Slashdot Mirror


Firefox To Replace Menus With Office Ribbon

Barence writes "Mozilla has announced that its plans to bring Office 2007's Ribbon interface to Firefox, as it looks to tidy up its 'dated' browser. 'Starting with Vista, and continuing with Windows 7, the menu bar is going away,' notes Mozilla in its plans for revamping the Firefox user interface. '[It will] be replaced with things like the Windows Explorer contextual strip, or the Office Ribbon, [which is] now in Paint and WordPad, too.' The change will also bring Windows' Aero Glass effects to the browser." Update: 09/24 05:01 GMT by T : It's not quite so simple, says Alexander Limi, who works on the Firefox user experience. "We are not putting the Ribbon UI on Firefox. The article PCpro quotes talks about Windows applications in general, not Firefox." So while the currently proposed direction for Firefox 3.7 involves some substantial visual updates for Windows users (including a menu bar hidden by default, and integration of Aero-styled visual elements), it's not actually a ribbon interface. Limi notes, too, that Linux and Mac versions are unaffected by the change.

39 of 1,124 comments (clear)

  1. Eyecandy in cost of usability by sopssa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In my opinion this is a really, really dumb move. While its all eye-candy and nice, it brings down the usability a lot. If you want to get to the menu, you have to find some button from somewhere obscure location and then the menu will be vertical to begin with, like right-clicking. On top of that its one extra mouse click. I hate the same thing with Office. Another good example is MSN Messenger. I can never find the menu button, and when I do the menu looks just retarted.

    The ironic thing is that a menubar is the least intrusive UI object on the screen. It's small, it doesn't get in the way and it goes nicely along with title bar. And you still find everything easily and fast from it.

    This doesn't "tidy up" 'dated' browser. There a lot more issues to look at, like UI responsiveness, fast drawing of loading websites and better & smoother scrolling, in which Firefox is actually lacking behind (still wins IE tho, but thats not much)

    Another sad thing about this is that it forges Windows UI style to Linux and other OS, and stops being consistent with the rest of the system.

    Gladly I'm not Firefox user, and even less so with this. It seems Firefox is going more and more to the way of grandma-understands-too. While I myself more and more like the approach Opera takes; feels like a complete suite for browsing. Maybe it'll gain more marketshare for Opera in power users, who still value usability and the simple efficient things like menu bars.

    1. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by Jaysyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree.  Thankfully, I'm sure there will be a theme or add-on to fix this GUI abortion.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    2. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by oldspewey · · Score: 5, Funny

      You know what you are?

      You're a ribbon bully!

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    3. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by spun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Good point. However, Microsoft Bob was also the result of advanced research into user interface design. So was Clippy. Microsoft has a way of taking very innovative ideas and stripping them of all sanity and usefulness.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    4. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by danbert8 · · Score: 5, Informative
      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    5. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by sopssa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      However Ribbon's "contextual" system is horrible to user too. People get used to where things are, even more so with computers. That is why static, normal menus and buttons are good. When the system is trying to contextually offer the "best" options to user, in seemingly random places it thinks are most relevant, they just get confused.

      I use browser and I I've learned where things are. I know better myself what I'm looking for than some algorithm that will just mix things up.

    6. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by raju1kabir · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem I have with the ribbon, and the reason I'll download an add-on to replace the menus in Firefox or just switch to Safari, is that it's a disorganized mess, with everything getting roughly the same amount of visual play. Worse still, some things get more play just because they take more space to show.

      With the menu, some things may be buried a few levels deep, but at least it's highly organised and I can quickly figure out where to find things using common sense. In the long run this works out much better for me. Maybe it's different for users who are just encountering a computer for the first time or something.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    7. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by badasscat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually the ribbon style is not built for eye candy but rather for usability. The problem with menu style systems is that it is not intuitive. There is resistance to the change because of 'menus are the way we are used to doing things' not necessarily the way things should be done.

      The way things "should be done" is the way people want them to be done and are used to them being done.

      All this "intuitive" BS is nonsense. What is "intuitive" about looking at a screen and picking something off a "ribbon" at the top of a bar over a bunch of text and images? There's nothing in human instinctual behavior that would guide that. We know to do something like that because we have learned how to do it.

      And there is just no reason to have to learn a new system when we have all already learned how to use menus. I still can't get anything done beyond the most basic tasks in Word because of the stupid ribbon, and I've basically given up on the whole app because of it. I used to use it for everything, now I use it as a last resort - I use Wordpad for most other things that I can't use Notepad for. (My version of Wordpad still has menus; I didn't realize there was a version with the ribbon. Now I know to avoid it.)

      You know what I wish people would stop doing? Assuming I'm too dumb to use menus, but smart enough to learn a whole new system that I've never seen before. And I'm sure a lot of other people feel the same way.

    8. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by buswolley · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. We need consistency for usability. When something shows up inone spot, we need it to be in that spot the next time we look for it. For things used a lot, it makes sense to have a quick launch icon for one click access, and that is good enough.

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    9. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by keithius · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is no "algorithm" in the ribbon, unlike in earlier (menu driven!) versions of Office.

      Unlike the menus in, say, Office XP or Office 2003, where some items were "hidden" until you used them, in the ribbon EVERYTHING is there. It doesn't try to "adapt" to you. Sure, you have to re-learn where a lot of stuff is, but that was often the case before the ribbon came out as well (because more features kept getting squeezed into a menu-driven UI that just wasn't made for a program with that many options).

      The only thing that changes in the ribbon are some contextual tabs that show up at the end, e.g., when you have selected a picture or a table. These tabs are meaningless normally, so they are hidden. But they don't re-arrange themselves based on your usage patterns - they are static and don't change.

      --
      "Programming is the fine art of making a machine that has absolutely no intelligence act as though it does."
    10. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually the ribbon style is not built for eye candy but rather for usability.

      This is actually a point of contention among usability engineers.

      The problem with menu style systems is that it is not intuitive.

      Intuitive is a rather subjective term. Rather the question is how learnable it is and how functional.

      There is resistance to the change because of 'menus are the way we are used to doing things' not necessarily the way things should be done.

      The learning curve for new interfaces can be problematic. Any change will meet some resistance. MS's ribbon will probably meets more than most because of vocal minorities and because the coupled it with a switch that temporarily eliminated some features. So power users of Word were frustrated partly by a new interface but also because they assumed they could perform a task and the interface was preventing them, when in truth the task had become impossible coinciding with the new interface.

      Putting features in front of the user rather than 3 to 4 deep in a menu system is far more intuitive.

      The problem is if the needed feature is in front of the user and determining what is needed where. If a menu system is more than three levels deep, you've failed as a UI designer.

      In fact I think the office ribbon layout is due to a massive amount of consumer research on Microsoft's Behalf.

      The consensus I've seen seems to be that it is based off of the the U of W's Decision-Theoretic UI project, but where MS was unable to get it to work properly so they scrapped the fundamental adaptive nature and just kept the UI style. The underlying concept resulted in mixed results for UI designers in the first place, so maybe that isn't too terrible and the design of the elements they copied were at least sensible and obeyed fundamental principals of UI design.

      MS does not seem to have published their usability testing (if they did it and followed the results which is always a question with MS) but have published PR pieces claiming that user studies show improved usability; of course not publishing that underlying study either. Scholarly works to date seem to contradict their claims, but some of those were a little less than methodical in implementation. I think MS managed to piss a lot of people off and introduce a new UI scheme which is questionable but not terrible in and of itself.

    11. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by onemorechip · · Score: 5, Funny

      Let's hope they have!

      --
      But, I wanted socialized health insurance!
    12. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by jandrese · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm confused about this point, and it has come up several times now. Menus are grouped logically based on the actions as well, that is not unique to ribbon. In fact that's the whole point of a menu, to keep stuff organized and easy to find.

      The thing that drives me nuts about Office 2007's menu is that I'll use a function on something, then move to a different part of the document and discover that the function I just used is gone, even though it would still be valid. Then I'm forced to flip through the various ribbon tabs to find the function on a different ribbon that looks different and has slightly different options (oh, this one has blue and grey instead of blue and pink for some reason). It drives me nuts. I'm forever hunting around on the stupid ribbon for wherever the function I want wandered off to.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    13. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by smurphmeister · · Score: 5, Funny

      Who? Who doesn't want to use the ribbon?

    14. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 5, Funny

      Too bad, everyone knows there is no alternative, only XUL.

    15. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by Volante3192 · · Score: 5, Funny

      table@diningroom:~ $ mv salt seat1 seat3
      Expected magic word not found.
      table@diningroom:~ $

    16. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by Bovarchist · · Score: 5, Informative

      The screenshot in TFA would seem to indicate that what they are calling a "ribbon" is simply the same interface that Chrome and Safari are already using.

      --
      Hell is other people's code.
    17. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Whatever the source of the data that they used, the result is something that the majority of advanced excel users hate and about 80% dislike. For intermediate users, about 40% hate it and 60% dislike it. Basically, people who know how to use excel already can't stand this ribbon, so MS has just royally pissed off some of their best customers perhaps to the benefit of those who don't use it so often. I have seen more people migrate to linux on their laptops due to this single "feature" than anything else. The ribbon is an even more than the problems with vista, although it is more of a straw that broke the camel's back sort of thing.

      I already dislike the new gui for firefox on the mac (why in the world does the back button need to be so big?), and use safari because of it, but on linux I use FF all the time. I guess I'm going to sit back and hope that midori is released soon, or use konqueror.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    18. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by neokushan · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hurray for people not reading TFA:

      Though it will be turned on by default for Windows 7 and Vista users, they will be able to toggle between the old and new interface by holding the Alt key.

      --
      +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
    19. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by Ghostworks · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Another important thing to remember that menus hide unused and rarely-used features. In most modern software that's actually a pretty good thing, as very few people need or want to leverage every single feature of an application in one session. It makes it harder to discover those features, but once you learn where they are the first time around, it's a solved problem. By presenting the user with large blocks of mostly unwanted toolbars, the ribbon scheme steals valuable vertical space without offering any usability savings over the initial discovery. You still have to switch between ribbon states to find half the features you want, and select from drop-down lists of icons insted of drop-down menus of options.

      This will mesh better with Microsoft's vision of a modern application, for what that's worth. It might make some features easier to discover (I know people who are still surprised to learn about Firefox's keywords feature). Even so, I doubt it will be more popular than the current design, lead to significant changes in the way people use Firefox's features, or be worth the loss of valuable vertical real-estate. The only good thing I can say about it is that most people don't need to use menus in Firefox as it is, and the ribbon can probably be hidden like the URL bar, menu bar, and toolbars can already be hidden.

    20. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by xaxa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The way things "should be done" is the way people want them to be done and are used to them being done. Bull....to an extent. Intuitive means it behaves in a way that you can reason out, that is natural. CLIs for instance are not intuitive, there is no real world example of CLI

      The other reply has mentioned natural language.

      I read a study where some old people were taught how to use a computer (some Linux distro) using the CLI for most tasks. Most of them quickly understood the give command/get response paradigm, one said it was like talking to a child -- you had to be precise and specific, and exactly what you asked for would be done.

      Think remote controls, all buttons are in front of you, at best there is an +10 on the remote.

      The meanings of the buttons changes according to what's on the screen. My grandma doesn't like her new TV, it has "too many buttons". This isn't an interface we should replicate.

      Or consider a more organic approach, at a grocery store you dont have to push fruit out of the way to get to the vegetables to get to the potatoes. You go to the produce isle and head for the potatoes right in front of you.

      File -> Save
      Produce -> Potatoes

      Looks like a menu to me. (Salads -> Potato, on a dinner menu -- that's why it's called a menu!)

      having them memorize a menu system is not useful.

      You don't need to memorise a menu system, that's the whole point. The options you have are grouped according to their function, if you want to change the text colour try the "Formatting" menu, etc.

      With a toolbar the minimum is to learn what each picture means, and this is significant. Grouping the icons is essentially making menus without text.

    21. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by raju1kabir · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think this is because of organization, I think it is because of all the rote learning you've done. You aren't reading & reacting to the menu bar you "just know" where to go because you've done it a million times.

      Actually I specifically meant to refer to situations where I don't know how to perform the task in question. With the menu bar I can quickly figure it out. With the ribbon I am flipping things in and out, trying to find something that seems relevant, wasting vast amounts of time waiting for tooltips to appear on undecipherable icons.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    22. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by Stele · · Score: 5, Funny

      There is no Dana, only XUL.

    23. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by Hangtime · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You sound like a Microsoft developer I curse everyday. For those who actually have to be productive ie those of us in Finance Excel 2003 works great. Everyone knows where everything is and has modified the menus and buttons to make them more productive. Of course, the Ribbon is not for the power user its for the user who has no idea what they want thus its geared towards the lowest common demoninator ie the secretary or grandma. Anytime I have to drop into 2007 I lose 30 - 40% of my productivity because things that were one or two clicks away you have to first find then you are 4 - 5 clicks. Ribbon is just another word for unproductive mess.

    24. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by commodore64_love · · Score: 5, Funny

      >>>gt wth th txtng genrtn. & no i wnt gt off yr lwn

      Shakespeare is dat u? I lovd ur ply. "O Romeo, denie thy Fathr: Vnto the white vpturned wondring eyes; Of mortalls that fall backe, When he bestrides the lazie puffing Cloudes, And sailes vpon the bosome of the ayre."

      Brllint!

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    25. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by msclrhd · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes. And TFA is taken initially from https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Sprints/Windows_Theme_Revamp/Direction_and_Feedback, which is discussing the direction of *applications* written for Vista and Windows 7 that don't use the menubar, but use a contextual strip (Windows Explorer) or Office Ribbon (Paint and Wordpad). That paragraph is about the rationale for not showing the menubar on Vista and later in Firefox, not on adding a ribbon to Firefox (it is under a Hiding of the Menubar section).

      It seems as though a blogger misread this paragraph, and everyone on the interweb has been taking this as fact, without actually RTFOA (Reading The Friendly Original Article).

      From the pcpro article referenced in the /. summary:

      "Starting with Vista, and continuing with Windows 7, the menu bar is going away," notes Mozilla in its plans for revamping the Firefox user interface. "[It will] be replaced with things like the Windows Explorer contextual strip, or the Office Ribbon, [which is] now in Paint and WordPad, too."

      From the Mozilla page:

      "Starting with Vista, and continuing with Windows 7, the menubar is going away. To be replaced with things like the Windows Explorer contextual strip, or the Office Ribbon(now in Paint and Wordpad too). Many apps still retain the menubar as an option to be pinned or to be shown briefly by holding the Alt key."

      Note that here they are talking about Vista and Windows 7, not Firefox (and also note the "Many apps ..." bit in the last sentence).

    26. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by jaavaaguru · · Score: 5, Funny

      table@diningroom:~ $ sudo mv salt seat1 seat3
      Salt move successful.
      table@diningroom:~ $

    27. Re:Eyecandy in cost of usability by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 5, Informative

      Good thing that the ribbon takes up the exact same amount of space as the old toolbars and menu did, then: http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/04/17/577485.aspx

      The document viewing area by default in Word 97 and Word 2007 is literally the exact same, except 2007 actually gives you slightly more space horizontally. PowerPoint is the exact same. The only significat difference is that you do lose a row with Excel, but as someone who works with Excel on a daily basis, I'd gladly take the ribbon over the menu any day. Additionally, you can collapse the ribbon (double-click a tab or hit Ctrl+F1) to save space. I'd guess this would save at least as much space as collapsing the old two-row Word toolbar into one, if not more.

      Space, my friend, is not an issue. (Not to mention that Mozilla isn't really going to the "ribbon," anyway, but that's another story.)

      --
      R.Mo
  2. How time flies by ArhcAngel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I had no idea it was April already.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  3. In Related News... by swanzilla · · Score: 5, Funny

    Firefox To Replace Menus With Office Ribbon

    Many To Replace Firefox With Opera

  4. Re:why??? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    See, I get it for Microsoft Office. Its alot user intuitive for users to find the save and print and formating buttons with the ribbon system they've got set up. Good for that.

    But seriously, when was the last time I used the menu bar in any browser? I enter a URL... I browse... I close it when I'm done...

    I hate clutter at the top of the sceen, eating up valuable viewing space for bigger pictures and such. I was upset when IE snuck a Search Toolbar in there without me really asking - since its automatically set to search if the URL doesn't resolve to anything... But whatever, removed it and got over it.

    Now they want to take that less than an inch menu bar and make it take up 2 inches of my screen so that I can NEVER use it. Besides the fact that I never find a need to go in there, everything will be relayed out and I probably won't be able to find what I'm looking for when I do need to.

  5. Re:Mac. by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dear Timothy,

    I use a Mac. Menu bars are built into the system. It also has "Aqua" rendering, not the knockoff "Aero".

    Love,
    TheMCP

    Dear TheMCP,

    I use a PET2001. There are no menus. It has no graphical rendering. I can't even get Lynx to run on it.

    This letter has as much to do with the discussion as yours does. Please take your fellatious Mac worship elsewhere.

    Love,
    Red Flayer

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  6. the haters won't notice, but... by spyrochaete · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The screenshot in TFA looks nothing like the Office ribbon. The purpose of the ribbon is to make apparent the options the are usually buried within expanding hierarchical menus. In the screenshot it looks to me like they just replaced pulldown menus with pulldown buttons.

    I love the Office ribbon and would be very happy to see this standard propagate into more user interfaces. I'd love to see it implemented in Firefox, but I see no such thing here.

  7. What contexts are there? by sherriw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The context sensitive ribbon... what 'contexts' are there exactly? I'm viewing a webpage or.... viewing a webpage. That's it! It's not like Word where I might be editing text or drawing a table, or manipulating an inserted image.

    Most of FF's menus are related to the configuration of the system. And configuration of the addons. This could be a little better organized but it's certianly not broken or a priority for redesign.

    Imagine trying to tell your grandma over the phone how to set an option: "Click on Tools, then click Internet Options"... oh wait... there's no more menu. "Click on the icon that kind of looks like a toolbox with a wand over it... er".

  8. Re:Summary of /. Reaction to Proposal by DJRumpy · · Score: 5, Informative

    I can't agree more. I had the pleasure(?) of helping a friend take his basic "Office 2007" computer class for college. Fortunately our company didn't go to Office 2007 so it was my first experience with it. It has to be one of the most unintuitive interfaces that MS has pushed out in years.

    The tabs try to present too much information in a limited space. I felt like I was playing those old Monkey Island pixel hunt games. I found it totally unnecessary to have a picture for every function I was trying to perform when simple functions like FILE, EDIT, and VIEW would serve so much easier. We ended spending more time just trying to FIND the sub tab info than we did learning about new functionality. It's almost like they did it just to make Office look 'different' but failed to realize they weren't really innovating anything. They were just putting pictures in place of easy to read text, and adding more 'clutter' in places where it wasn't needed.

  9. Re:Summary of /. Reaction to Proposal by Evil+Shabazz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are all complaining about a complete non-issue. But this is /., so that's to be expected. The ribbon actually IS a much better menu system once you get used to it. All the normal things that most users generally use are pretty easy to find, and many of the mid-level and intermediate things they weren't already aware of are presented more easily. And, the shortcut keys for advanced users weren't changed for the most part.

    Most people who actually give the ribbon a chance get used to it in about 2 weeks - much better than most software changes as big as moving to the ribbon. It's just the people railing against it for the sake of railing against change who can't handle it.

    Get over it. Not all change not initiated by YOU is bad.

    --
    Down with the career politician! SUPPORT TERM LIMITS
  10. Re:Summary of /. Reaction to Proposal by Fallen+Seraph · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If he had trouble with it, regardless of his previous experience, then it's because it's not intuitive! Where intuition means the ability to use the product without reading manuals, looking up online help, etc.

    I'm sorry, but you're quite wrong here. Previously used conventions are a major part of UI design, but abandoning old conventions for better ones is both a major and necessary risk at times. By your definition, how intuitive a system is depends entirely on the person using it, and the results of testing would have no objective value. The fact is that old Office menus were complete garbage, and we only liked them because we'd been using them for the better part of almost 2 decades.

    I remember my heuristics professor once telling us how she was at CES one year and there was this black device at one of the booths. It just looked like a box, and had no buttons or anything, and she stood there for a while trying to figure out how to turn it on. It never occurred to her to just touch it. When she did, it immediately lit up and exposed interactive elements on it's surface.

    Something being intuitive is not what you describe it to be. It is the ability of a system to be learned and adapted to quickly. Prior knowledge of other systems can either help or hinder this scenario, but the baseline is from the perspective of one who's never interacted with this sort of technology before. If you are accustomed to other systems for the same task, but which function differently, this will be an obvious hindrance as your mind subconsciously begins looking for the same conventions, which are notably lacking. The real measure of its worth is how long it takes to relearn how to use the new system.

    I was personally hesitant to try it as well, and put it off for about two years, but found it surprisingly comfortable to use when I finally capitulated. Additionally, it's very obvious that the ribbon's real purpose is actually to provide a common interface for legacy, and potential future touch screen displays, with its use of large buttons and more area.

  11. Re:Summary of /. Reaction to Proposal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except that even once you're used to it, it still takes up a HUGE chunk (relatively) of vertical screen real estate which you can never get back. You know, the dimension that's becoming less and less available as the OEMs beat the "widescreen" drum because they can claim the same number of inches for less pixels?

    On my install of firefox 2, I have the toolbar, menubar, *AND* address bar all stuck on the same line. It takes up 16 vertical pixels. The tab bar is another 16 pixels. This is a godsend on tiny screened devices. Yes, I may be able to hide the ribbon, but it's not very useful when it's hidden, is it? It adds another click to *everything* that simply does not need to be there. Used to be, in Word, I could cram all of the functions I use often (including "hide spelling/grammer errors") onto one toolbar. One toolbar which would fit next to the menubar on most screens. The other functions were there under the menus if I needed them. Can I do that now? (Maybe I can--if the ribbon can be reduced to ~16 or so pixels tall while still giving one-click access to functions, then maybe it's less of an abortion than I've given it credit for.)

    I can't understand why vertical screen space is treated like it's free and unlimited when really it is becoming more precious with time.

  12. Re:Summary of /. Reaction to Proposal by glennpratt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm really surprised that the Slashdot crowd has so much trouble with the ribbon. I'm an IT consultant and across all the people I've deployed Office 2007 to, not one has had more then a handful of questions and zero complaints (at least with regard to the ribbon). Many people actively sought a budget to get 2007 after seeing someone else use it, I never pushed it on anyone. On top of that, people are using styles instead of hand formatting everything, creating locked forms and templates (and editing them later without calling me for help) and using all sorts of feature, sometimes asking me about features I had never used. I've been using it so long, it's far more jarring to try to go back then the transition ever was. Plus auto-hiding the ribbon works great on notebooks / netbooks. Of course, I don't see how it will work in a web browser, but I guess we will see.