Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft 'Ribbonizes' Windows 8 File Manager
CWmike writes "Microsoft said today it will 'ribbonize' the file manager in next year's Windows 8, adding Explorer to the short list of integrated applications that already sport the interface in Windows 7. Microsoft's Alex Simons, director of program management, released screenshots of the new ribbon interface planned for Explorer (scroll way down). 'We evaluated several different UI command affordances including expanded versions of the Vista/Windows 7 command bar, Windows 95/Windows XP style toolbars and menus, several entirely new UI approaches, and the Office style ribbon,' explained Simons. 'Of these, the ribbon approach offered benefits in line with our goals.' Plans by Microsoft and others to ribbonize applications have often met resistance. 'We knew that using a ribbon for Explorer would likely be met with skepticism by a set of power users, but there are clear benefits,' Simons said."
Looks like a two year old designed it. Talk about cluttered. Explorer has a ribbon, the right mouse button.
The ribbon is just awful. Generally it takes me 1-2 weeks to get back to 95+% productivity with a new machine. I am now over 18 months into Office 2007 at work, and still only at 75-80%. Important things were buried or burned to make the ribbon approach fit, so I am constantly having to dig for simple crap like "crop". Ugh, I was hoping it all would go the way of Clippy...
And alternative file manager downloads soar on Windows 8 launch day.
Windows professionals and consultants ready themselves for increased profits in tutoring a new array of people having difficulty simply working with their own files.
Better information about Microsoft's researches: http://seldo.tumblr.com/post/9549775746/this-is-genuinely-microsofts-idea-of-a lol
In the age of widescreen displays, why in the world do they want to waste more of my precious vertical viewing plane with pictures?
My company's switch to Office 2007 nearly a year ago is still bringing groans from my coworkers (who by the way are engineers in their 20-30s for the most part). We love new things, and we love improvements; we abhor inefficiency and "stupid pretty things". If we wanted eye candy, we'd get a Mac.
I guess I should read more about their "clear benefits", because we are obviously missing them!
No matter how you look at it, Ribbons are inefficient, badly designed UI elements.
Microsoft continues to floor me with how valiantly they push that envelope toward a cliff.
I'm guessing they won't have a 'classic' look and feel option?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Word is famous for being able to do 1000 things to a document, but the interface makes it faster to only do 3-4 of those tasks, and make it frustratingly agonizing to find some little known feature, which pisses me off, ruins my experience, and blows all the efficiency I just gained on complaining and hunting for what I needed.
A Ribbon would be great if word only did about 50 things, but then that's the problem, word is bloated and crazy. They've put the right interface onto the wrong product.
Then again, a Ribbon on Explorer might not be bad, because it really only does 50 things.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
I have been using Total Commander since Windows 3.1 as a file manager. Every version of the Windows File Manager and Explorer seems very limited to what I can do with Total Commander.
This new one even looks like it is a step backwards yet again. I hate the ribbon interfaces in Office 2007 and used a third party addon to get the old menus back, so I doubt if I will like the Windows 8 ribbons any better.
I hate the ribbon. It's been 4 years... How long is enough time to be comfortable with it?
I used office 2007 since beta.
I wish I could have those years back.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Ditto, I have used MS office in my job for years as well Generally after 2 years of getting used to it, I can find things almost 75% as quickly as I could in the menu interface. In general I know a few people that claim to be at roughly the same speed. I don't really think I've met anyone in person who likes it better. The one thing I don't get with MS, why not make it an optional style. In general if everyone wants to turn it off in a week, you know it's bad design. Also don't reffer to me as afraid of change, I started learning to type with dvorak about a month ago, I'm not quite up to my qwerty speed, but I can see clearly why it would be faster when I get used to it. Ribbon I just don't see an increase in speed, unless your computer is so slow that menus take 3 seconds to pop up after you mouse over them.
I use sh/bash/csh/tcsh/cmd/powershell, and I still use GUI file managers daily (when appropriate). Now Ribbon vs Menu? There is no appropriate time to use ribbon. It takes up more space, and is ordered haphazardly. I shouldn't need to refer to the help file every time to find stuff that could be logically organized (or is now just a stupid icon instead of a menu phrase).
Why, why, why, why, WHY?
But if you do those things so often that they need to be fast, wouldn't you just learn the keyboard shortcuts after a couple of times and do it even faster without moving your hands from the keys?
Some people, when confronted with a problem, think “I know, I'll use regular expressions.” Now they have two problems.
- Jamie Zawinski
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
that's the one good thing about the ribbon, it forced me to learn a shitload of keyboard shortcuts.
This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
How is haphazardly mixing multiple sizes of buttons with complex scrolling controls and text an improvement in UI design? My gosh, have you actually looked at this thing?
Putting commonly used features within easy reach is inarguably good UI. Making it customizable so that the definition of "commonly used" can be modified by the user, however, is also inarguably good UI. Doing this, by definition, necessitates something approaching standardization of icon sizes, layouts, etc. Instead, what we have here looks like a Jackson Pollock painting.
Let's look at what's wrong with this UI design, point by point:
Tabbed navigation incorrectly used to select between banks of controls
Tabbed navigation is assumed to affect the contents of the screen as a whole. It is a fundamental abuse of the metaphor to use it to choose between banks of controls.
The need for tabs is a clear indication that you are bringing way too many controls to the forefront of the user's attention.
Most users won't notice the tabs, and will be confused if they accidentally click on one because they won't know how to get back to the controls that they're used to. They will, in turn, file bugs or call tech support.
Tabbed navigation shares a row with other information
I'm guessing that the blob called "File" is not part of the navigation tabs, but it appears to be. While it might seem convenient to reduce the vertical spacing by placing unrelated information in a tab bar, it's extremely confusing. It looks to me like two different things are selected in a single tab bar, which is just plain wrong.
Unhelpful grouping labels
Although conceptual grouping of icons can be useful in terns of keeping related things together, it is generally not useful to label those groups. This wastes valuable vertical screen real estate and adds nothing to the user's understanding. Yes, in some way, burning a file to disc is conceptually similar to emailing it to someone, but a label called "send" doesn't add meaning, and is actually a bit confusing.
Inconsistent levels of detail, and non-independent controls
There are wildly different levels of detail between different features in this UI. You have simple tasks like "Print" that presumably open their own dialog boxes, and then you have things like sharing preferences in which lots of detail is crammed into a single section of the ribbon bar for no good reason. "Sharing options" could be a single icon in a button bar that brings up a modal sheet or dialog box, and no convenience would be lost.
In general, UI elements should be independent unless you are in a dialog box or sheet. Clicking an item in a button bar or similar should cause either an action to occur or a dialog box to appear for getting more information. Items in button bars should absolutely not depend on other items in the bar for their behavior.
Minor variations have separate buttons instead of a pop-up menu
If there are several UI elements that conceptually do the same thing, then they should be combined into a single menu item with a pop-up menu to choose which specific variant action should be performed.
Example 1: "Send" button: display a pop-up for email, burning, etc. (Note: compressing a file is *not* an equivalent action, and should *not* be listed with the rest of those.)
Example 2: "Clipboard" button: for all of the various cut, copy, and paste options, show a hierarchical menu that pops up when you click the clipboard/pasteboard button.
By making those two changes, you've turned basically two ribbon bar tabs into two or three buttons with a couple of simple pop-up menus and a simple modal sheet.
Rarely used UI options are artificially elevated
Most people don't add or remove columns in their views regularly. That's the sort of thing that you pretty much do once when you first get a computer, assuming
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
... OFFER BOTH OF THEM!!!!
.. would it really take that much more to keep the EXISTING MENUS but add an option to use a ribbon for those that like them or are new users??? I thought Windows and C++ was supposed to support some type of modular programming, it should be a piece of cake to chose one widget over another one. Just plug it in. I know it's pretty easy in Java to do it.....
Jeez
Any benefit from ribbons (which I haven't seen any yet) is lost from me not being able to find stuff. Excel was just plain nasty trying to find things in. I still have a difficult time finding things that I don't use very often, but had used enough to make some sense about why they were in a specific menu.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Well, I think the issue is that they keep reinventing the wheel, and the result is that instead of people being more productive with a tool they are familiar with, the changes in the UI keeps getting in the way. After all, the thing one wants to do when using a file manager (or a word processor) has nothing to do to keep relearning the same tool every couple of years. It is 2011 - these are trivial operations we all have been doing for decades, and these things should be fairly standardised by now, unless someone comes up with a new paradigm in how we organise information (i.e. not using files/folders). These changes only happens because software companies wants to sell the same users the same product, so they need to justify the 'upgrade'. Far from helping the end users, keeping changing the UI is aggravating if one just need to get the work done and has no time to spare in the new (and useless) eye candy.
I am currently working on a Word document that has all the usual bells and whistles: tables, multiple styles, bullets, pictures, drawigs, etc.
It is awful.
Most of the time is spent moving the mouse around and switchings tabs.
Sure, it is easier to find the various commands with the Ribbon, but it takes a lot more time than toolbars. With toolbars, whatever you needed was there, you just had to move the mouse to reach it. Now, with the Ribbon, you have to move the mouse, click the appropriate tab AND move the mouse to the appropriate command.
Whoever designed the Ribbon is a complete moron. It now takes double the time to do the same work.
Absolute BS. What makes the ribbon the ribbon does not speed anything up. The ribbon is just a crappy version of the menu bar where the structure has been decimated under the misguided idea that the buttons you use most should be the biggest. Any reduction in the number of clicks has nothing to do with the random structuring that the ribbon brings. If you can style a table in 5 seconds instead of clicking 180 times, that isn't because the classic menu bar is a poor design. It is because the buttons you press are not properly placed in the menu bar. You could have gotten the exact same speedup by just putting a "Most Used" entry after "Help".
Absolute BS. This is the same garbage that Apple fanboys spout. "Oh, it's because you resist change! You only hate it because it's different and your stuck in a rut!". I have use just about every UI that has been available since my first computer the Commodore KIM. I have enjoyed the steady improvement that we have seen through the decades. I have welcomed change, and look forward to new improvements when they come. The ribbon is not one of those.
Sure, I can learn to use it. In fact I can guarantee that I will "get used to it". That doesn't mean it is good. I don't see anyone complaining about Windows 7's snap to the boarder feature. That is new, but it is also a good improvement. I didn't hear anyone complain when quick launch buttons were added to the task bar. In fact, I didn't hear anyone complain about the task bar at all when it was added. These were good IMPROVEMENTS to the UI, so while they were different, no one complained.
The ribbon is bad UI, and the sooner MS admits it, the sooner we can start moving in a positive direction.
It is utterly baffling to long time users
I have been using word processors since Display Write for DOS and didn't find it "baffling". It is basically the same as the old menus but with icons instead of just a list. People sort of knew this was a good idea back in the Windows 95 days when toolbars were first introduced to save you digging through menus for common tasks like changing the font or printing. The ribbon is just a toolbar with tabs.
The ribbon is nice because the icons actually show you what you get if you click on them and are better organised. Finding things is no harder than going through the various menus was in previous versions, except that now you can do it quicker because the brain can recognise pictures faster than it can recognise words.
It does take about five minutes to get used to and isn't necessarily appropriate for every app, but as a programmer who occasionally uses MS Office for documentation and the like I much prefer it. Previous versions fumbled around trying to be helpful with idiocy like Clippy, "personalised" menus and toolbars that only appear when you click on an image or a table, but now everything is on the ribbon and properly organised.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Because you actually used the ribbon interface, instead of just looking at it (or not even that) and parroting the "Everything M$ does is terrible" line.
If you didn't have the damn ribbon interface (like it used to be) you wouldn't need to minimize it.
This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.