The Stupidity of Office 07

[jstiene]

Is it just me or is Office 07 one of the stupidest business decissions ever made?

Here people have been telling me about open office, and other suites replacing MS Office and me telling them corporations would never go for retraining 100,000 employees on a new office suite.

So what does Microsoft do? Come out with a version of Office in 07 that removes all the menu items, replaces them with tabs, and makes its COMPETITORS OFFICE VERSIONS EASIER FOR USERS TO LEARN THAN THEIR OWN OFFICE SUITE.

What in the hell? I can see how there was no gradual way to introduce tabs with icons. But why the giant icons, and more importantly, why REMOVE all the old menu items so customers are totally screwed trying to find familiar functionality?

I dont think there is even any option of putting the menus back. Do they just think that strong arming everyone into a new version and forcing them to learn it when the stop licensing XP and 03 will force people to buy new software without millions of people being very, very pissed off?

I did an upgrade on Access from 97 to 07 a few weeks ago for a company and could barely find my way around Excel and Access. I had to make a form with all the old menu options, opening traditional windows.

I've seen software that supposedly puts 07 back the way it was, but is an exe and I don't trust it, and don't have a version of 07 here.

Luckily the backend is pretty much the same for Excel and just about everything that works in XP and 03 will still work, though if you have backend references some things might be missing if they are old, like DAO 2.5-3.5.

And in Access, forget it. They totally messed with the interface. Why does everything have to look like a web page now with left top and middle sections? They did this with .net, Office, and supposedly Vista has done similar things?

What moron decided to risk their monopoly on office suites and operating systems forcing radical change on customers?

 

[lalbatros]

I like the analogy:

Upgrading to 2007 is like moving to a new city.

because I feel like I was expropriated without care and consideration.
Microsoft should learn about respect.
It should at least offer a choice to the customers.

Recently, I changed my mind completely about banks: I decided I could change and play the competition between banks.
I will soon do the same with µsoft. All for my own benefit.

 

[lalbatros]

Maybe I know why:

And they removed Application.FileSearch - why

Since my only interrest for Vista two or three years ago was in the indexing and search engine it was supposed to offer.
(based on the new file system and supposed to be extremely performing)
Since years I am using the Yahoo desktop search (or X1).
I always thought that googling my PC was a must.
This is the tool I use most often, I almost never use the µsoft search tool.
(not to mention the search utility in outlook which is ridiculous compared to X1 and others)

Unfortunately, I seems that Vista is not yet ready for the old promise.
("old promise" aslo known as "vaporware")

I guess the search function in Excel is just waiting for Vista upgrades.
And competitors of µsoft are to be fooled once more.

 

[lalbatros]

From all I read above, one lesson:

Don't invest too much time in Excel applications.
Just to the minimum which is absolutely needed.
Otherwise you will regret it on the next upgrade.

And I even don't discuss the spaghetti organisation that results from the wide use of spreadsheets.
If I had to suggest the best IT improvement in my company (a large company),
I would suggest a total ban on Microsoft Excel and Microsoft Access.

 

[jstiene]

Re: The Pushiness of Office 07

Oh I like both Windows and Office XP. Office XP added language tools like voice recognition, or wizzards to pronounce what you type, or the contents of a cell, which is programable. They let you draw on a pad which could be inserted into a document or cell.

With Windows XP, it was stable, relatively fast and had very nice options for navigating. Compression, looking at thummnails of various pictures, MP3s.

In fact in terms of windows XP was the first OS that brought little criticism. I have XP pro with service pack two, with a built in firewall, though I use Zone Alarm.

But making everyone have at least some kind of firewall helps web crawlers looking to create more drone computers. XP Pro also lets the administrator make folders invisible or locked. So if I set up a guest login, they cant see My Documents.

Of course this messed with some cookie cleaning code I had, but it is a nice security addition. I could put anything I dont want anyone to see in My Documents, for example, and they cant even open the folder.

And I don't think I'm alone. XP might just have been Microsofts peak as far as an OS and Office Suite. Office 03 might even be a little better.

But removing the menu items in Office 07 so users dont even have a choice of finding old functions was assine and heavy handed. They shouild have an option to view menus or an option to switch back to the old format completely.

Well, first off you have to remember who you are dealing with here, Microsoft! If that alone doesn't say it all, I can think of quite a few beefs that quite a few people will have with the change. I stopped upgrading at Office 2000, as I thought that it had pretty much everything that '97 did with a few nice little 'extras', so to speak. My thought is that Microsoft should have never "abandoned" the code base for the Windows '95, '98 and ME only to replace it with a shaved down version of NT (2000) that is now known the world over as XP and now they've introduced Vista. Never used it myself, and I've heard many reports of its bugginess over the past few months.

In my opinion, Microsoft has done so many wrong things, it might not EVER have even a decent OS much less an office suite that will retain its familiarity for those of us who "cut our teeth" on the original Office's, even Office '95 was a fairly sophisticated system for its time. I thought that Windows 2000 was one of MS's best efforts so far, and again Office 2000 hasn't let me down too badly. I also think that MS has most likely replaced some of the best programmers it had with newer ones who all had/have their own ideas on how things should be, and I again think that that is pretty obvious. The thing about these newer programmers is that they have learned to use the higher level API's and languages, many of them probably never had to deal with things like memory management and machine-level routines, IO, etc., and just start changing things around that worked fairly well for the simple reason that they plain just don't understand the old code. All in all, the future will determine how all of the issues are resolved or dealt with, but in my opinion MS should have just stuck with what worked and COMPLETELY re-written what didn't rather than modifying old code to try and make it work better or give it an "easier to use" type of interface. It really burns my A** to try and re-learn a product I've been used to using for years. Granted, there are going to be a lot of folks who learn Office from the newest package, and if they ever run across an "old" copy of Excel or something they won't have a clue where to start just as it is the opposite.

Microsoft would have done well to keep or hire older programmers who could either learn or remember the code that worked and taken measures to make it better and debug it rather than trying to rewrite everything with younger programmers that (obviously) aren't experienced enough to make the changes a little more subtle so that new users can understand older versions of the software and old users can quickly pick up on the newer versions. It's insanity at best, and I agree with you if you think it's really that bad!

 

[jstiene]

Well a lot of us make a living off programming Microsoft Office, myself, Excel, Access and some Word. So I don't want other office suites replacing it. And the back end of Excel and all the functionality of Access were masterworks.

Not flawless but very powerful. People have no idea what you can do with VBA. Almost anything you can do with Visual Basic, except for sound and graphic manipulation, independently compiled projects, and some system manipulation, for example, leaving Excel and entering data into SAP forms, although there are Java and C++ developers in the financial industry that pick up Excel programing and probably do things like that.

But we can batch process, move or rename files, use sendkeys occasionally, get into virtually any database with DAO, ADO, OO4O, ODBCs, etc. In fact I get tired of insults from other developers who think we just record macros. Nonsense. Almost from the beginning I was looking through folders batch processing, hooking into Access, then SWL Server, Oracle, even a mainframe AS400 with DB2. Automating various office products from another, etc.

I was never a math wiz, but VB made it possible to do very powerful things. And its still there in 07. Its just that the interface has been scrapped. I don't even know where to find things like Addins in Excel 07, but like I said, made a form with the old options. The Application.Dialogs lets you open just about any old menu they havent removed completely, though I can't figure out Options. It seems like every tab was its own window and I can only individually make them open.

As for programers who think VBA is for amatures, I bet I could write circles around most of them quickly building fast powerful, flexible aps. Saying it is easy is like saying the bass guitar is easy. It can be initially. But that doesnt make anyone who picks up the bass John Entwistle or Stanley Clarke.

It is just a tool and it is not even what you know but what you can do with what you know. They build Cathedrals with hammers and chisels. Is someone more intelligent or expert because they learned Autocad? They've just learned a different tool.

 

[jstiene]

Yeah, nobody memorizes chart and pivot table code. Its too complex and intricate, unless you are constantly making them. Even MS suggest recording code to make or alter charts and pivot tables then changing the code. Hell, I still record for a lot of formatting as a reminder. I have one workbook with probably 50,000 lines of codes and 50 forms so almost everything is there. I stick things there not related to it just to have it when I need it in a search. And I stopped carrying around old projects in case I needed code.

A question is, how much has chart code changed? If we run code in XP or 03, will 07 still recognize it? Usually they just add things to argument lists so macros recorded in new versions wont work in old, but old code always worked going forward. Generally you record for formatting or charting, but this makes me wonder. Will old chart code still fly in 07?

 

[jstiene]

People love the flexibility of Excel, which yes, creates problems for IT security and control. Also anyone can build a rudimentary database with Access wich is nice but a little risky if they don't understand contraints, primary keys, normalization, etc.

But personally, I love Excel and Access. The idea that almost everyone has the potential on their desktop for a developer to build a relational database with automated forms is nice. Enterprise level systems are TOO controlled from my perspective. I know why org want them controlled, but being somewhat of an expert in Access, I already know how to bulletproof things, do security, split databases so the tables are seperated from the front end. But yes, many IT orgs are antsy about any moron doing what they want with Access and Excel.

But face it, IT has created some of the largest beaurocratic messes slowing progress. IE everyone needs 100 signatures, to fill out 900 forms and get budgeting approval for minor additions or changes. Access gives them control back. Last time I was with the company I am with again, I was automating Excel, but on the SAP BW team, and even minor requests could take weeks and many forms and I was in the IT group.

It seems IT always sets itself up to avoid work and force budgeting. You want something, get the funding, approval and wait. Sometimes the changes are too minor or need immediately so this only slows things and increases costs. I have told people several times I don't like 5 hours of meetings about something I can do in an hour. Show me what you want and I'll bring it back the same day usually.

 

[jstiene]

You can hide the ribbon. My main point is they should have at least left the old menu options on the top. People would learn the icon tab schema at their own pace. There was no beed to burn bridges. They basically left a gap between the old and new.

After a week or so I could get around Excel and started getting Access, but I would relaly need it here and mess around at home for weeks before I found everything. The main thing is, software I made before still works, the back end looks the same. But as an Office expert it doesnt look good to be searching for front end functionality in front of the people hiring me as a supposed expert - "Sure, all you have to do is goto tools validation and...uh, give me a minute, it's here somewhere. Isn't it?"

07 turned experts into beginners. "Yes, I can pull data from a mainframe into Excel and send it to Powerpoint slides. If I can only find...."

 

[lalbatros]

jstiene ,

You are right in most of what you say.
However you should not pay too much attention to what you believe is the opinion of other developpers about VBA and Office.

Personally I am a professional amateur using MS Excel as user interface for my specialized applications.
I have two main types of applications.
The first uses an external library to solve optimization problems.
The second uses an external Java package I developped for process simulation.
I like Office very much, and I like Java too.
I should take time to switch everything to ".net", but I don't like too much conversions which are not very useful.

That's precisely the main topic here, I believe.
With all these arbitrary changes in MS Office, developpers are pushed to waste their time on futilities, conversions, like learning about the ribbon and adapting their old applications.
So, Microsoft lives on versioning, and we are paying for it without any reward.
Furthermore we are paying it even more because of the overhead in adapting and learning.

But there is even worse!
Microsoft Office, and specially Excel is a huge source of inefficiency in numerous companies, smaller and bigger as well. The (large) company I am working for is my daily example of this inefficiency. I recently found some descriptions of this problem on the net and was surprised how far-reaching it could, actually much worse than I even thought. Read for example:

http://www.eusprig.org/tiacositcol4.pdf

http://www.eusprig.org/

Microsoft changes the appearance of Excel, removes menus, pushes a ribbon, removes some feature and promises a new heaven.
However, the main problems of using spreadsheet, inefficiency and risks, are never adressed.
Inefficiency is the main business of Microsoft.

 

[lalbatros]

My point is:

- why are big companies or smaller companies spending so much money on spreadsheets boxes, waste of time, and risks
- why are they supporting the Microsoft futilities, like this ribbon

and why are they not recognizing this simple fact:

Spreadsheets are a powerful modeling language, mainly used by amateur programmers on a diversity of applications which are typically deployed throughout a wide range of different business functions.

and why do they not draw the full conclusions ?

Read more there: http://www.eusprig.org/eusprig.pdf