Interface better than MS ribbon

[vipin]

I have a proposal to update the interface of OOo. The problem of the present interface of OOo is that there is a lot of buttons that has to be shown. Thus the number of buttons has cluttered the interface. Can't we show the buttons in tabs.

No this is in no way a ripoff of the MS ribbon interface. There they have done way the familiar file menu. I think this would confuse the long time users. We can retain the file menu and show the toolbar in say 2 tabs. The buttons in these tabs can be customized by the user. When we select an object, say a picture, a new tab called the picture tab will come and will show all relevant buttons of the selected object.

The advantage of this is that the buttons in the original tabs will never change and when a user clicks an object, a new tab with the relevant options shows up. Thus there is no obtrusive floating windows.

This is simply an update to the current theme of OOo. What I am saying is:
* split the main toolbar into say 2 tabs
* show the floating toolbars and object specific buttons which pop up in a new tab

[Villeroy]

I have a proposal to update the interface of OOo. The problem of the present interface of OOo is that there is a lot of buttons that has to be shown. Thus the number of buttons has cluttered the interface. Can't we show the buttons in tabs.

When you have many toolbars on the screen and you don't know about the stylist then you almost certainly use the software in a sub-optimal way.
The top row of buttons in the stylist behaves like the tabs you describe. Each "tab" shows a different set of predefined styles related to paragraphs, characters, print pages and other styles depending on the type of current document. Each style comprises a whole bundle of formatting properties. Additionally, some style families are organized in a hierarchical manner (tree-views). You have also several filters for styles to be displayed. Like some other tools, the stylist is a dockable window.
Almost every task related to formatting should be done through the system of styles (named bundles of complex properties).
Toolbars, shortcuts and menues can be customized via Menu:Tools>Customize...
The more you learn about the general concept the less you will use toolbar buttons. In fact I have no toolbar visible when I add content to some document. I use shortcuts and the menus through Alt+<underlined_char>. I apprechiate the fact that certain rarely used toolbars pop up when you select certain objects.
IMHO this software has quite a well designed user interface. I don't care about the fact that it looks somewhat ugly and outdated (this is how I look as well). As a human beeing I can easily adjust to any interface that is not completely broken. Interfaces that try to adjust to the user dumb down the whole application and tend to be a desaster for advanced users.

[vipin]

I am talking about first time users here. It will make a huge difference to them. Surely experienced users won't care about the interface as you said. For one thing you are completely wrong in your assumption that the program interface will not make much difference. But it make all difference to the newbies.

In the present interface newbies have to hunt down through the menus to find what they were looking for. This is surely not good. We must present them with the right buttons when they want it. That is what I tried to achieve.

As you said the bottom toolbar behaves 'like' tabs but that can be better. Like I said this proposal is not a radical change from the present interface but only an evolutionary step.

[warrick nelson]

I detest the ribbon - for me, ordinary everyday functions are now hidden behind another layer of icons. The current set of OOo icons is a good place to start, and occasionally I have added a few extras that I want to have available (eg I use paste as values a lot). I would be very much against changing the OOo interface to one that changes them all as per the ribbon. The only dynamic icon interface needed is eg a floating toolbar as happens with inserting graphics, or similar requirements.

Keeping functions in the same place is far quicker for experienced users than the continual shifting around of what is available at the top of the screen. In particular, if they are going to shift according to what I've just done, rather than what I am about to do.

[luke.browell]

Features VS User Friendliness.

Its an age old balance and developers have been overcompensating for themselves for years.

The people who get it right offer two interfaces - one for professionals and one for novice users (eg Photoshop)

The addition of optional user friendly features is never a bad thing - it's when they are forced upon the user -eg MS' Ribbon that people don't like them.

An option at install time could easily hide the uber 'user-friendly' features from an experienced user.

The real art comes in developing an interface which is easy for the first time user but can develop with them as they become more experienced. The whole while giving someone who jumps onto the machine the feeling of continuity.

So user identities are important.

The current trend is to contextualize everything - have we forgotten what right-clicking is for?

The way to improve our interfaces is not to hide away features from power-users but to give them the option with one click of showing them all. So that the features of the simple user are simply a subset of the power users repertoire.

Microsoft tried this with expandable menus, but it didn't work quick enough or pretty enough for them, they also wanted to product-differentiate themselves from the clones (ie OpenOffice) and in doing so threw the baby out with the bath water.

We simply need to do one thing - look again at contextually hiding power features from newbies in our existing menu structures and allowing power users to quickly set the the package to view all the options by default.

This keeps your existing users happy while opening up the package to new adopters.

Interface metaphors are fads and trends - lets concentrate on what the users want - all of them (new and old).

[neosentry]

IMHO, you're missing the point. Like it or not, the MSO-2007 ribbon menu system has some advantages over traditional button-bars. While I did find it difficult to adjust to, for all of a day or so, it is now something I find quite easy to use and I don't dislike it at all. How could I, a loud advocate of open source and public license software, say such a thing? Easy, the MS solution solves one of my problems. A few of the machines I use with great regularity are small laptops, EeePC 1002HA and a similarly sized Sony VAIO, which both have small 10.2" screens. The ribbon system allows me to hide my tool bar to maximize my working area.. while still allowing me to quickly get at the controls I want when I need them. Yes, it was different and it took some adjusting to.. no.. it didn't take me more than a day to get the hang of it.. it was also my son's first office suite and he mastered it much more quickly than I would have guessed. So.. putting our prejudice aside, it isn't really that bad.

I've tried some custom scripts to achieve a similar function in oOo, but it completely bombs the menus in spawned windows. So, don't cut my throat for not liking it.. it doesn't work for me.

With netbooks and smaller laptops becoming more and more popular, it stands to reason that screen clutter will be more greatly noticed and disliked. Perhaps, if we're tossing out ideas for menu and toolbar improvements, we should capture those concepts that our competitor has mastered and find a way to do them even better... not just complain about them and try to explain them away.

[r4zoli]

Best thing what can you do, join to Renaissance project, they now started working on new interface.
Or see RedOffice 4.0 beta - Chinese implementation of OOo, more details on Johannes Eva blog.

[TheGurkha]

We're not the developers, just users trying to help other users. The developers don't hang out here.

But see the post above where this sort of discussion can make a contribution. There's also the User Experience group: User Experience Project.