Windows Vista wasn't exactly a success, and as such, Microsoft needed different people to manage the development of Windows 7. One of those new people is Julie Larson-Green, who made a very good showing with Microsoft Office 2007, which took the bold move of replacing the menu-driven interface with the newly designed Ribbon interface. The Sydney Morning Herald (awesome name) decided to take a look at who, exactly, Larson-Green is.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
I'm sure most people agree, but many people find that the boring way to do things. Especially in Open Source software people do what's fun first and what needs to be done later (if at all). It's the nature of the beast.
I know, for examplem that on the open source app I'm currently hacking on I'm doing things exactly the wrong way. I should be looking at how users in the relevant domain currently work and what they actually need, then I should design a UI that focuses on those aspect etc. etc.
What I'm actually doing is starting with the fun low level stuff. Reading up on the current state of the art, trying out new algorithms, playing around with multithreading and clever data structures and having great fun and learning all kinds of cool stuff along the way. On the plus side I've tuned a bunch of things so that they run several times faster than then 'normal' approach. On the minus side I don't actually have anything useable for people other than me (and barely even that) yet.
Member since:2006-12-28
I agree, but I would go one further.
CLI programs need a good, consistent interface too or at least consistent with the other CLI programs on that specific platform. This is one problem many UNIX admins have.
Take for example "find", available on all *nixs. Find has a syntax that is unlike any other tool I have ever found. If you are a new user and have just figured out how to start using the CLI, "find" can very quickly scare you off from trying to delve any deeper into the system.
It's a shame really as "find" is a very useful tool.
Member since:2006-03-31
I like your argument that command line tools also have a user interface. However, I wish to add to your argument. The reason why many people believe that command line tools lack a user interface is because they are at least an order of magnitude less complicated than graphical interfaces. It's no surprise. The amount of code and computer resources that goes into a graphical interface far exceeds command line ones. That's why people are so quick to dismiss the existence of command line interfaces.
Member since:2005-07-06
Ain't that the truth. Most of the time, I find it's easier to just resort to kludges like "ls -l -R | grep filename" than trying to remember the "find" syntax.
Member since:2006-04-22
My first experience with the Ribbon interface was not that pleasant, but it really did not take long before I realized why there was such buzz. After I became accustomed to it, and had the task of editing multiple documents quickly, I soon realized how much more efficient this interface was for me.
CLI programs need a good, consistent interface too or at least consistent with the other CLI programs on that specific platform. This is one problem many UNIX admins have.
Take for example "find", available on all *nixs. Find has a syntax that is unlike any other tool I have ever found. If you are a new user and have just figured out how to start using the CLI, "find" can very quickly scare you off from trying to delve any deeper into the system.
It's a shame really as "find" is a very useful tool.
In regards to syntax, I saw that Microsoft is offering their new Powershell tools through Update. Of course this is very limited/initial opinion, but I was simply shell shocked at just how inefficient the syntax was. To copy a folder from location A to B while keeping ACLs was not a simply matter of a small command to be given, but rather a long scripted line. Again this was a very preliminary look so I very well could have missed something completely, Afterwards I just thought how gratefull I should be that this is not in my domain anymore to learn this.
Member since:
2005-12-31
I always find it strange that people tend to think of the UI as "a necessary evil that needs to be there in place for us to be able to perform all our cool actions". This is especially true for many open source projects.
I've always considered the UI as one of the key components of a graphical application, and downplaying the importance of "getting it right" - from a users perspective can effectively ruin an otherwise perfectly good application.
Designing a graphical application around the way it is going to be used, and making sure that the UI is good and intuitive, before designing the nitty-gritty functionality, seems to me like doing it right.
Unless you're working on a command-line tool where UI isn't really that important. Just seems that often it is the same programmers creating both kinds of programs leading to bad UIs becoming the standard.
Edited 2009-04-21 10:50 UTC