If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AZCentral)   Microsoft finds little demand for Windows 8 ... probably because consumers still haven't forgiven them for Vista   (azcentral.com) divider line 222
    More: Followup, Microsoft, Windows, Vista, Apple products, GfK, Kindle Fire, desktop computers, consumers  
•       •       •

3259 clicks; posted to Business » on 29 Oct 2012 at 10:39 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



222 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-29 03:47:02 PM  

MrSteve007: Also, for those of you who like to refresh/reinstall your operating system, these new settings in the control panel of Win8 are pretty damned nice.
[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 614x671]


You work for Microsoft, don't you?
 
2012-10-29 04:01:48 PM  

sjmcc13: StrikitRich: Krieghund: I have little demand for Windows 8, because I'm still happy with Windows 7.

Meanwhile, the major corporation I now work for is still has us using XP because they're married to the customized version they force on us. Can't believe how slow it runs on an i7.

XP can not use multi-core processors properly. You are probably better off with an old single core processor then a modern multi-core...


I know, but I didn't know about the XP install when I bought the laptop. I asked for them to create a partition, but was turned down. Most likely it was because the person didn't know how to make one.
 
2012-10-29 04:27:31 PM  

AcneVulgaris: Man, they really screwed the pooch on PR for this one. Everything I've seen is negative.


They made some horrible design decisions. Deleting the start menu, requiring keyboard shortcuts to do simple tasks, changing the whole "look and feel" of the way a Windows computer works. It's like selling a new car that gets better mileage, more horsepower, is more safe in an accident-and requires you to steer with your feet. Yeah, you can figure it out eventually, but why fark with what works?
 
2012-10-29 04:43:58 PM  

Lumpmoose: Vista to work reliably


Vista SP2 is a totally different beast than Vista original. The service packs fix a lot of issues, and 3rd party drivers were a lot more stable by the time SP2 was out.


lilbjorn: Everyone knows that every other Microsoft OS is utterly useless.


Windows 2000 and XP were both very good versions, and they are side-by-side.


slayer199: What did they farking expect?


Given the huge discount for those buying an upgrade edition, they were expecting a lot of people who were still on XP to take advantage of that discount and finally upgrade.

Had I not already upgraded my home systems from XP to W7, I totally would have jumped on W8 as a cheap upgrade solution.
 
2012-10-29 05:04:08 PM  
If you're on Vista, it's a damn fine upgrade. Pay £25, another £3 for Start 8 and get a whole new OS that runs faster and looks like Windows 7.
 
2012-10-29 05:12:44 PM  

slayer199: You work for Microsoft, don't you?


No, but I work as IT director for an architecture firm not all that far from Redmond. Once or twice a year I volunteer as a guinea pig for Microsoft's "User Research" testing, which is pretty fun. About a third of my friends from college work there, or are contractors of MS (the rest are split evenly between Amazon and Boeing).
 
2012-10-29 05:27:25 PM  

Dinjiin:

Windows 2000 and XP were both very good versions, and they are side-by-side.



ME was between 2000 and XP.
 
2012-10-29 05:37:36 PM  
//how does WIN7 do in a VM?

I have a Windows 7 VM on my machine at work and it works fine.


Microsoft seems to have forgotten step 1 of software design - assemble a requirements list by talking to representatives of all the stakeholders. They seem to have concentrated on tablet users, PR people and upper MS management and completely ignored people who use desktops at work or at home.
 
2012-10-29 06:16:06 PM  

offmymeds: [us.acidcow.com image 700x525]


That AOL interface was actually very user friendly. Would have been even more so with touch screens.
 
2012-10-29 06:20:09 PM  

DigitalCoffee: And that's pretty much hitting the nail on the head. One thing not mentioned is that from WIN95 thru WIN7 the basic system remained the same. Switching to something else meant having to relearn everything. The big excuse for business for NOT switching to some *Nix system was "OMG!! Retrains because DIFFERENTS!!". Now WIN8 makes everything different and that eliminates a major reason that prevented switching. If you're going to retrain anyway, why not retrain on something different?


Like what? Linux is still less than viable for a mass audience (I don't care what flavor you go with).

And the pricing and lack of selection of Macs makes those a non-starter in most serious enterprise environments.

In summary, there isn't really a very good "different" option because thus far Microsoft is the only company that understands enterprise needs.
 
2012-10-29 06:31:54 PM  

NotARocketScientist: //how does WIN7 do in a VM?

I have a Windows 7 VM on my machine at work and it works fine.


Thanks for the verification. I seem to remember some noise made a few years ago about making Windows 'VM proof' (or some such, maybe I'm misremembering). Might be time to upgrade the sandbox from XP to 7.
 
2012-10-29 06:43:48 PM  
www.ssidisplays.com
 
2012-10-29 06:50:14 PM  
As one of the few people who downloaded Windows 8, I've got to say it's actually a nice improvement over 7. There's less of a learning curve to it then to the average Facebook redesign.
 
2012-10-29 06:56:18 PM  
I do IT for a small municipality. We are having this discussion right now. A big issue is 3rd party vendors adapting their software. Most can't address 64 bit, much less Windows 8. So, our next upgrade round will be to Windows 7 and a Server 2008 forest.
 
2012-10-29 06:58:06 PM  

Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

pants on fire stupid stuff from Redmond, and no amount of attempted hipster branding is going to change it.


I was so happy when we got away from Romper Room XP. Granted Metro is pastels, but I do like the changes to the Desktop mode. It is easier on the eyes than 7 was,
 
2012-10-29 06:58:19 PM  

whistleridge: That, and 7 is in no way outdated yet.

If I could use XP for 8 years, no problem, I don't see any reason why I shouldn't get the same sort of life out of 7. Especially since big OS changes mean issues with a lot of the other programs I've purchased. Even if 8 didn't look totally idiotic (and it does), I would see zero reason to change. It ain't broke, after all...


8 is basically 7 with a silly front-end and a bunch of backend usability stuff stripped out. At least that was my take on it from the several hours of toying around with it in a VM a couple months ago. I have little to no interest in a further nerfed OS.
 
2012-10-29 07:03:32 PM  

Dinjiin: Windows 2000 and XP were both very good versions, and they are side-by-side.


Windows 2000 was the last major change in NT that was headed up by Dave Cutler.

He managed to oversee a major rewrite of the OS that still managed to work very well indeed right from the start. This was a particularly noteworthy accomplishment since none of his successors have managed the same.

XP was just a point release of an OS that already worked quite well.
 
2012-10-29 07:04:10 PM  

MrSteve007: Techhell: I don't need to have a crap load of cell formats taking up 75% of the ribbon - if I want to make a cell look a certain way I can damn well format it myself. hate that all the things I do need (like adding Macros to Excel, and Watermarks to documents) are hidden behind layers of obfuscation.

In Office 2010 or 2012, you can customize the ribbon UI & quick start to do and show whatever you want - well beyond that of any of the menus in Office 2003 - right?

Since you claim that you're the guy that people go to for answers, you're awfully misinformed.


Thank you for so totally proving my point for me with a single, glorious graphic. Seriously, thank you - there's no way I could have done it better. And I'm totally saving that image to use in the future so I can prove my point when I need to make it again.
 
2012-10-29 07:17:06 PM  

Techhell: Thank you for so totally proving my point for me with a single, glorious graphic. Seriously, thank you - there's no way I could have done it better. And I'm totally saving that image to use in the future so I can prove my point when I need to make it again.


Your point is that you don't like being able to customize every iota of menu within Office? Because just a little bit ago, you were whining that you couldn't change anything in the ribbon.
 
2012-10-29 07:25:38 PM  
Maybe because I JUST bought a new machine capable of running 7, I'LL BE DAMNED if i'm dropping more cash to buy another machine with the hardware necessary to take advantage of all the whiz bang?
 
2012-10-29 07:43:06 PM  

MrSteve007: Techhell: Thank you for so totally proving my point for me with a single, glorious graphic. Seriously, thank you - there's no way I could have done it better. And I'm totally saving that image to use in the future so I can prove my point when I need to make it again.

Your point is that you don't like being able to customize every iota of menu within Office? Because just a little bit ago, you were whining that you couldn't change anything in the ribbon.


No, my point is that everything I needed to find in 2003 was damned easy to find. You went to one of the menus - File, Edit, Insert, Format, Tools, etc. It was all there - now if you want to find things, you have to figure out where they're hidden. Then you have to display them. And if you aren't going to be using it on a constant basis, you either leave it on there so your ribbon gets full of crap you don't need, or you are constantly selecting it and unselecting it. Or you're keeping a list somewhere else of all the keyboard controls to use them instead.

And your graphic beautifully showed that.
 
2012-10-29 07:49:04 PM  

Techhell: MrSteve007: Techhell: Thank you for so totally proving my point for me with a single, glorious graphic. Seriously, thank you - there's no way I could have done it better. And I'm totally saving that image to use in the future so I can prove my point when I need to make it again.

Your point is that you don't like being able to customize every iota of menu within Office? Because just a little bit ago, you were whining that you couldn't change anything in the ribbon.

No, my point is that everything I needed to find in 2003 was damned easy to find. You went to one of the menus - File, Edit, Insert, Format, Tools, etc. It was all there - now if you want to find things, you have to figure out where they're hidden. Then you have to display them. And if you aren't going to be using it on a constant basis, you either leave it on there so your ribbon gets full of crap you don't need, or you are constantly selecting it and unselecting it. Or you're keeping a list somewhere else of all the keyboard controls to use them instead.

And your graphic beautifully showed that.


A ribbon is a menu with pictures. Serious question: why is clicking "developer ribbon -> macros" in 2010 more work than clicking "tools -> macros" in 2003? The difference is that whichever ribbon is currently open is one click away instead of two. It sounds like your real complaint is that you have gotten used to where everything was and don't want to change, which is a very different complaint than "ribbons suck".
 
2012-10-29 07:58:06 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: [www.ssidisplays.com image 480x452]


Do they make a 42" version of that?
 
2012-10-29 07:59:37 PM  

DigitalCoffee: NotARocketScientist: //how does WIN7 do in a VM?

I have a Windows 7 VM on my machine at work and it works fine.

Thanks for the verification. I seem to remember some noise made a few years ago about making Windows 'VM proof' (or some such, maybe I'm misremembering). Might be time to upgrade the sandbox from XP to 7.


I have just gone from XP to 8 and (with Classic Shell or Start 8) can strongly recommend it. The install kept all my documents and I haven't had anything not work except for my video card. It still worked with a default Microsoft driver but not the dual screen output.
 
2012-10-29 08:09:40 PM  

Lost Thought 00: pkellmey: Windows 8 is ridiculously fast.

There is a caveat to this. Windows 8 is ridiculously fast IF you allow Microsoft to store all your information in their "cloud" and you keep your computer connect to the net at all times. Violate either of those, and it behaves just like every other version of windows and will get bogged down once you've installed a bunch of stuff on it (aka, after using it for a year)


Pass. I'm pretty irritated that Blizzard and Ubisoft do this for some of their games. I don't want my operating system to do the same...
 
2012-10-29 08:11:28 PM  
Picked it up for $15. I'll probably install it in 6 months after the bug fixes come out.
 
2012-10-29 08:13:03 PM  

oren0: Techhell: MrSteve007: Techhell: Thank you for so totally proving my point for me with a single, glorious graphic. Seriously, thank you - there's no way I could have done it better. And I'm totally saving that image to use in the future so I can prove my point when I need to make it again.

Your point is that you don't like being able to customize every iota of menu within Office? Because just a little bit ago, you were whining that you couldn't change anything in the ribbon.

No, my point is that everything I needed to find in 2003 was damned easy to find. You went to one of the menus - File, Edit, Insert, Format, Tools, etc. It was all there - now if you want to find things, you have to figure out where they're hidden. Then you have to display them. And if you aren't going to be using it on a constant basis, you either leave it on there so your ribbon gets full of crap you don't need, or you are constantly selecting it and unselecting it. Or you're keeping a list somewhere else of all the keyboard controls to use them instead.

And your graphic beautifully showed that.

A ribbon is a menu with pictures. Serious question: why is clicking "developer ribbon -> macros" in 2010 more work than clicking "tools -> macros" in 2003? The difference is that whichever ribbon is currently open is one click away instead of two. It sounds like your real complaint is that you have gotten used to where everything was and don't want to change, which is a very different complaint than "ribbons suck".


Way to miss the point by focusing on the singular example I used.

1) In the University Edition of MS Office, the Developer ribbon isn't active by default. You have to go in and activate it.
2) Most of the ribbons don't correspond to the 2003 menus; there isn't a "Tools" or "Edit" ribbon, for example. So you have to look through all of them to see if the command you want is on one of the ribbons. And then if it isn't, you have to go through options to figure out where they actually are now. With new menus like "Developer" instead of Tools (to continue to use my example you so doggedly latched onto to insult me with. good job with that.) and five or so ones that are quite new (Blog ribbons? Mailing ribbon? WTF? Fine, whatever.), trying to find the old commands is annoying as hell; I don't bother going to look anymore since it's moronic. I've used the Help option more times in the two months I've had 2010 than I did in the previous 6 years of learning 2003 and using it daily at work. Not because there's new things I want to try out in 2010 but because there's old things that I want to continue doing and I need to figure out whether I can still do it or not.
3) Why change the titles for the menus, if they are (as you seem to insinuate) supposed to be simply replacements for the menus?

/Really, what it sounds like to me is that you're one of those kinds of people who think that change = good because change is good, and anyone who thinks change isn't good is wrong because change is good.
 
2012-10-29 08:19:42 PM  

jaylectricity: I thought everybody knew to use every other new OS from Microsoft...2000, XP, 7...I'll be waiting for whatever comes AFTER 8.


God I still miss windows 2000. And I'm only 21. I never could crash or get that thing to lag.
/Also the OS-tan for it is awesome. ultrx.net
 
2012-10-29 08:21:09 PM  

Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

pants on fire stupid stuff from Redmond, and no amount of attempted hipster branding is going to change it.



Does anybody remember Microsoft Bob? Could Windows 8 be the next Bob?
 
2012-10-29 08:25:35 PM  
7.mshcdn.com

What's a Windows 8?
 
2012-10-29 08:39:40 PM  

Techhell: Way to miss the point by focusing on the singular example I used.

1) In the University Edition of MS Office, the Developer ribbon isn't active by default. You have to go in and activate it.
2) Most of the ribbons don't correspond to the 2003 menus; there isn't a "Tools" or "Edit" ribbon, for example. So you have to look through all of them to see if the command you want is on one of the ribbons. And then if it isn't, you have to go through options to figure out where they actually are now. With new menus like "Developer" instead of Tools (to continue to use my example you so doggedly latched onto to insult me with. good job with that.) and five or so ones that are quite new (Blog ribbons? Mailing ribbon? WTF? Fine, whatever.), trying to find the old commands is annoying as hell; I don't bother going to look anymore since it's moronic. I've used the Help option more times in the two months I've had 2010 than I did in the previous 6 years of learning 2003 and using it daily at work. Not because there's new things I want to try out in 2010 but because there's old things that I want to continue doing and I need to figure out whether I can still do it or not.


So you're upset that you first have to enable a single, fairly obscure menu (developer)? And then you complain about fairly useful tools, like being able to directly mail a document for review.

It's also true that items are located in different ribbon menus than the ancient system of 'edit.' Now it's much more obvious what to select. You want to insert something? Click on the "Insert" ribbon. Want to deal with layout issues? "Page Layout" Etc. It's pretty damned easy to figure out.
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
Looks to me like everything is pretty simple to find within, *at most,* 2-clicks. And if it isn't, you can customize a ribbon menu with all of your obscure controls.

That's the thing, you can't customize shiat in Office 2003. Some commands take 3-4 menus deep before you can get to them. Considering they're prepping Office 2012 for shipping, and you're still grasping to the hobbled 9-year old version of office, you have some issues adapting to change. Yes, it requires you to do something different. The thing is though, once you get used to it, the ribbon interface is much, much faster to work with in documents (let alone the 'right-click' context menu in Office '07, '10, '12 is a big productivity booster).
 
2012-10-29 09:04:56 PM  

MrSteve007: It's also true that items are located in different ribbon menus than the ancient system of 'edit.' Now it's much more obvious what to select. You want to insert something? Click on the "Insert" ribbon. Want to deal with layout issues? "Page Layout" Etc. It's pretty damned easy to figure out.


See, I don't think that's true. I think it is like taking people who learned on a QWERTY keyboard then giving them a LINOTYPE machine and saying, you can do a lot more, but you have to customize it first. It's more powerful though! Why are you complaining! It's like taking WORD away and giving them TeX and saying, you can do a lot more, but you have to learn about your new powerful tool first and customize it.

No, I don't give a fark about your new powerful tool, Microsoft, I want to do my goddamn job but this time without crashing in the middle and supporting my new printer.

I want to spend ZERO time up front reading howtos and watching videos and signing up for classes. I want it to work EXACTLY like it used to but faster UNTIL I need a new feature.

Making me customize it and recognize entries I never will use and return it to what it once was is a disfeature that strips added value.

Only when I want to learn about a new feature am I at all interested in reading about it. Otherwise, get it out of my face.

And I am sure my coworkers are even less tolerant about this than I am.

Anyway, that's how I feel.

My other problem with 2010 on all my computers is that it does weird broken things with mouse clicks. When I mouse over and click on FILE for instance, it almost always takes two clicks before the damn thing moves to FILE. Maybe it's just slow, but my computer while older ain't that slow, with a Core2 Quad CPU Q8300 @2.5Ghz and 6Gb running W64. But there are lots of places in the WORD 2010 app, and only the WORD 2010 app that my mouse clicks just go poof.
 
2012-10-29 09:14:32 PM  

Great_Milenko: [7.mshcdn.com image 600x375]

What's a Windows 8?


Something that's better than OS X.
 
2012-10-29 10:23:23 PM  
Windows 8 is wicked fast - been running it since RTM, and I'm still getting sub-10 second boot times - it takes longer to go through BIOS than it does to boot the OS and get to a usable screen.

You must be a Microsoft tool because they've been pushing this as an OS "goal" since NT 5.0 and somehow it never seems to happen.
 
2012-10-29 10:40:04 PM  
I don't think anyone's mentioned the video player stinks. Can't play a video in anything other than full screen, and there's no volume control in the player. The video stops playing as soon as you switch away from a player. All of these problems probably wouldn't even be noticed in a phone or on a tablet. But on a 28" LCD, it's a colossal flaw. I want to run a little video off to the side while I'm running another program in a different window. This version of Windows is the least window-y of all.
 
2012-10-29 10:47:55 PM  
let me share something I have been working on with windows 8..
all I want to do is add my music network folder on my NAS.
In windows 7 i can go to network and see the NAS no problem.. in windows 8 it does not show up. but i can go to the IP..

This is from the help file.

To Add a network folder that isn't indexed to a library

Open Computer by swiping in from the right edge of the screen, tapping Search (or if you're using a mouse, pointing to the up
per-right corner of the screen, moving the mouse pointer down, and then clicking Search), entering Computer in the search box, tapping or clicking Apps, and then tapping or clicking Computer.

Create a folder on your hard drive for your network folders, for example c:\share.

Create another folder within that folder, for example c:\share\music.

Select the subfolder you just created, tap or click the Home tab, tap or click Easy access, choose Include in library, and then select the library to which you want to add the folder.

Delete the folder.

Swipe in from the right edge of the screen, and then tap Search.
(If you're using a mouse, point to the upper-right corner of the screen, move the mouse pointer down, and then click Search.).

Enter cmd in the search box, and then tap or click Apps.

Press and hold or right-click Command Prompt in the search results, and then tap or click Run as administrator.

Enter mklink /d, and then enter the path of the folder you just deleted and the path of the network folder. For example, mklink /d c:\share\music \\server\music. This creates what is called a symbolic link.
 
2012-10-29 10:56:15 PM  

Kuroshin: StoPPeRmobile: [www.ssidisplays.com image 480x452]

Do they make a 42" version of that?


Yep, and have been eyeballing. Curious as to how it will work. About to pull the trigger on a 24".
 
2012-10-29 11:02:12 PM  

syrynxx: I don't think anyone's mentioned the video player stinks. Can't play a video in anything other than full screen, and there's no volume control in the player. The video stops playing as soon as you switch away from a player. All of these problems probably wouldn't even be noticed in a phone or on a tablet. But on a 28" LCD, it's a colossal flaw. I want to run a little video off to the side while I'm running another program in a different window. This version of Windows is the least window-y of all.


That's the video player in Metro? Download Windows Media Player (Free at the moment for W8) and open it in Desktop and it works exactly like WMP in W7 or XP.
I also use Media Player Classic.
Both of these will happily run in the background or minimised.
 
2012-10-29 11:05:20 PM  

ColSanders: LesserEvil: With Windows 8, I feel like "Windows 8 Secrets" would be the manual for doing all the "normal" things I need to do to be productive... need to close an app? Look at secret tip #45.

This I agree with, even though I like 8 overall. Microsoft actually made 8 very Apple-like in some ways. It took me a while to realize that, as with OS X, closing a program doesn't really close it. It's cute that you can swipe down to close an app, but would it have killed them to leave a red X in the corner, too?


All this talk about making Win8 easier to use on a desktop makes no sense considering that their goal is to kill the desktop, and finally move on.

"This transformation is going to make some people uneasy because the PC has taken us a long ways. It's brilliant. We like to talk about the post-PC era, but when it really starts to happen, it's uncomfortable." -- Steve Jobs, 2010
 
2012-10-29 11:09:16 PM  

Mcavity: all I want to do is add my music network folder on my NAS.


Yikes. Reminds me of trying to add NAS folders to a library in Win7.
 
2012-10-29 11:34:17 PM  

Kazan: NowhereMon: : It's a tablet, it's a laptop , it's a tablet, it's a laptop...

i'm on a horse!


Is it in a bathroom?

/nothing is obscure on Fark
 
2012-10-29 11:34:46 PM  

sendtodave: Reminds me of trying to add NAS folders to a library in Win7.


Agreed. I found the Win 7 Library Tool (from Zorn Software) to be really handy for adding SMB shares to a library. Otherwise, Win 7 will throw up errors about adding mapped drives and the like.
 
2012-10-29 11:35:40 PM  

Fark Me To Tears: Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

pants on fire stupid stuff from Redmond, and no amount of attempted hipster branding is going to change it.

Does anybody remember Microsoft Bob?


No, of course not. And no one else has ever thought it clever to skip even-numbered MS OSes, either.
 
2012-10-29 11:55:40 PM  
DRTFA, DRTFT: Probably because Windows 7 is great, Vista was crap, 8 looks garbage, and people are leary of getting burned on an upgrade, and tech-heads are conflicted on recommendations.
 
2012-10-30 12:09:09 AM  

MrSteve007: Techhell: Way to miss the point by focusing on the singular example I used.

1) In the University Edition of MS Office, the Developer ribbon isn't active by default. You have to go in and activate it.
2) Most of the ribbons don't correspond to the 2003 menus; there isn't a "Tools" or "Edit" ribbon, for example. So you have to look through all of them to see if the command you want is on one of the ribbons. And then if it isn't, you have to go through options to figure out where they actually are now. With new menus like "Developer" instead of Tools (to continue to use my example you so doggedly latched onto to insult me with. good job with that.) and five or so ones that are quite new (Blog ribbons? Mailing ribbon? WTF? Fine, whatever.), trying to find the old commands is annoying as hell; I don't bother going to look anymore since it's moronic. I've used the Help option more times in the two months I've had 2010 than I did in the previous 6 years of learning 2003 and using it daily at work. Not because there's new things I want to try out in 2010 but because there's old things that I want to continue doing and I need to figure out whether I can still do it or not.

So you're upset that you first have to enable a single, fairly obscure menu (developer)? And then you complain about fairly useful tools, like being able to directly mail a document for review.

It's also true that items are located in different ribbon menus than the ancient system of 'edit.' Now it's much more obvious what to select. You want to insert something? Click on the "Insert" ribbon. Want to deal with layout issues? "Page Layout" Etc. It's pretty damned easy to figure out.
[sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net image 850x177]
Looks to me like everything is pretty simple to find within, *at most,* 2-clicks. And if it isn't, you can customize a ribbon menu with all of your obscure controls.

That's the thing, you can't customize shiat in Office 2003. Some commands take 3-4 menus deep before you can get to them ...


Look how much space that takes up. Look how cluttered all the icons are. Look how offset and unaligned all the words are. Now look at one of the old drop down menus:

www.addintools.com

Clean, stacked, packed, efficient, aligned, all right there.

Sometimes change is great. Sometimes it isn't. Dropdown file menus have been standard for a long time for a reason. They're simple, effective, fast. Also, you could customize toolbars in Word 2003.
 
2012-10-30 12:42:41 AM  

natmar_76: Look how much space that takes up. Look how cluttered all the icons are. Look how offset and unaligned all the words are. Now look at one of the old drop down menus:

Clean, stacked, packed, efficient, aligned, all right there.


You say the ribbon takes up too much space, then show an example of how efficient the old system is. You ever notice how much empty space that menu has? You call that packed and efficient? Dude, it's 75% empty, gray area.

Most of the ribbon menus have a 'carrot' in the bottom corner, pulling out all the rest of the options for that area. Doesn't get much more simple and data packed than that.

Example: two clicks to bring up all of the colors in one menu.
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net

It's been a while (about 5 years now) since I've used the old interface of 2003. Care to show me how many steps it takes to do that up in the old menus? If you're feeling extra smug about the old menu, why don't you tell me how much more efficient it is to pull up a print preview. If you take a look at the example above, you'll see it takes one click with the 'quick access toolbar' in the top left.
 
2012-10-30 12:53:51 AM  
To change font color? You can put a button on the toolbar that takes one click.
 
2012-10-30 01:03:14 AM  

MrSteve007: Looks to me like everything is pretty simple to find within, *at most,* 2-clicks. And if it isn't, you can customize a ribbon menu with all of your obscure controls.


The thing I don't like about the Ribbon is that I'm very keyboard centric. I know that isn't the typical user but I like pressing "Alt-T" and seeing all my tools. The commands I still remember do still work, to MS' credit, but all this Metro and Ribbon stuff is for mouse and touchscreen users. I end up using Help far more often just to look up how to do things I learned back in Office 97, and that's another thing about Win8 I'm resistant to. The change for no reason other than Microsoft decided to change it.

/Get off my lawn
//even though I'm only 30
 
2012-10-30 01:10:50 AM  

natmar_76: To change font color? You can put a button on the toolbar that takes one click.


Try again. It isn't just a single font color, its changing the document's default colors to match theme.
 
2012-10-30 01:19:24 AM  

Gig103: The change for no reason other than Microsoft decided to change it.


I have a bit of a different view, since MS uses me occasionally for their user studies, (all of what I've done is under NDA) but you realize that when people click the "send usage stats," MS tracks every click, selection and default setting of Office (aka. telemetry).

With some 1.4 billion users and decades of data, they know how many trillions of times a certain setting is opened or adjusted. They sift through that data and decide to make changes to better fit the usage patterns of 98% of the users out there. They spend $9-billion a year in pure R&D to figure this stuff out.

Yet, people think this sort of stuff is just randomly changed for no reason . . .
 
Displayed 50 of 222 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report