Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft's Must-Have List for Windows 9

pcmag.com

71–75 of 75 posts

Re: Microsoft's Must-Have List for Windows 9

#71
post #32
post #16

The "miserable counter-productive "ribbon" interface on Microsoft Word" was the result of a lot of actual user testing. I could understand people disliking it just because it was new, but it's been years now... How long does it take people to realize a better interface is more productive? Edit: oh I just noticed it's Dvorak. Never mind.

I've been using the ribbon UI in Office frequently for years, and still find its usability inferior to the old menu system. Aside from its poor usability, I dislike the visual clutter of having all the functions visible all the time. Personally, I'm less productive thanks to the ribbon UI. Well, what do I know... I'm just one data point... probably an outlier.

I used to always make a custom toolbar with the items I frequently used. Then later, when I had to, I would go into the menu to find the other items I needed. It was nice having familiar icons for my most-used functions and then having text-based labels neatly organized in the menu for the other functions.

The way the ribbon had it all (or lots of items I didn't regularly use) always visible irritated me and made it hard to quickly find the things I wanted without wading through the things I didn't. I've gotten used to it somewhat and I no longer keep Office 2003 installed, but I still end up searching for ways to do things now and again.

Re: Microsoft's Must-Have List for Windows 9

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't even resize the window past 80 You can if you know those good ol' mode-commands. But yeah, no drag'n'resize like on all other platforms unless you install third party software like MinTTY and ConEmu.

You not need to use "mode" command to do it. If you search in the options of cmd.exe, there is a way to set the width in characters, but cmd.exe can't remember it for the next time that you open it (so is useless by laziness). ConEmu is far better that cmd.exe, but I really wish having Konsole or Yakuake running in Windows.

What did you miss in ConEmu, interesting?

Re: Microsoft's Must-Have List for Windows 9

#73
post #71
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using the ribbon UI in Office frequently for years, and still find its usability inferior to the old menu system. Aside from its poor usability, I dislike the visual clutter of having all the functions visible all the time. Personally, I'm less productive thanks to the ribbon UI. Well, what do I know... I'm just one data point... probably an outlier.

I used to always make a custom toolbar with the items I frequently used. Then later, when I had to, I would go into the menu to find the other items I needed. It was nice having familiar icons for my most-used functions and then having text-based labels neatly organized in the menu for the other functions. The way the ribbon had it all (or lots of items I didn't regularly use) always visible irritated me and made it…

You can still add a bunch of functions to the "quick access toolbar" which is still open at the top of the screen even if you minimize the ribbon.

Re: Microsoft's Must-Have List for Windows 9

#74
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, how do you go from "result of a lot of actual user testing" (PM who had the new ribbon designed, sold internally and implemented hosts and evaluates "user testing") to treating it as a truth? My impression is that by the time companies are large enough to have "actual user testing" going on, they have lost the ability to make something truly nice and coherent, the naive "ribbon" being a prime example. I know it…

The menu system was hardly "coherent". At least functions are nicely sorted into meaningful groups now.

The new Ribbon is basically a menu that is built out of extendable XML parts that can grow and shrink on context.

I don't see why its bad at all frankly. It is most definitely a win from a user-experience perspective. Even more so... its a win from a developer perspective.

A single XML file can serve as a consistent menu across old-style C++ COM programs or even be used in the new .NET / C# programs. You no longer have to worry about resizing icons to the user's screen, Ribbons automatically stretch or shrink as necessary.

Just from an API perspective, they are far more powerful and consistent way to communicate between the user and the program.

--------------

Menus of old can be well designed, but they won't be consistently designed across all programs.

That said, the older menu system of MS Word was well designed. The real issue was that they totally reorganized everything in a feeble attempt to get people to start using the more advanced style options of MS Word.

"Properly" using MS Word involves using it more like LaTeX or HTML: you use semantic markup, and then later style your document. (or use a style that is consistent with the rest of your office).

But people would rather just hit the bold button or italics button. They don't want automatically generated table of contents or figure charts... they want to manually type that stuff in... like a typewritter from the 80s or something.

I don't know, I can agree that the new Ribbon interface makes it harder to do certain things in Word, but that was unfortunately the purpose. People need to learn the semantic-markup style of Word and start using better methodologies to organize their Word Documents. But no one seems to put in the time or effort to learn how to use the programs they use every day.

Anyway, I've put in the effort to learn the "new way" Microsoft wants you to use MS Word. And I personally agree with Microsoft, documents are much more consistent, and much easier to update styles consistently across the whole document when you focus on styles first and foremost. Hiding the Bold and Italics buttons (and several other popular... but "wrong" features) was a wakeup call indeed.

The problem is that most users don't like being told that "they're using the program wrong". Part of it is truth (really, the new way is better). Part of it is business based though (Using a document editor as a fancy typewritter means you're ignoring a lot of useful features... and are probably better off using the much simpler Google Docs, or OSS like Abiword)

Re: Microsoft's Must-Have List for Windows 9

#75
post #61

I didn't read the by-line initially, got about two paragraphs in and thought "Jesus, is this by Dvorak?" And it is. And I smiled. I remember howling with laughter at his anti-mac articles more than a decade ago, and this is funny for the same reason. Dvorak has always been utterly incapable of thinking from any perspective other than his own. For example, his hatred of the full screen mode for applications is almost…

They did. There are two versions of (client-side) Windows 8: Home and Pro.

Almost everyone wants the cheaper Home edition. Businesses who want Group Policy and Domain Joining will spend the $50 extra for Pro.

Post reply on HN