Skip to main content

Microsoft Office 12.0 : Say Goodbye to the standard user interface

Wow - for years, the familiar File, Edit, View menu approach has become synonymous with the "Windows" and "Office" experience (even though it was pioneered by Apple, PARC, etc) and now in one swoop, MS has decided to do away with it (at least once version 12 comes out)

The slide show is linked about half-way down. Update: Direct Link

While I'm a big fan of "task-groups", I'm not sure how this user interface will fly. Why?

1. While every application is different, having a standard interface does make it easier to learn and train new users on. Menus are "complexity browsers" and while Office continues to try and make it easier to use, having spent the last 10 years convincing people that menus are good - to come around and say they are no longer there, may not be quite the best default option.

2. By grouping items into categories, it certainly helps improve the interface but if you look at the last slide (the "less-intimidating" Access), you'll see that there's a real danger when you continue to have lots of options available.

3. I do like the idea of when you click on Write in Word, it shows "galleries" of areas where you can make changes like fonts in one section, paragraphs in another. It almost reminds me of the "toolbars" that appear in "other" operating systems and applications.

Now, I'm sure MS has done their user research on this so I'm excited to see what it will look like in the end but don't forget - MS User research also suggested that people would like "MS Bob" and Clippy. And some people do.

What does this mean for the FoxPro developer? It will be interesting to see - because while FoxPro has kept up to speed on the "Windows XP" compatibility (Theme support, etc), it has always lagged behind with the Office user interface compatibility. With the new Office 12, the UI will most certainly be affected.

I'm looking forward to what Ken has said regarding Sedna's compatibility with Office 12- it's likely more to do with the new XML file formats.

But I think developers will face another round of "why doesn't my application look like...." - sounds like a job for Arg Software Design!!

Comments

Andrew MacNeill said…
Direct link:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-9696_7-6322533-2.html?tag=ss
September 14, 2005 at 1:25 PM
Andrew MacNeill said…
Watching the "Julie" video and it does look

It was really interesting listening to how they did their usability tests.

There WAS a reason for that Office usability option in the program after all!

The real test - will more people be able to figure out Pivot tables in Excel?
September 15, 2005 at 7:25 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Elevating Project Specifications with Three Insightful ChatGPT Prompts

For developers and testers, ChatGPT, the freely accessible tool from OpenAI, is game-changing. If you want to learn a new programming language, ask for samples or have it convert your existing code. This can be done in Visual Studio Code (using GitHub CoPilot) or directly in the ChatGPT app or web site.  If you’re a tester, ChatGPT can write a test spec or actual test code (if you use Jest or Cypress) based on existing code, copied and pasted into the input area. But ChatGPT can be of huge value for analysts (whether system or business) who need to validate their needs. There’s often a disconnect between developers and analysts. Analysts complain that developers don’t build what they asked for or ask too many questions. Developers complain that analysts haven’t thought of obvious things. In these situations, ChatGPT can be a great intermediary. At its worst, it forces you to think about and then discount obvious issues. At best, it clarifies the needs into documented requirements. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Respect

Respect is something humans give to each other through personal connection. It’s the bond that forms when we recognize something—or someone—as significant, relatable, or worthy of care. This connection doesn’t have to be limited to people. There was an  article  recently that described the differing attitudes towards AI tools such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini (formerly Bard). Some people treat them like a standard search while others form a sort of personal relationship — being courteous, saying “please” and “thank you”. Occasionally, people share extra details unrelated to their question, like, ‘I’m going to a wedding. What flower goes well with a tuxedo?’ Does an AI “care” how you respond to it? Of course not — it reflects the patterns it’s trained on. Yet our interaction shapes how these tools evolve, and that influence is something we should take seriously. Most of us have all expressed frustration when an AI “hallucinates”. Real or not, the larger issue is that we have hi...
Post a Comment
Read more

When A Machine Starts To Care

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Arthur C. Clarke (1962)  I first used that quote when I was starting out in the tech industry. Back then, it was a way to illustrate just how fast and powerful computers had become. Querying large datasets in seconds felt magical—at least to those who didn’t build them.  Today, we’re facing something even more extraordinary. Large Language Models (LLMs) can now carry on conversations that approach human-level fluency. Clarke’s quote applies again. And just as importantly, many researchers argue that LLMs meet—or at least brush up against—the criteria of the Turing Test.  We tend to criticize LLMs for their “hallucinations,” their sometimes-confident inaccuracies. But let’s be honest: we also complain when our friends misremember facts or recount things inaccurately. This doesn’t excuse LLMs—it simply highlights that the behavior isn’t entirely alien. In some ways, it mirrors our own cognitive limits....
Post a Comment
Read more