lkerr said:
The ribbon, as far as I've used it, is probably the best development in Office for a while ... It also seriously reduces the number of clicks to get to certain menu options in 2003.
This may depend on which application you are using. I hate it in Word; it may reduce the number of keystrokes for a few things but increases it for most (what were) simple actions. It may be less intrusive and less of a problem in Excel - I haven't used it enough to tell.
Microsoft, apparently, expect a third of users to love it, a third to hate it, and a third not to care. For such a major redesign of the user interface expecting to alienate 100m+ customers amazes me but they must have an idea where they're going.
The general consensus seems to be that the lack of customization is a serious shortcoming; Microsoft, on the other hand, have deliberately and explicitly made it that way saying that customization causes problems for lots of users. Actually it isn't entirely true that customization isn't possible - it just isn't possible using the tools ordinary users will have; it is possible, to an extent, with COM AddIns and xml but definitely requires expertise outside the application. I guess time will tell whether they have got it right.
UI aside, the default xml format being sort of public makes working with documents and workbooks outside Office easier - other applications can now create them without needing extra Office licences and I suspect this may well be done in corporate environmnets. VB Projects, though, remain in the old undocumented compound file format. The separate 'x' and 'm' file types provide a veneer of safety - a superficial barrier to viruses but I'm not sure what else. Zipping files makes them smaller - the cynic in me thinks this is designed to make people think that the files are not as bloated as they used to be (which, in a sense, they're not) but, of course, they won't see significant further reduction of file sizes when they explicitly zip files themselves.
There are added features - live preview, themes, etc. which are a bit glitzy. Excel has gained by the removal of some limits but Word seems to have changed without really improving, for example the new building blocks which replace and 'extend' autotext.
Overall I don't think there's enough for companies to spend millions to replace perfectly adequate 2002/2003 versions (maybe some heavy Excel users will see benefits) but those planning to upgrade from 97 (a bit out of date now) and 2000 (still perfectly adequate for many users) will probably go straight to it. Once it is released it won't be possible to buy older versions so there is an element of compulsion of course. The other side of the coin, as it were, is that if you have to learn (and train your staff in) what is effectively a new product,why not change to a completely new, possibly cheaper, product? I think MS is still ahead of the game in many respects but I don't think this release does anything to further their position.
Once upon a time people had newer versions of Office at work than at home, then it turned the other way round and that gave an impetus to companies to upgrade; now it's got to be such a big - and expensive - product that many home users stick with older versions or no version at all as it doesn't ship with new PCs any more.
I think I'm starting to ramble. I'll stop.
Enjoy,
Tony
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We want to help you; help us to do it by reading this: Before you ask a question.
Professional Office Developers Association
![[glasses]](/data/assets/smilies/glasses.gif "[glasses] [glasses]")
[red][/red]![[tongue]](/data/assets/smilies/tongue.gif "[tongue] [tongue]")