Yes, most people are averse to change. However, in this case, every user who
responded to that survey, pro or con, tried out the Ribbon. There are some
who have used it for months and STILL find it to be slow and cumbersome.
Before I used the trial version of Office 2007, I had no preconceived
opinions of the Ribbon. I tried it out for several weeks. It was an enormous
productivity killer. I did not see (and still don't see) any reason to invest
time and effort to learn a whole new user interface (and a cumbersome one at
that) merely because some hotshot over at MS thinks it's a good idea not to
provide a classic UI.
"As for MS data, I suppose the number of UPgrade sales from the trial would
be as good as it is."
Nope! That includes corporate upgrades and thus includes "captive" users.
"the world is full of examples where "productivity" is initially lost where
a process is changed, and the up side is when the "new method" is adopted the
productivity increases over the old method."
Sure! However, in this case, there are many who have used it for months on
end and see zero benefit. I used it for a few weeks. Thankfully, I am not
beholden to some corporate suit dictating which Office version I need to use.
"What amazes me..."
I think that's very obvious. Once again, there are many users who have used
the Ribbon for months and don't care for it one little bit. They're under the
gun to get their work done, with the Ribbon slowing them down and they're
mandated to use the silly thing. That's like asking someone to win the
marathon carrying a heavy load on their back. I'm not at all surprised that
those folks dislike the Ribbon intensely.
"The reasons why it was done should be enlightning. "
I did read a lot of Jensen Harris' posts. Sorry, no cigar. JH talks of all
the data that was analyzed and led to the design of the Ribbon. Most of his
explanations are utterly unconvincing. What he avoided answering was what
kind of users were profiled (beginners, intermediate, advanced), were users
behind corporate firewalls included, etc. The basic user data that was used
as the basis itself is highly suspect. The fact that JH avoided answering
those questions speaks volumes.
"When you pause to consider what the ribbon DOES bring to the table,
productivity goes up because you have all the tools there."
There are many, including me, who would not agree with that statement one
iota. As that survey plainly shows, the Ribbon has been a productivity killer
for advanced users.
As far as the OS/2 comment, IBM had the attitude, "We are IBM. When we put
out a product, customers will accept it without question". That pretty much
sank OS/2. How do I know? I was at IBM during those years. MS was the
beneficiary of that arrogant attitude. Now, it's MS telling long term users,
"We don't care what you want" in so many words, by not providing a classic UI
alternative for those (esp. l/t users) who didn't like/want the Ribbon UI.
Oh yes, do read the rest of the survey after that productivity killer
section. It is very informative indeed.
Oh yes, those who don't like the Ribbon and come here looking if they can
get away from it, are not going to be won over with some of these snippy,
arrogant, juvenile, condescending responses they receive.
I thought you