Microsoft's CEO Outlines Reorganization Plan

BryanSTG said:
Dont' forget Office 365 and also that goddamn Ribbon, which is clearly designed for simpletons and people that can't read.
Click to expand...

You do realize you just claimed a word processor is designed for people who can't read, right? :p
 
Unknown-One said:
You do realize you just claimed a word processor is designed for people who can't read, right? :p
Click to expand...

Do my eyes decieve me or are almost all of those buttons non-wordprocessing related?

d262bd5a-ec6e-4e39-9fa2-6513944938d8.png
 
Also, Micrsoft Office is not just Microsoft Word and the ribbon is crapping up every single one of them. It's even part of Wordpad and Paint now too.
 
Interesting, looks like Julie Larson-Green finally got kicked out of the OS division. The Phone OS guy will be handing operating systems engineering across all platforms.
 
BryanSTG said:
Do my eyes decieve me or are almost all of those buttons non-wordprocessing related?

d262bd5a-ec6e-4e39-9fa2-6513944938d8.png
Click to expand...
You realize that's the "insert" tab, right? As in, the entire reason you use that tab is to insert foreign objects into your document?

Also, that's the 2007 ribbon. In 2010 and 2013 you can make your own ribbons with exactly what you want on them right from the settings menu. It's an even more customizable system than the toolbars that the ribbons replaced.

Case in point, if you wanted, you could take a screenshot of Word 2003 and put EXACTLY the same buttons as you had on the 2003 toolbars in almost EXACTLY the same places in 2010 and 2013.
 
I'll remember that there's no edit in this sub-forum one of these days...

Wanted to show the ribbon options present in 2010 and onwards. They're very extensive:

h0vTWjm.png


If you still miss your toolbars even with all the tricked-out ribbon options (seen above), Office 2010 and 2013 still have you covered. Select "Show quick-access toolbar below the ribbon" from the Settings menu and behold! A toolbar that you can drop any feature you want onto.
 
Unknown-One said:
You realize that's the "insert" tab, right? As in, the entire reason you use that tab is to insert foreign objects into your document?

Also, that's the 2007 ribbon. In 2010 and 2013 you can make your own ribbons with exactly what you want on them right from the settings menu. It's an even more customizable system than the toolbars that the ribbons replaced.

Case in point, if you wanted, you could take a screenshot of Word 2003 and put EXACTLY the same buttons as you had on the 2003 toolbars in almost EXACTLY the same places in 2010 and 2013.
Click to expand...

Yes that is the insert tab from Word 2007, which is one of about a dozen Office applications. Microsoft Office is a productivity SUITE, not a word processor and this image is proving my point that the ribbon is designed for the least common denominator (aka iditits and people who can't read).

As for customizing the ribbon, I am aware of that and personally use an addon to restore menus that should have been there in the first place. Customers/users don't what to have to pay even more or waste their time trying to restore functionality that should have been there in the first place (just like the start menu in Windows 8).
 
Remind me again what functionality was lost? Almost all the feature on the tab you're complaining about are in Word 2003 as well...

And of course Office isn't just word, but your screenshot was, which is what i was responding to.

Additional software isn't needed to customize the ribbon, it's built-in to 2010 and 2013...

I fail to see a screenshot of an obsolete version of the ribbon damns it for all eternity here...
 
That's great but where is the option to restore the menus that should already be there? All this does is make the ribbon look cute. The quick-access toolbar just another ribbon only smaller! I don't want more ribbons and buttons all over the place, I want zero ribbons and a normal menu driven GUI.

Microsoft seems determined to screw up every GUI by simplifying and hiding everything. Let the users have the options and stop telling them they're doing it wrong.
 
BryanSTG said:
That's great but where is the option to restore the menus that should already be there? All this does is make the ribbon look cute. The quick-access toolbar just another ribbon only smaller! I don't want more ribbons and buttons all over the place, I want zero ribbons and a normal menu driven GUI.

Microsoft seems determined to screw up every GUI by simplifying and hiding everything. Let the users have the options and stop telling them they're doing it wrong.
Click to expand...
What menus that should be where?

The ribbon is a combination toolbar and menu. I fail to see a reason for a redundant UI element that was overhauled precisely because of its inability to handle the number of features Office now has.

This makes the ribbon look EXACTLY how you want it to...

The quikc-access toolbar is a toolbar... it's totally separate from the ribbon. You can hide the ribbon (again, built-in feature) and just use the toolbar...

You realize that once the ribbon is hidden it acts like a menu-driven UI, right? Click a tab from the strip and it temporary shows that tab of the ribbon until you click away from it (exactly how a drop-down menu works). It's basically just a very wide and 100% customizable drop-down menu at that point
 
Also, the ribbon was created PRECISELY because they were hiding TOO MUCH in Office 2003. They had to implement smart auto-hide functionality within drop-down menus in order to make the even partially manageable.

let me say that again, they had to design an additional way to HIDE functionality from the user because there was too much in the drop-down menus to manage normally.

With the ribbon, everything is brought back to the surface rather than hidden inside a menu and then potentially hidden AGAIN by the auto-hide feature.
 
Unknown-One said:
Also, the ribbon was created PRECISELY because they were hiding TOO MUCH in Office 2003. They had to implement smart auto-hide functionality within drop-down menus in order to make the even partially manageable.

let me say that again, they had to design an additional way to HIDE functionality from the user because there was too much in the drop-down menus to manage normally.

With the ribbon, everything is brought back to the surface rather than hidden inside a menu and then potentially hidden AGAIN by the auto-hide feature.
Click to expand...

The ribbon makes everything so hard to read. A row of short columns is just clumsy.

FWIW I always disabled auto-hide.
 
I don't want to hide the ribbon and waste time trying to make the quick-access toolbar look like a menu, I want a menu. You know, File, Edit, View, Insert, etc. etc. Everything that is listed in the tabs should be in a their respective menus with the option to hide/show the menu at will.

Your way of thinking is exactly why the Microsoft failboat is sinking. You seem to think this one potential solution should be the only solution and everyone is going to like it whether they want to or not.

The Office Ribbon, Windows 8, and the XBox Dashboard all support this way of thinking, unfortunately the rest of the world does not. I used to love Microsoft products but I'm quickly starting to resent them for their Applesqe way of treating customers. I hope they fail big time, learn their lesson, and fix their products.
 
Unknown-One said:
What menus that should be where?

The ribbon is a combination toolbar and menu.
Click to expand...

It's also combines option dialogs:

Screenshot%20(47).png


I this case you can mouse over the dimensions that you want for a table and see the results in real time. Plus the tabs collapse and you can even hide the tabs, even the words altogether to get a full screen mode. Keyboard commands still work and the entire arrangement the tabs is configurable.

Microsoft won this battle. The Ribbon is now six years old, in it's third revision and simply blows away conventional drop down menus, toolbars and dialog boxes overall. I do wish they had a darker theme, this is the darkest one and it's on the pretty light side but it does feel cleaner than the Office 2010 themes to me.
 
I use Classic Menu for Office and it is exactly what I am trying to describe. Its a MENU...and it should already be there.

classic_menu_for_office_2007-56633-1.jpeg
 
BryanSTG said:
I don't want to hide the ribbon and waste time trying to make the quick-access toolbar look like a menu, I want a menu. You know, File, Edit, View, Insert, etc. etc. Everything that is listed in the tabs should be in a their respective menus with the option to hide/show the menu at will.
Click to expand...

Again, I fail to see how opening a drop-down menu is any different than opening the equivalent tab on the ribbon.

Only difference is one his vertical format with features intentionally hidden from the user, while the other is horizontal format with as many options shown as possible.
 
BryanSTG said:
I use Classic Menu for Office and it is exactly what I am trying to describe. Its a MENU...and it should already be there.

classic_menu_for_office_2007-56633-1.jpeg
Click to expand...

Erm... all that does is speak to the flexibility of the ribbon, because all that is... is a customized tab on the ribbon.
 
You answered your own question, one looks and functions slightly different than the other. Users want options and changes aren't always for the better despite what Microsft tells you.
 
Unknown-One said:
Erm... all that does is speak to the flexibility of the ribbon, because all that is... is a customized tab on the ribbon.
Click to expand...

I realize that, it is a customized tab that is designed to function like a menu driven GUI. That is most likely because the developer couldn't just inject a real menu into the application. Although its a compromise, it solves the problem and restores functionality that was lost.

Why is it so hard for you and heatlesssun to comprehend that OPTIONS are a good thing and that a fair amound of people really do not like Microsoft's new GUI designs?
 
BryanSTG said:
You answered your own question, one looks and functions slightly different than the other. Users want options and changes aren't always for the better despite what Microsft tells you.
Click to expand...

But as he said, this menu is nothing more than a Ribbon application. There's even a project template type in Visual Studio that directly supports building such a Ribbon application.
 
And as I said, its a compromise but does solve the problem.

I don't want a project template to build a ribbon application, I don't want to customize the quick-access toolbar, I don't want to customize the ribbon, that is a huge waste of time and effort.

You two keep suggesting that everyone who doesn't like the ribbon waste tons of time trying to recreate a menu that should already be there. This doesn't strike you as stupid?
 
BryanSTG said:
You answered your own question, one looks and functions slightly different than the other. Users want options and changes aren't always for the better despite what Microsft tells you.
Click to expand...
Except you haven't actually described how the old menus were better than the new ones (aka the ribbon).

The old menu was:
1. DESIGNED to hide things from you (auto-hide inside menus).
2. Vertical-list format (most displays have less resolution on the vertical axis, making this sub-optimal for large numbers of options).
3. Not in any way customizable (best you could do is delve deeper into hell by turning off auto-hide).

The ribbon is:
1. Designed to make accessing a large feature set easier by hiding it under fewer levels.
2. Horizontal format, maximizing its usage of the screen (more options can be shown on smaller screens).
3. 100% customizable, to the point that it can actually host a replica of the old UI if desired.

You're comparing an old inflexible vertical-list menu to a new customizable horizontal menu. You're going to have a very hard time pegging the old version as being better...
 
BryanSTG said:
You two keep suggesting that everyone who doesn't like the ribbon waste tons of time trying to recreate a menu that should already be there. This doesn't strike you as stupid?
Click to expand...
No, we're suggesting that it's not actually that much different when you actually stop and think about it for a second. Not only that, but the ribbons contain ALL the features of the old list-menus (and more) so there isn't actually any need to customize them.

We only suggested and pointed out the customization options because you seemed hell-bent on getting the old UI back. Well, the new UI is so much more flexible than the old one that that's possible if you really want it.
 
I never said it was better, that's just you putting words in my mouth.

That looks like a list of why you like the ribbon and why you think its better. It also looks like a list made by Microsoft to convince people to upgrade their software.

I don't care if YOU think it's better, that's not the point. The point is that Office should have a normal menu and that Windows 8 should have a start menu with the option to enable/disable it. Option is the key word here.
 
BryanSTG said:
I never said it was better, that's just you putting words in my mouth.
Click to expand...
Why would you want something that's worse re-implemented?

Only conclusion I could come up with that made any sense was that you somehow thought the old system was better.

BryanSTG said:
That looks like a list of why you like the ribbon and why you think its better. It also looks like a list made by Microsoft to convince people to upgrade their software.
Click to expand...
Er, no, that was a feature-by-feature rundown of some of the major points of both interfaces...

BryanSTG said:
I don't care if YOU think it's better, that's not the point. The point is that Office should have a normal menu and that Windows 8 should have a start menu with the option to enable/disable it. Option is the key word here.
Click to expand...
And I ask again, why should they re-implement an inferior UI? What's the advantage to having a normal menu again when the ribbon offers 100% of the functionality of said menu with less hierarchy in the way?
 
You seem to hate having options and I'm clearly not going to convince you that options are useful good for the consumer/user.

Instead, why don't you explain why options are bad and how such a simple one such as a start/office menu is absolutely unacceptable and a terrible choice.

I'm interested to learn why allowing these simple chocies, which many consumers want, is just awful in your eyes.
 
BryanSTG said:
You seem to hate having options and I'm clearly not going to convince you that options are useful good for the consumer/user.
Click to expand...
I love having internally consistent options, I see no point in having redundant options that do 100% of the things the first option does in a definably worse way...

BryanSTG said:
Instead, why don't you explain why options are bad and how such a simple one such as a start/office menu is absolutely unacceptable and a terrible choice.
Click to expand...
I never said options were bad, YOU did... You just poo-pooed all the options we showed you that the ribbon has for customization (many more than the menus and toolbars of Office 2003 ever had)

BryanSTG said:
I'm interested to learn why allowing these simple chocies, which many consumers want, is just awful in your eyes.
Click to expand...
Office allows many more choices now, as far as UI configuration goes, than it ever has in the past... we pointed that out to you already.
 
BryanSTG said:
And as I said, its a compromise but does solve the problem.

I don't want a project template to build a ribbon application, I don't want to customize the quick-access toolbar, I don't want to customize the ribbon, that is a huge waste of time and effort.

You two keep suggesting that everyone who doesn't like the ribbon waste tons of time trying to recreate a menu that should already be there. This doesn't strike you as stupid?
Click to expand...

It boils down to just how much backwards compatibility do you support? I've built a number of Office add-ins over the years and the ribbon is simply more powerful and flexible than the old menus in some many ways. And the ribbon and class menus work VERY differently. If Microsoft had kept the old menus it definitely would add work for add-in developers that took advantage of the ribbon UI as those things don't map well to the classic menus.

I remember very well this controversy in 2007 and how tons of people were going ape and saying all of this productivity would be lost and users would be so confused and with the tens of thousands of Office users at the bank, while it hasn't been perfect, people got used to it and a lot of people loved it, though of course some people didn't.

I just don't think that you can drive a product forward with infinite backwards compatibility nor is that even sustainable. The Ribbon has been successful and people have adapted and Office is selling better than ever with new options for cloud delivery and via the web. It even works reasonably well with touch on tablets, though there are some rough spots, except OneNote which is quite excellent with touch.
 
You're obviously being dense on purpose, and skirting around the simple point of this conversation. I'll let you, heatless and Microsoft congratulate each other in newspeak for the remainder of the evening.
 
BryanSTG said:
You're obviously being dense on purpose, and skirting around the simple point of this conversation. I'll let you, heatless and Microsoft congratulate each other in newspeak for the remainder of the evening.
Click to expand...

I've been dealing with Office for a LONG time in the biggest of enterprises. Again, I lived through the conversion of tens of thousands of users from Office 2003 to 2007 and had developed and couple of add-in, pretty complex ones, that we had to migrate to 2007. It wasn't the most daunting of tasks but there were actually some things that were able to do with the ribbon that made things easier for our users that wouldn't have worked the same way with the old menus.

Options don't necessarily come for free, they can add complexity, redundancy and fragmentation. I just want to know how long does backwards compatibility be maintained. At some point you can do new things and keep supporting all of the old stuff. It seems like Microsoft is so hamstrung with 100% backwards compatibility that has served it well I think now it's slowing them down a bit. That's not to say that everything they do is correct but it also doesn't seem that they can move anything forward much anymore without all of this resistance.
 
Red Machine D said:
The only re-org Microsoft needs is to kick Steve Ballmer's penis-headed ass the fuck out of the industry.
Click to expand...

And the office ribbon lady right along with him. Aka Julie larsson'green, who believes pushing metro out as the universal UI for every ms product she can get her paws on is the path to glory.
 
Pulldowns:

This is now a human standard. Like our character set, it has flaws but has become ingrained in everything. First thing you look for on anything with a menu is pulldowns. Your TV is a good example.

Some say this is old-fashioned and progress must be made, sort of like the Dvorak keyboard is superior to the old asdf keyboard. There is second way of looking at it.

It's called "Shoot the Engineer and Ship It". Pulldowns work and are now universal, go on to the next project.
 
A good project to work on would be making malware extinct. Want to sell a billion seats of Win9? Figure out a way to make it hack proof. I'd buy it.

Not sure how it would be done, but that's the whole invention thingy.

There is a huge flaw in our computer structure today. Fixing it should be #1 for an OS.
 
I have to admit, while I think the majority of the Office Suite is substandard garbage (aside from excel and some functions on other software), the ribbon is not why.
 
This is exactly what MS needs. They have proven they can make great products like the zune and WMP, but they are always late to the party. They have to be able to change and get products out faster to market.
 
Qinsp said:
A good project to work on would be making malware extinct. Want to sell a billion seats of Win9? Figure out a way to make it hack proof. I'd buy it.

Not sure how it would be done, but that's the whole invention thingy.

There is a huge flaw in our computer structure today. Fixing it should be #1 for an OS.
Click to expand...

Most major security flaws that effect end users are third party applications.
 
Qinsp said:
A good project to work on would be making malware extinct. Want to sell a billion seats of Win9? Figure out a way to make it hack proof. I'd buy it.
Click to expand...
Well... Windows 8 already potentially has you covered on that front. Windows 8 supports enforcing a minimum signing level. The available options are Unsigned(0), Authenticode(4), Microsoft(8), and Windows(12).

Windows 8 defaults to 0, Windows RT defaults to 8. This value is protected by SecureBoot and is near impossible to modify without user intervention.

Up it from 0 to 4 and you should kill 100% of malware. The only things that will run are applications signed by you, applications signed by Microsoft, and applications that are part of Windows itself. Downside is that you'll have to sign any desktop application you want to run so that the OS will trust it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top