Today I read Microsoft Bob Rides Again and found what John C. Dvorak had to say very interesting. He seems to be saying that there will be a reluctance for people to upgrade to Microsoft Office 2010, citing some peoples’ aversion to Office 2007 as evidence of this. On the contrary, I think people who forked out for Office 2007 will be less likely to bear the cost of yet another upgrade so soon. Those who avoided Office 2007 will be running antiquated versions of Office by the time Office 2010 hits the streets and may be more inclined to ‘catch up’.

Intuitive Computing

In response to Microsoft’s perpetual quest to make their applications more intuitive, John ponders the following question:

The question always arises, do we need to make computing more intuitive? And a second and bigger question is, intuitive to whom? This is the real problem.

Whilst we can all comfortably use the current version of Microsoft Office (I know, big assumption), that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for improvement. You might think that certain functions perform perfectly well at the moment, but your competence is most likely due to familiarity with the software. However, people can become so familiar with software that even the weirdest procedures will seem ‘intuitive’ to them. Many people mistake an intuitive interface for one that they are merely familiar with. So striving to make a more intuitive application is a Good Thing.

John raises a good question when he asks “intuitive to whom?”. What is the real measure of how intuitive an application is? It’s how easily a new user can use it. Like John, I found the new ribbon interface bewildering and was annoyed that they seemed to have made such a drastic change simply for improved aesthetics – not improved functionality. I’m more comfortable with the interface now, but I share John’s skepticism about their motives for making such changes. Yes, it looks good, but has it improved our lives? Or at least, has it improved our experience whilst sat in front of a Word document? To tell the truth I can sit in front of either Word 2007 or Word 2003 and usually get the job done in both in the same amount of time. I’m not impressed by the ribbon. I think it’s a cheap marketing trick. Make that an expensive marketing trick, but a trick nonetheless. When I think of improved functionality I think of functionality that falls into one or more of the following categories:

• it enables me to do something I couldn’t do before. Disclaimer: it has to be something I want to do.
• it helps me do more quickly what I did before
• it helps me do more easily what I did before

As far as Word 2007 goes, and I suspect that this is true of the average Word user, my user experience has not been improved. It’s only been changed.

Contextual Spell Checker

Although John says:

In the next Office Suite, I’d like to see not intuitive gimmicks but killer AI. How about a contextual spell checker? For example, using Word today I can type, “This sentence makes no cents.” The sentence should read, “This sentence makes no sense.” Is there a suggested correction highlighted?

Word 2007 actually does have a contextual spell checker. Though it pains me to jump to Word 2007’s defence, “This sentence makes no cents.” does actually make sense/cents if you write for money. Yes, the meaning is ambiguous. If instead you type “I’m wearing a pear of brothel creepers”, Word 2007 will spot it and highlight the incorrect use of “pear”. It doesn’t currently give guidance on shoe wear, though. Watch out for that gimmick enhancement in Word 2010.

Tags | dissent, functionality