jwcolby
jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
Sat Aug 8 14:09:24 CDT 2009
Shamil, In fact you picked a bad example to demonstrate your old / new interface argument. The auto is so standardized that you can go anywhere around the world and the ONLY thing that may throw you a curve is the steering wheel on the left / right. The Accelerator / brake / clutch is identical. The shift patterns for manual tend to be identical, or at least similar enough that you can very quickly adapt. The column auto gear shift, virtually identical, the center auto shift patterns, almost identical. So almost any seasoned driver can go almost anywhere in the world (that I have seen anyway), jump in a car and at least peel away from the bad guys. When you get down to lights, wipers... a handful of pretty standard locations. I guess my point is that to completely redesign the interface needs a reason... and I certainly don't see that reason. Excel is still Excel, it did not undergo a radical redesign that simply wouldn't work under the old interface. Same with Word, Access etc. In fact I found a widget that would somehow convert Office 2007 to use the old interface, which completely thrashes the "needed for new technology" mantra. As for asking developers... I truly do not think so. I have heard, and it is admittedly pure hearsay, that they have a huge usability lab and they basically did usability studies and decided that the usability could be enhanced. I will not argue that. But did they do the usability studies AFTER deciding to completely change the interface, in order to make the new one as efficient as they could? MAYBE the new toolbar is more efficient for "brand new, never seen this widget before" users. And of course MS owns the product and can do with it what they want. The irritation comes from the fact that if you HAVE used the product before, if you have spent 10 years using it, then the new toolbars are a huge time suck trying to adapt. It is EXACTLY the same thing as taking a guitar and stringing it backwards and telling Eric Clapton "hey, it is just a guitar, it does exactly the same thing". Yea RIGHT. It does do the same thing, but Eric just can't play it without completely relearning the manual interface. Have you ever heard of the DVorak keyboard? It is supposedly a much more efficient design but who is going to go learn to use it? You get my point. Microsoft owns office and they are in a position to FORCE the world to change, and that is what they are doing. You can bet your bottom dollar it is for their own reasons. Usability? Maybe. Or maybe they had lost control of the interface and had competition designing office products that looked identical but were free (Open Office anyone?) and maybe a redesign could be copyrighted or even patented... MS would never admit to any such motivations but given that it is apparently possible to install a widget that takes you back to the old interface, it is NOT because it was impossible to use the old interface. John W. Colby www.ColbyConsulting.com Shamil Salakhetdinov wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > Thank you for your comment. > As I noted I do not intend to start MS Access 2007 vs. MS Access X (<2007) > discussion I just wanted to agree with Arthur therefore this will be my > final post in this thread. > > BTW, but my previous posting I didn't mean that MS Access 2007 is better/has > better interface than MS Access X (<2007) - I just wanted to note that I > like MS Access 2007 a lot when it happens to do some development with it. I > also didn't mean that MS likes/listen to opinions of all of MS Access > developers and users but I'm quite sure that they(MS) do a lot of > investigations, which involve many developers and users who do use MS > Access/Office in their everyday work (I do not belong to this MS selected > elite group), before they (MS) introduce the GUI changes as they did for MS > Office/Access 2007. > > Short note (just a note - no discussion/arguing) about "throwing away a good > percentage of their knowledge" - we're in IT/software development business - > that kind of "previous experience losses" happens every day - and more and > more with every new day. It's inevitable. Have a look at the cars: what > external and internal "interface" they had in 80-ies/beginning-middle of > 90-es and what they have now? MS Access/Office interface was quite the same > since MS Access/Office 95/97 (and its ideas/principles are from > 80-ies/90-ies). It was time to change it for MS Access/Office 2007. > > Not going into flame mode, not defending MS, just trying to be realistic. > (Sure somebody will find my above passages stupid. No problem.) > > Thank you. > > -- > Shamil > > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Thomas Ewald > Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 9:23 PM > To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com > Subject: Re: [AccessD] Access poll > > One of the poll options mentioned something like "Microsoft must hate Access > developers." Why developers...how about users? And why stick with > Access...all of Office was changed. Can you say "New Coke"? Microsoft took > the best known office interface in the world and changed it, insisting that > its millions (!) of users have to throw away a good percentage of their > knowledge and start over. Not all of their knowledge, of course, but a good > percentage. And why? Because they had too many options to fit in their > menuing system - their easily adaptable menuing system? > > I'm not at the level of some of you, but I do Access (and Excel) > development. Beyond that, though, I USE Access and Excel a great deal, and > Microsoft is apparently intent on making much of my knowledge and experience > obsolete (How politically correct: Level the playing field by removing the > value of experience.). > > Since I make my living using and developing Access and Excel, I'll have to > learn the ribbon eventually, unless Microsoft decides to dump it later, but > I'm in no hurry. Like most companies, my employer and my current outside > client are both in no hurry to migrate, so I'm safe for now. > > Thanks for listening. > > Tom Ewald > Detroit Area > > Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 20:58:30 +0400 > <<<All the bad-mouthing about Access 2007 is based on a failure to > investigate what profound improvements lurk therein.>>> > > Agreed. > Not going to start Access X (<2007) vs. Access 2007) flame. > Just stating about my experience with MS Access 2007 development. > And as you know I have intensive experience with working with MS Access > since MS Access 1.1, especially with Access 2.0, Access 97, skipped Access > 95, almost skipped MS Access 2000 and MS Access 2002(XP) and I have done > quite a lot of development work with MS Access 2003. You can find software I > have done running all over the world for all MS Access versions including MS > Access 2007 - have a look www.4tops.com and www.helpgenerator.com (I do not > work for that company nowadays, nor have I any shares in it or any profits > from its current business). > > Thank you. > > -- > Shamil >