…oh come on. If you think you can tear the article to shreds, then do so. The process that Microsoft went through in the development of the Ribbon is all out in the open. It was clearly usability driven: not marketing driven…and if you have evidence that shows otherwise then offer it up.
The research clearly showed that a huge number of features weren’t being used because people couldn’t find them and/or didn’t know they existed.. When the Ribbon was introduced the office suite became easier for me to use: and easier for thousands of other people to use as well. You might not like it but you don’t have to invent reasons not to like it: simply say you don’t like it.
Fine I don’t like it. I knew where all that functionality was and now I had to re-learn where to find it.
I understand however that I am not the population at large, that I spend WAY more time delving into the most hidden features of Office than the average user and that in the end the ribbon brings those features to the forefront so far more users will find them available and take advantage of them.
Fuck them. I like the program I knew. Now get the fuck off my lawn, get the God-damn paper onto the porch you little fuck, stay the hell away from my granddaughter, tell your convict friends to stop hanging around the corner, pick your damn cigarette butts up, drive like normal people instead of a bat-out-of-hell, pull up those GODDAMN trousers, and when I speak to you address me as “Sir”!
Not only does that not cover all the tasks, it is a pure loss of quality (there is no gain by taking up the same amount of space the start menu would take with a toolbar instead, but there is a loss of functionality).
Again, I like the start screen. I like the start menu. They would make each other better together.
The start menu can handle shutting down, restarting, etc. The start menu can handle recently opened documents and programs. The start menu can handle your absolute most used programs and your most opened folders. The start menu can handle any programs with especially complicated nesting structure. The start menu can handle searches which interact with other programs, maybe via drag and drop or by viewing text to educate your search. I’ll stop there for now.
The point is, the start menu and the start screen are both good, but they don’t do all the same things. Both is better than either alone. What really sucks is the damn pop ups and reliance on cluttered, inferior taskbar pinning and archaic desktop shortcuts.
??? I’m not saying a toolbar is a complete replacement for the Start Menu, but if you have to navigate through that mess of “All Programs” every time you want to start MS Word, then a simple toolbar with the programs you frequently use is really by far a better solution.
I am not defending this UI choice, but you don’t have to navigate each time: just start typing the name of the app into the Win8 start screen.
Yes, I know that there’s nothing on that screen that would in any way indicate that you’re able to type to it, so most folks will never realize this feature is there.
Yes, I know that most people don’t know their exact app names.
Yes, I know that it’s context sensitive, so under some circumstances it just won’t work with no visible reason why.
One of the functions of the start menu is that you can pin your most used programs to it (not the same thing as using “All Programs”). Using a toolbar for that is strictly inferior, because it takes up the same amount of space for decreased functionality.
One of the reasons I like the start screen is precisely because “All Programs” is such a mess to look through. At no point did I suggest looking through “All Programs” for MS Word was a good idea. That is a task almost certainly better suited for either pinning to start menu, or just using the start screen. Note, however, that if you had both the start screen and start menu, it would allow you to simplify both. You could drastically cut down the number of items in “All Programs” on the start menu, and organize the start screen with greater simplicity knowing you could use the start menu for certain things.
Well, I knew what you had posted, I just don’t see the logical train of thought there. I agree that using a toolbar, or pinning to the start menu, or using the start screen, are all better methods of launching frequently used programs than searching through a messy “All Programs” list.
So I agree with what you said, I just don’t know how it is a response to my post.
To be fair, Windows 7 did this too. Hit the windows key and start typing either the registered name of the application or the .exe file and you could select it. For me, launching Word (when I still used Word) was just Window Key->wor->enter
One thing that annoyed me about Win7 is the lack of official support for creating customized launchers that can be pinned to the task bar. Is there a way to make custom tiles in Win8?
If you are talking about jump lists, I think the answer is no. Jump lists don’t work at all with the Windows 8 start screen (despite working with the Windows 7 start menu), let alone using them to make customized launchers.
Frankly, I just like the fact that the start screen takes up the whole screen and is very, very fun and easy to customize how you want it.
I will admit that not having a power off/standby/hibernate option right there on the start screen is dumb, but other than that minor annoyance, it’s better in every way than a start menu.
I have never used windows 8 on a touch-screen device and frankly, using it with a mouse and keyboard is no problem whatsoever. I don’t understand why people are saying that they are upset because a touch-screen interface has been forced upon them with windows 8. It hasn’t. It’s just as easy to use with a mouse and keyboard as windows 7 or windows 3.1. The fact that it also tends to work nicely on a touch-screen device is a bonus but really doesn’t and probably won’t ever matter to me and shouldn’t matter to you.
I love the full-screen windows 8 apps. I hope the windows store takes off like the android market and the apple store have done. I enjoy how easy it is to switch between all the open apps and windows.
Yes, there were a few things I had to google to learn, because of the new interface. But after spending just a few minutes learning the new layout of where some things were and how to get to them, windows 8 is just fine. If you hate having to learn new things when it comes to technology then you must be a perpetually unhappy person (no one specific here I’m addressing, just speaking in general).
What I see as the biggest problem from a new user adoption perspective is the awful curb appeal of Win8. It looks like a massive bruise, all dark purple and blue. The dark colors make the corner of the local computer store look overcast and gloomy, like it’s going to thunderstorm right there in the laptop section. Too many people will judge the book by its cover and walk away from Windows 8.
IMO stores should be displaying the traditional Windows 7 desktop on all of their Win8 display machines, with the exception of the touch screen laptops.
Hmm.. that’s interesting. When I set up Windows 8 it asked me to pick a color I liked and I chose a forest green, so that’s the color I associate with it when I’m in the Metro interface.
It is odd that the stores all use the (default?) color dark purple/blue. I always thought light blue was the default. Guess I haven’t been paying attention.
Man (most of you) you guys are resistant to change.
I have Windows 8 on a desktop w/o touch screen capabilities, on a laptop w/o touch screen capabilities and on a tablet.
It’s awesome. When I’m using my Kindle, I find myself using Win 8 gestures to do something.
On my work computer (Win 7) it drives me nuts to have to go to the menu, then open the sub folder for the app, then click on the correct program from that list.
With Win 8, all I have to do is start typing the program name and I’m instantly given all of the choices that match, or can I then click on the app to direct my search to that. It’s so freaking simple. I have my desktop tiles organized and grouped by how I want them. I have no complaints whatsoever. How can you expect something to improve if it doesn’t change?
By the way, Windows 7 was released 3 1/2 years ago. It’s hardly been ‘ditched’.
When dealing with a particularly smart salesperson, you can expand it to “don’t touch my screen or I will kill you, we’ll use you to feed the cats and everybody will swear you just didn’t come in to work one day.”
You say that like change is automatically a good thing. Let’s replace your shirt with one made from pancakes. Don’t like it? You’re resistant to change.
Resistance to change can be quite a sane reaction, if you have invested time and effort learning or implementing something. I don’t think Windows 8 is going to be rapidly taken up on the business desktop.
My prediction: Windows 9 will bring back the Start menu in some form and the desktop will get more emphasis - maybe a scrollable desktop (like the Metro Start screen) and Metro tiles will be able to be pinned to the desktop as widgets.
Have you never used a version of Windows between 95 and 7?
It’s way easier to switch between open apps and Windows when you have a taskbar than (as far as I can tell) going to the hotcorner, bringing back the start screen, then go to another hotcorner to show a list of open windows to choose from. It’s way easier to switch between open web sites when you have multiple visible tabs than when you need to right-click to see your open pages. And IE9 (which, I’ll grant, was available in Win7) does not at all behave well with Flash, at least not out-of-the-box. IE9 drove me to Chrome.
And I have nothing Microsoft’s App store, but I hope their “video store” fails big. I want to be able to play my DVDs on my computer. I don’t want my computer’s video player to refuse to play them in favor of directing me to a Microsoft revenue stream.
Windows 8 is the most user-belligerent OS I have ever used. It removes so much that was useful in prior versions.