"Jon Peltier" wrote in message
...

"Bob Phillips" wrote in message
...

"Jon Peltier" wrote in message
...

Do people have so much money that they can afford to buy a £200+ program,
and then bin it? Why not trial it?

I agree that if that happens, then the impact is lessened, but you cannot
legislate for people's behaviour. It doesn't stop me thinking that
building a 2003 looky-feel interface is not a good idea.

Bob, I agree that making a look-alike interface would be a step backward,
and I imagine doing so would impact performance even more. In principle
the ribbon based interface sounds like a great idea, and I didn't find it
too hard to adjust to its nuances. I will admit it took a while to learn
which tab had the command I needed, and even now I have to hunt for those
infrequently used items. But the ribbon's potential efficiency is hindered
by its inflexibility and its inability to truly anticipate what the user
needs at any given time (at least what I need at any given time).

I agree with everything you are saying here Jon. I too find the ribbon far
less efficient than what I am used. I too abhor its lack of flexibility, and
it is this latter point especially that I personally will expend my efforts
in trying to get MS to see the light.

The thing we should also point out all the time is that Excel is much
improved (I know you will tell me about the many failings of the charting
engine, not my field <bg., and I know there are still many failings, Pivot
tables still need work, Data Validation, and so on, and I don't agree with a
million rows, but overall .... No, the failings that the ribbon give rise to
are in Office, which is imposed upon Excel. I read an interesting idea
recently, I think it was either Simon Murphy or Dennis Wallentin, who
suggested that as Excel and Access are development tools, and should be
unbundled from Office. Maybe than they could be let loose, and we could have
a real debate upon where they should evolve.