it is not patented, maybe some OSS applications will want to use the idea.
Does anyone know if it is patented?
Am I the only one... (Score:2)
MS will hopefully see what a mistake this is very quickly or people will look elsewhere?
Re: (Score:2)
"save as" one of the hardest to find items. (Score:5, Funny)
A few weeks ago, I watched someone install this program by mistake onto a new computer. It's what the university is now pushing, so they kept it.
It would be hard to describe their frustration, so I won't bother. It took them half an hour to find "save as". As usual, the OS itself hid the extension so you could not tell that it was saving everything in .DOCX, the 6000 page "open XML" successor to the previous M$ "open" format, RTF. I can only imagine the anger and sadness that awaits true Word users who have been using all the painful tools that M$ bloated into the program, drawing tools, flight simulator, whatever.
The upgrade train is roaring on and M$ is really pushing hard this time. It's going to piss a lot of people off and offers great opportunity for free software. You can now say that it's easier to make the move to Open Office for a new system than it is to move to Office 2007.
Enchanted Office (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
She better be careful with sharing that ribbon, the BSA might be hiding behind that one tree.
But how to support it (Score:5, Insightful)
The Other GUI Blinked (Score:3, Insightful)
MS file formats and GUI skills are 90% of the reason users upgrade to MS without even considering switching to something else/better. Let 'er rip!
How much screen space... (Score:2)
I'm betting M$ will be getting a design patent on this real soon, and won't that be fun...
It's a Test (Score:3, Interesting)
Nobody understands users... (Score:2)
I don't know who Microsoft tests these radical changes on, but it is not an everyday user. I have seen many people struggle with Office over the years and I have seen how they learn to do specific tasks click by click. If you change the way to do a task, the users are crippled. I remember there were changes in bullets and numbering around Office 2000, and I saw how it was almost impossible to do what used to be simple. I've had to go in and disable most of the auto-editing features for some users. Changes
It doesn't matter (Score:2)
MS could care fuck all about the average user. The average user isn't paying their bills.
Steep learning curve my ass (Score:2)
New For 2007: Microsoft Irony (Score:2)
Before, you would use software as a tool to increase your productivity. With new Microsoft Irony 2007 you spend the majority of your time learning how our complicated user-interface works, and less time on your original task! Brilliant isn't it? After all, that's why Microsoft Irony was designed.
New upcoming features in Microsoft Irony 2008!
Look forward to even more ways to waste precious time with our update to the popular Microsoft Irony 2007. With our 2008 ver
It doesn't matter what the average user thinks (Score:2)
Hey, I tease. Mostly.
But that's why crappy software wins out. Market forces aren't really at work when a few appointed people control the rules and tools a bunch of other mostly powerless people have to accept. It's a lot like government.
Worse than the wasted real estate (Score:2)
Turn on ClearType - they're fuzzy. Turn off ClearType - even fuzzier. Turn off "font smoothing" - sweet mother of god, what is this abomination?
Don't you freakin' dare badmouthing the Ribbon... (Score:3, Interesting)
The competition to Office 2007 will be Office 2003 (Score:4, Insightful)
a)A database program that doesnt suck
b)A presentation program with all the bells and whistles(the current one lacks it)
c)well thought out Desktop publishing
d)web page design tools
I use openoffice and I like it but I couldnt stop using publisher and frontpage
Re:The competition to Office 2007 will be Office 2 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The competition to Office 2007 will be Office 2 (Score:3, Interesting)
Plusses and minusses... (Score:3, Interesting)
The placement of the commands seem fairly arbitrary to me, however. It was like they filled out 75% of the ribbons and said, "ok, let's just throw the rest of this stuff on there." They seemed to make the little windows button at the top the default for all the functions that they couldn't fit in anywhere else.
They say that they completely redesigned it, but as soon as you get into any of the options that aren't in the ribbon the box it pops up looks exactly like the older versions of Office which really shows that they just put a skin on the old application.
The instant preview of the fonts and formatting is really nice and the little formatting menu that pops up when you highlight a section is nice, although I wish it would pop up instantly instead of fading in. I forget it is there and move the mouse half way up to the ribbon before I remember that the formatting thing will fade in and by that time it is too late to use it.
Re:Non-Basic document processing (Score:2)
To handle complex documents and complex non-static layous, CSS would need to be "embraced and extended" so much we'd never have anything resembling a standard again.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Word DOS 5, had named paragraph styles. They've become progessively less useful ever since as MS has made their definitions so "intuitive" that almost every user just directly formats every paragraph without realising they're using stles. A great idea was bastardised to become a mockery of itself. When I get files to layout (my job is DTP) I spend a couple of hours rationalising the styles and headin
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, changing from a pre 2007 MS-Office to Openoffice.org is much less of a change than going to MS-Office 2007.
Linux is quite configurable, this means that you can train your sysadmin to create, a Linux
appearnce that is very close to that of winXP, that means that you will have to train
fewer people, than if you make the change to Vista where all users will need
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Bye Bye Microsoft (Score:4, Interesting)
My wife did the same thing with her text documents. After lots of fighting with MS Word or OO.o write, she decided all she wanted was words on a page and switched to notepad.
The moral of the story is: It's still black ink on paper, so you don't need to upgrade.
Re:Bye Bye Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing, for the average user (Score:2)