Re: Whither GUI conventions?

"Joseph M. Newcomer" <newcomer@flounder.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:1rfrn3dppoq42i0rkscnrjtl38du52cc48@4ax.com...


Same for me.

In fact, I still prefer using the Office 2003 interface.

....maybe we need more training?

This makes me recall to memory a fact of some years ago. A relative of mine
who is a lawyer used a software (it was basically a database to find Italian
laws and jurisprudence stuff stored in CDs, and to write some text documents
for civil trials), this software was written for MS-DOS. The user interface
was made by text-based menus and keystrokes, like: press "P" to print
current document, "F" --> find a law, "S" --> save document, etc.
Some years ago the software house that developed that software discontinued
the MS-DOS version (which run under DOS-box on Windows 98), and only
supported a Windows version. The new Windows-only version offered (and still
offers) integration with Microsoft Word (pre-ribbon, Word XP), to edit
documents.

I helped him with the new Windows version of the software, and I was
surprised that he was not happy of Windows GUIs and Word interface. He
preferred the keystroke based interface and text menus with just an
horizontal bar under the screen and the "Print Find.. etc.." line of
commands.
He found all the graphical icons on toolbars and menus of Word
counterproductive; he found them too confusing. (In fact, I told him about
the open, new, save and italic/bold/underline buttons, and I told him to
just ignore all the other buttons and icons :) He found Word's Clippy
distracting.
He just loved the minimal text-based user interface of the DOS version of
the application he used for his work. He found that text-based
user-interface to be the top quality for productivity for his own job.

I think that before producing the ribbon interface, the Office team did lots
of research and maybe they have also some PhD level experts in GUI design
and human-computer interfaces... maybe these are just *not* "exact" sciences
:)

Giovanni