On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 19:51:00 -0700, Gemini wrote:

> Think about it. If the Ribbon was so much better than the menus, there would
> have been no call for third party add-ons to replace the Ribbon w/ a classic
> menu system.

I wonder why people who dislike the ribbon didn't stick with Office
97.2003/XP?

I really doubt the claim that power users don't like the ribbon too,
in most offices power users spend a lot of time explaining how to do
things to less experienced staff. The ribbon takes this problem
away, big benefit to power users!

Sure everybody gets a vote. :) At the end of the day it's exactly what
I said it was though - some people like it, some people hate it, some
people are neutral on it.

I suppose it's possible that some longterm users found the Ribbon to be of
some use. Yet, it is an undeniable fact, based on several posts I've seen
here and elsewhere, that the Ribbon was not a welcome addition for a majority
of longterm users.

Ben, with all due respect, it wasn't as much of a trade off as arrogance. MS
could have very well provided the classic UI as an alternative to the Ribbon.
They CHOSE not to do so. Despite many calls from users to provide the classic
UI as an alternative, MS has refused to do so.

As regards SQM data, you're right in that unless the way it was collected
(testing methodology) was explained, it has no meaning. From the description
Jensen Harris provided on his blog, it does not appear that longterm/power
users were well represented in the data MS used as a basis to design the
Ribbon. Jensen received several queries about which users were well
represented in that data as well as the basis for his claim of 85%
"acceptance". No response at all from Jensen to those questions. The silence
speaks volumes.

The fact remains MS chose to annoy a large portion of their user base and
continues to ignore calls to provide an alternative to the Ribbon despite
demand. I don't see the business wisdom/logic in it at all.

Thankfully, as consumers, we get to make a choice. I do have Office 2007 to
thank for the stimulus to start looking into non-MS alternatives, since per
Bill Gates, the Ribbon (more accurately, the "Fluent" interface), will be
more pervasive with future version of Windows.

-- Gemini

"Ben M. Schorr - MVP (OneNote)" wrote:
[..]

Actually Chris, quite a few longterm/power users (including yours truly) did
go back to Office 2003. Unless I see a viable alternative to that ridiculous
Ribbon thing, I'm far more likely to move to non-MS products such as
OpenOffice and/or Zoho.

As a matter of fact, the link Harlan Grove posted, points to an article
which clearly indicates a large bunch of Office users are still sticking with
Office 2003, since moving to Office 2007 offers little or no value.

As regards power users not liking the Ribbon, there are tons of posts here
as well as elsewhere that clearly indicate that longterm/power users, by and
large, do not like the Ribbon. That article on ExcelUser also indicates the
same.

I have seen many posts where the term "productivity killer" was used to
describe the Ribbon by longterm/power users. I would love to know how many
users would have even bothered with the Ribbon had there been the menu system
alternative AND how many of the current Ribbon users are "captive" users
(i.e. they have to use the thing at work). I seriously doubt that the
resulting numbers would be pro-Ribbon.

-- Gemini
"Chris Game" wrote:
[..]

Ben, here's an interesting link.

http://vista.blorge.com/2007/04/12/c...2007/#comments

The above bolsters the points I was attempting to make.

-- Gemini

Gemini, it can't be an "undeniable" fact about how the "majority" feels
when it's based entirely upon anecdotal evidence of "several posts".
All that is an undeniable fact from that evidence is that some
power/longterm users don't like the Ribbon which is something I think we
all know to be true. You're extrapolating what you want the limited
data set to say.

You can describe the UI decisions as arrogance if you want to - I was
actually in contact with the product teams, and even occasionally in the
building, during the development of the UI and the product and that's
not my opinion of how the decisions were made. I've met Jensen Harris on
many occasions, and spoken with him at some length about the UI. But I
don't know the source (or even definition) of the "85% acceptance"
statement that you keep calling out and don't have any interest in
trying to defend it. Jensen is more than capable of defending himself if
he thinks he wants or needs to.

In any event it seems to me that we need to agree to disagree. It's
clear to me that you are pretty heavily invested in hating the Ribbon
and that's fine. I don't think anything I have to say will change your
mind about that.

And that's o.k. :)

I'm glad you've started looking into other alternatives; there are some
good ones out there. I've had OpenOffice installed on my machines for a
long time - I'm even writing a book about it. Corel's WordPerfect Suite
is worth looking at too (though I need to find my X3 install disk to
reinstall it). I've used Google's online stuff. It's good to see what
else is out there.

Gemini,

It's just another handful of comments (about 10 to be specific) from
users who don't like the Ribbon. If you're planning to send me links to
every page where a tiny fraction of anonymous Office users are
complaining about the Ribbon I think you're going to waste a lot of time
proving what has already been stipulated: Some Office users don't like
the Ribbon.

I'm taking continuing education classes at the local college. Since last
year when Office 2007 came out all the computers on campus have it, and
Student Edition is available at the bookstore for $25, installable on three
computers. There's a slew of users for you who will at least be used to the
darn thing by the time they graduate. ;^)

Earle

"Ben M. Schorr - MVP (OneNote)" <bens> wrote in message
news:2408
[..]

Chris Game <chrisg> wrote...
>> Let's consider the number of nested menus.
>
>Word in Office 2003: 250 menu items, 31 toolbars, 19 task panes
>(PC-Pro article). It had out grown the menu system, something more
>usable was necessary.

Oh, the poor Office 2008 users then. Stuck without the benefits of a
UI encumbered with Microsoft licensing restrictions. How they must
suffer!

I'll stick with Excel with the half dozen add-ins I load by default.

9 top-level menu entries

Under File
17 next-level menu entries
3 of which access submenus
8 submenu entries

Under Edit
21 next-level menu entries
2 of which access submenus
11 submenu entries

Under View
11 next-level menu entries
1 of which, View > Toolbars, accesses the only submenus which
contains
1+ number of loaded toolbars under this submenu

Under Insert
14 next-level menu entries
2 of which access submenus
11 submenu entries

Under Format
7 next-level menu entries
3 of which access submenus
14 submenu entries

Under Tools
22 next-level menu entries (of which 4 are provided by add-ins)
7 of which access submenus (1 of these from add-ins)
25 submenu entries (though there's only 1 under Tools > Speach; 3 from
add-ins)

Under Data
14 next-level menu entries
5 of which access submenus
33 submenu entries

Under Windows
7 next-level menu entries

Under Help
8 next-level menu entries

201 menu commands, not including the separate submenu entries for each
loaded toolbar. As for toolbars, I've got 21 with 2 provided by add-
ins. As for task pains (misspelling intentional), I never use 'em, and
I've made the necessary registry changes to ensure they NEVER appear
automatically, ONLY when I press [Ctrl]+[F1].

As for number of menu entries IN SPREADSHEETS, Lotus 123 of the mid
1980s had about 100 menu commands just under Print. 200-odd menu
commands in total is no big deal. And when all the menu commands under
Windows and Help are completely generic, nearly all the commands under
File, 3/4 of the commands under Edit and View, and half the commands
under Insert are also generic, you realize there are maybe 120-150
specifically Excel menu commands. Not a big deal.

As for toolbars, most of them are task-specific (Standard is the big
exception), and many of them are context specific - they pop-up only
in specific contexts. Are they necessary? No. All the commands
provided by the standard toolbars can be found in the standard menu or
dialogs accessed from standard menu commands. They're a convenience,
and since they're FAR MORE FLEXIBLE than the !@#$%&* ribbon, they're
FAR MORE CONVENIENT.

One person's improved usability seems to be another's dog's lunch of a
UI mistake.

Chris Game <chrisg> wrote...
>On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 19:51:00 -0700, Gemini wrote:
>>Think about it. If the Ribbon was so much better than the menus, there would
>>have been no call for third party add-ons to replace the Ribbon w/ a classic
>>menu system.
>
>I wonder why people who dislike the ribbon didn't stick with Office
>97.2003/XP?

We do!

In addition to the superior UI, it's faster and wastes less disk
space.

>I really doubt the claim that power users don't like the ribbon too,
>in most offices power users spend a lot of time explaining how to do
>things to less experienced staff. The ribbon takes this problem
>away, big benefit to power users!

More proof you don't use Excel much.

"Gemini" <Gemini> wrote in message
news:d455
>I have no idea what Abi-Word is. Unless it's along the OpenOffice or Zoho,
>I
> don't want to expend the resources to learn that either.
>

Abiword is an open source Word 97-2003 look-alike.....

On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:19:33 -0700 (PDT), Harlan Grove wrote:

>> I really doubt the claim that power users don't like the ribbon
>> too, in most offices power users spend a lot of time explaining
>> how to do things to less experienced staff. The ribbon takes
>> this problem away, big benefit to power users!
>
> More proof you don't use Excel much.

True I tend to use MS-Word and Powerpoint mostly; I lost faith in
Excel when it transpired the statistical functions gave wrong
results. No doubt it's ok for presenting sales data, subtotals and
the like. But I doubt that invalidates the point I made above.

Chris Game <chrisg> wrote...
>On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:19:33 -0700 (PDT), Harlan Grove wrote:
....
>>More proof you don't use Excel much.
>
>True I tend to use MS-Word and Powerpoint mostly; I lost faith in
>Excel when it transpired the statistical functions gave wrong
>results. No doubt it's ok for presenting sales data, subtotals and
>the like. But I doubt that invalidates the point I made above.

And how many of Excel's statistical functions did you ever use? And
were you aware that the summary statistics functions were fixed in
Excel 2002 and some of the continuous distribution functions in Excel
2003? Do you know what the errors were?

The fact that the first thing you can think of for using Excel is
presenting speaks for itself.

Excel (and Access) are forced to follow Word's lead in terms of UI
whether it makes sense for Excel (and Access) or not. Mindless
uniformity has been the Office way since Office 95.

> Gemini, it can't be an "undeniable" fact about how the "majority" feels
>when it's based entirely upon anecdotal evidence of "several posts".

Ben, based on the posts I've seen here and elsewhere, the response from
longterm/power users to the Ribbon has been overwhelmingly negative. The
proper term is "a lot", not "some".

If it comes to discussing what's "anecdotal", the "success" of the Ribbon
can be viewed in precisely the same manner.

>You're extrapolating what you want the limited data set to say.
Incorrect! That has been my observation, as stated above.

> You can describe the UI decisions as arrogance if you want to
It's either arrogance or omission, one of the two. It must have been quite
evident to MS that not all longterm users would like the new UI. It was
certainly within their capability to provide the classic UI as an
alternative. I am quite certain, based on the feedback I've seen online and
from others in person, that had MS provided the classic UI as an alternative,
the Ribbon would have been an also-ran, right out of the gate. There are many
users who are pretty much forced to use the Ribbon, since their employer has
deployed Office 2007.

> But I don't know the source (or even definition) of the "85% acceptance"
> statement that you keep calling out and don't have any interest in
> trying to defend it. Jensen is more than capable of defending himself if
> he thinks he wants or needs to.
Ben, I mentioned that source of that "acceptance" was Jensen's blog. Here's
the link.
http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archiv...mix-it-up.aspx

As far as JH being capable of defending that statement, that's anecdotal,
for sure. Despite several questions about how the initial usability data was
collected and how the "success" numbers were computed, JH has remained
utterly silent. If he did have an answer, he could have easily stated it. The
silence leads one to conclude that MS cannot back up their claims of the
Ribbon's "success" with any hard data.

>It's clear to me that you are pretty heavily invested in hating the Ribbon
"Invested"? Don't quite follow your meaning here. As a longterm user, I feel
let down by MS by their tactics with Office 2007. Basically, the deal is
"learn whatever it is that we give you." We really don't care that many
existing customers want the classic UI back. Now that's arrogance.

Ben, you can defend MS all you want. That's your deal.

> I don't think anything I have to say will change your mind about that.
That's about the only thing on which we can agree.

As far as other alternatives are concerned, I am decidedly not the only user
that was encouraged to look at other alternatives, after discovering that MS
had the "Ribbon or nothing" attitude. If encouraging longtime customers to
look for other alternatives was one of the goals, then the Ribbon has
achieved outstanding success!

Furthermore, since the Ribbon has been so "successful", per Bill Gates, it
will become more pervasive in future Windows versions. I can't think of a
better way to encourage users to start looking at other o/s alternatives as
well.

Ben, I know where the link pointed.

>Some Office users don't like the Ribbon.
The word "some" is an inaccurate characterization.

-- Gemini

"Ben M. Schorr - MVP (OneNote)" wrote:
[..]