OSNews

I realize, though, that I am probably on a sinking ship regarding the WordPerfect file format. The aforementioned review's talk about "formats now being more important than word processors" got me thinking about how I was in effect locked into the WordPerfect format. I want to reach the Zen state of application independence described in the article - I want to be able to read and edit my documents in whatever word processor I want! So I've decided to convert all of my WordPerfect files and preserve them in a more widely readable format. And believe it or not, that format isn't ODF - it's MS Word 97-2003.

Now before you go rush into the comments section to call me a sell-out, may I urge you to read a bit further. Let me just say that I am a practicalist. The MS Word 97-2003 format is the one format that pretty much all word-processing apps can reliably read and write to, and in many cases they can even be set up to save in this format by default. It's a de facto standard. It's not perfect, and it's certainly been a rough road getting to the level of compatibility we're at right now, but we're there, and it's supported - by every single (mainstream OS-targeted) word processing program in development today.

When the day comes that I finally decide to move onto another word processor, be it OpenOffice, AbiWord, or Word 2007 (much as I hate to admit it, the UI junkie part of me is yearning to try it), I will never have to worry about compatibility... It will just be there. And that, to me, is more important than upholding a personal file-format ideology which, until ODF truly becomes fully supported everywhere, would just serve to make my life more complicated. So, just as I rip all my music to MP3 (despite the supposed advantages of AAC and WMA and the real advantages of OGG) because I want to avoid application/device lock-in, I'll convert my documents to .doc format and avoid word-processor lock-in.

So that's that. Until at least next year, when ODF really gets integrated everywhere, consider DOC the new MP3. You heard it here first. Now there's one more point I want to bring up before I finish.

User interfaces still need help

The user interfaces of office programs have really suffered because of the factors leading up to this point in time: They came from disparate roots whose Windows versions sprung up near simultaneously (WP, Ami Pro, Word, and StarOffice), and thereafter the one with the worst interface actually won out in the market. The result is that there is a lack of sensible interface conventions in office programs. What I mean by this is that to this day we do not have any kind of consensus on where the user should look for line formatting, for page formatting, for headers, for borders, etc. This problem is relatively severe when compared to the established conventions that have developed in OS/DE-level GUIs, where despite the many differences between MacOS, Windows, Gnome and KDE, there are enough shared interface conventions across all of them that most users who have experience with one environment will quickly be able to figure out how to perform similar actions on another environment. For instance, actions such as changing the wallpaper, the look and feel, the mouse settings or the resolution almost always involve a "Control Panel" of sorts. The users know to go there, since it's logical - if it's a setting, it's in there.

By contrast, where is the logic in setting margins by going into the File menu? Where is the logic in setting page numbers throughout the document by editing the header of a single page, and why must I create a custom page style simply to avoid putting a page number on the first page? There is absolutely no reason that I, who consider myself a fairly advanced computer user, should have to search through the online help just to figure out how to set page numbers. There is no reason page numbers should be non-trivial or take up more than five minutes of my time, period. And yet, in MS Office 2003 and OpenOffice 2.1, this is the case. And it's just the tip of the iceberg.

This lack of sensible, standardized interface conventions is the result of MS winning the office wars. If WordPerfect had won, perhaps we would all be using the kind of intuitive interfaces found in WP6.1. Yet sadly, MS's stranglehold on the market has negatively influenced other programs' UIs to be less coherent and more idiosyncratic (because they have either created their own from-scratch UIs or embraced the chaos that is Office's). And of course these competitors' resultant poor UIs have only served to help Office reinforce its own entrenchment, and so the cycle has continued.

But the fact that MS has released as huge of a change as Office 2007 is a momentous occasion which calls for much celebration, because (if you look at it from an angle other than "MS just wants to hijack ODF, oh I hate them so much") it has the potential to reinvigorate the stagnant, status quo office software scene. The result could be that the WordPerfect and OpenOffice developers finally reconsider their strategy of imitating Microsoft, and start reorganizing and improving their interfaces so they actually make more sense and are easier to use! The potential is there for a new renaissance in the refinement of office software UI. KOffice already took the first brave steps, but now Microsoft has officially thrown down the gauntlet! Who will step up to the challenge?

About the author:
Michael Klein is a 24-year-old student of computers, music, and life.