Amiga UI Style Guide

[carvedeye]

Wow great site, added to favourites

[Thorham]

No logical consistency... A total failure of interface design.

Isn't it up to the GUI designers to put similar functions in different software in the same places in the GUIs of those programs? Don't see how it's the ribbon's fault. It's like saying tool bars are bad because designers put icons all over the place instead of using logical locations, etc.

I'm not convinced ribbons are bad just because designers make a mess when using them.

[bloodline]

Isn't it up to the GUI designers to put similar functions in different software in the same places in the GUIs of those programs? Don't see how it's the ribbon's fault. It's like saying tool bars are bad because designers put icons all over the place instead of using logical locations, etc.

I'm not convinced ribbons are bad just because designers make a mess when using them.

No, you miss the point. I have no problem with "favourites" or short cut bars/dock... But the ribbon interface eliminates the concept of standard locations to find standard functions. Locations that have never changed since the earliest days of the graphical user interface. The ribbon might be a perfectly acceptable concept (in fact it is quite an old concept of a quick launching dock), but as usual Microsoft have managed to screw up the implementation massively!

-edit- Also you might not know, but the ribbon encourages the user to put the functions they want where they want, there is no other way to find the function!

[commodorejohn]

Never used ribbons... why are they so bad?

Any more examples?

As has been said, the ribbon interface A. completely disrupts the workflow of anybody accustomed to the way Office looked for just about the entirety of its history prior to 2007, and B. doesn't even do so to any tangible benefit - the quality of organization is middling at best and certainly not a noticeable improvement, and it nonsensically attempts to create spatial organization for a former hierarchical list of menu commands by the much-less-intuitive-than-it-sounds maxim of "frequently-used things big and in the center, less-frequently-used things small and spaced around the perimeter." It's wildly confusing, and half the "less-frequently-used" stuff (little things like, you know, page setup) is just hidden behind teeny buttons that pop up traditional dialogs anyway. It also worsens Office's "toolbar wasteland syndrome" because you're not allowed to customize or hide the ribbon as you could with the toolbars. And worst of all, there's no option to go back to the traditional interface unless you resort to hacks.

Really, the ribbon encapsulates most of the worst developments in UI design since the late '80s: it's visually-oriented for no other reason than that it gave the design department something to do (shades of Quicktime's horrible old "drawer" interface,) it chews through screen real estate (I wouldn't dream of trying to use Office 2007 on my 1024x768 laptop, I only just have a usefully-sized work area on my 1280x1024 display at work,) it forces massive visual information overload on the user for the sake of "quick access" to functions that they typically aren't even using at the moment, it displays the modern "design diva" approach to UI by not even allowing you to turn it off or rearrange it the way the old Office toolbars did, and, as bloodline says, it isn't even consistent.

[DLH]

All 5 books from the Third Edition have now been posted.
 
Amiga ROM Kernal Reference Manual Devices (596 pages)
Amiga User Interface Style Guide Third Edition (218 pages)
Amiga Hardware Reference Manual Third Edition (484 pages)
Amiga ROM Kernal Reference Includes and Autodocs 3rd Edition (1012 pages)
Amiga ROM Kernal Reference Manual Libraries Third Edition (887 pages)
 
http://www.bombjack.org/commodore/amiga-books.htm
 
Enjoy
 
DLH

[itix]

I stuck with Office 2004(?) rather than upgrade to the XP-ribbon package. The odd day of working despite it while hotdesking on someone else's machine was enough.

I simply never used the ribbon - I'm sure it works well for what it does, but as I knew the relevant 8x8 pixel icons in word/excel at a glance (although I knew where they were anyway so rarely actually looked at/for them), they worked 'fine for me.'

My problem is not with the user interface design per-se, but with having fundamental changes foisted upon one which disrupt an established workflow. Changing menu entry locations/tree structures (and therefore the keyboard combination/sequence which activates it) between versions is a prime example.

I started with Microsoft Office 2007 so I dont have that problem.

[itix]

The ribbon interface totally brain damaged. It Eliminates consistency and logic from interface design.

Want to use a cut and or paste function in excel... It's in one place, probably called review... Want to use the same function in word... It's somewhere else... Perhaps home? Ok, once you have managed to set the ribbons up so you can find everything... Then you have to help a colleague... But you try and use their computer and everything is in the wrong place...

In menu driven application you would have to scan through menu to see if copy/paste is in edit menu or not. For example on Amiga applications you dont always find it from menu at all. But that is not fault of menu system.

[itix]

No, you miss the point. I have no problem with "favourites" or short cut bars/dock... But the ribbon interface eliminates the concept of standard locations to find standard functions. Locations that have never changed since the earliest days of the graphical user interface. The ribbon might be a perfectly acceptable concept (in fact it is quite an old concept of a quick launching dock), but as usual Microsoft have managed to screw up the implementation massively!!

If standards never changed the standard would be IBM PC with monochrome graphics.

Is it logical that load/save and print/preferences/quit are under project menu? Is it logical that there are three different paste functions in edit menu but create table and similar is found in another? Is it good UI design to have long and deep menus? Or is it good UI design to have dozen toolbars by default with 8x8 icons without any explanation what they do unless you scan through icons to read tooltips?

Ribbon interface has design issues but other interface styles are not necessarily any better.

[takemehomegrandma]

I started with Microsoft Office 2007 so I dont have that problem.

I started with Office 95 myself, I mostly use Word and PowerPoint (sometimes Excel), and even if some things has changed during the years, the core functionality has always remained the same. It's really the same in Office 2007 and onwards, Word for example is the same program with the same core functions and capabilities, with the only difference that it has become impossible (almost) to find some functions you want to use, especially those you use more seldom. More than once I have had to use the help function or even google to find out how to do certain things that I simply did without thinking in previous versions, and I consider myself to be an experienced user that shouldn't really have to search for basic things like that. Maybe ribbon UI's are great for some programs, especially those with limited functionality perhaps, but in the case of MS Office I'd say "if it ain't broken, don't fix it".

Unfortunately they did...

[bloodline]

@Itix

I'm having difficult following your reasoning here. My point was that before, functions were arrange hierarchically under the same headings regardless of which office Application you were using. They were grouped logically, so even if the heading was vague (like "Project", where "File" might be a better title), once you found one file system related function, you had found them all, for example. This has been removed in favour of a set of customisable quick launch tool bars.  With the ribbon, there is no structure... The spell check is next to the find and replace... Style option are with the cut and paste... Saving, loading and print settings (but not the page layout options!?) have been moved to a completely separate screen!? Also Microsoft have decided that some items can't share a ribbon, so it doesn't even work as well as a quick launch tool bar.

I think the ribbon would be a fine addition to the interface, if they hadn't removed the original (20 year old) interface structure that has worked well on every desktop system since Xerox first put one together!

I'm not saying I don't want change, I'm simply pointing out that this one was a royal screw up... Other changes have come along and been such a step forward I almost didn't notice their addition.

Also Excel 2010 likes to crash a lot... 2003 was rock solid, but this is a personal gripe.

[takemehomegrandma]

The last book of that set of 5 will be posted tomorrow.

Just downloaded it. Thank you very much!

[itix]

@Itix

I'm having difficult following your reasoning here. My point was that before, functions were arrange hierarchically under the same headings regardless of which office Application you were using. They were grouped logically, so even if the heading was vague (like "Project", where "File" might be a better title), once you found one file system related function, you had found them all, for example.

If I wasnt a programmer I wouldnt know what Load/Save and printing have in common.

This has been removed in favour of a set of customisable quick launch tool bars.  With the ribbon, there is no structure... The spell check is next to the find and replace...

To me this sound logical.

Style option are with the cut and paste...

It makes sense to me.

Saving, loading and print settings (but not the page layout options!?) have been moved to a completely separate screen!?

I dont see problem.

Also Microsoft have decided that some items can't share a ribbon, so it doesn't even work as well as a quick launch tool bar.

I think the ribbon would be a fine addition to the interface, if they hadn't removed the original (20 year old) interface structure that has worked well on every desktop system since Xerox first put one together!

I'm not saying I don't want change, I'm simply pointing out that this one was a royal screw up... Other changes have come along and been such a step forward I almost didn't notice their addition.

I dont understand what makes it so difficult. When I am writing documentation using Word I am spending 99% of my time on writing and 1% on ribbon interface.

Also Excel 2010 likes to crash a lot... 2003 was rock solid, but this is a personal gripe.

Must be ribbon interface ;-)

[itix]

Maybe ribbon UI's are great for some programs, especially those with limited functionality perhaps, but in the case of MS Office I'd say "if it ain't broken, don't fix it".

True statement. However, if Office 2007 was the first MS Office package ever you wouldnt mind about it. But yes, changing user interface is not cool if you are used to old interface.

[bloodline]

True statement. However, if Office 2007 was the first MS Office package ever you wouldnt mind about it. But yes, changing user interface is not cool if you are used to old interface.

If office 2007 was the first you had used... It would also be the last... IMNSHO :-p

[Boot_WB]

If office 2007 was the first you had used... It would also be the last...

It's just that good?

I started with Word 97 on a 486 portable running Windows 3.1.
Spent a long time with Office 2000, and finally onto 2003 (thanks for the reminder) for a few years.

97 - 2000 was a blissful expansion of functionality, but what little had originated from 97 remained basically the same in terms of menus and keyboard activation.
The changes from 2000 - 2003 were annoying (insert>picture (alt, i, p) became insert > object (alt, i, o ... wait for appelet to appear ... scroll down list of object types ... select 'image')).
2003 > 2007 was just a completely new UI, and might as well be a change of program entirely.

For comprehensive Word/Excel users (and I mean across a broad range of their massive functionality, not just knowing how to format fonts, bullet points and paragraphs or do a vlookup), such a change in UI is crippling, and can easily double the time taken to prepare a document to professional standards (even just using relatively basic functionality like references, indices, tables of figures/equations/contents and consistent styles).
God knows what the industry cost was for companies which blindly upgraded, just in lost productivity as people struggled to adjust to the new interface.

I didn't even bother trying Excel after trying to use Word. I'm just grateful MS issued the Office 2003 compatibility pack (docx, etc) which essentially extended the life of 2003 for another few years.