About ribbon and user interfaces

There's been some dis­cus­sion on the blo­gos­phere lately, espe­cially after Patrick Smacchia's posts on new inter­face for NDe­pend. Well, I've already said, that as much as I love this tool, it's cur­rent inter­face leaves much to be desired. It's a good thing that finally they are doing some­thing about it, and in the direc­tion I talked about in my first post (sim­i­lar to Visual Stu­dio). Only thing that sur­prises  me is that by default NDe­pend will have rib­bon, but you (for­tu­nately) will be able to go to options and change it to good old menus and toolstrips.

I'm not going to com­ment on NDe­pend team' choice, instead I'd like to con­cen­trate on other thing — is rib­bon really some­thing we should go for? I get it, Office 2007 has rib­bon, so finally we have some­thing new and fresh in stiff win­forms world, so every­one eagerly wants to play with it. But I don't really think rib­bon is like any other win­forms con­trol. I think it's sim­ply not gen­eral pur­pose, like a but­ton, com­bobox, or even toolstrip.

There are sev­eral rea­sons why Microsoft put rib­bon in office. The most appar­ent one is tar­get group. What is rib­bon any­way? It's a tool­strip with tabs and really big icons. The rea­son why Microsoft decided to build office' user inter­face with it (the way I see it) is to make it eas­ier for aver­age sec­re­tary for whom com­puter is voodoo to use it. Instead of menus hid­ing option every­thing is right in front of her eyes, labeled, and with big shiny icons. That cer­tainly makes it eas­ier for starters to use it.

For advanced users how­ever result is oppo­site. Advanced users do most of their work with key­board short­cuts, and don't care about big icons and descrip­tive labels under them. What they rather care about is: this big thing on top of my screen eats up lot of space on my mon­i­tor. This is espe­cially impor­tant in tools where you want to have mul­ti­ple win­dows open at once, and every pixel is worth gold.

There's a rea­son why Microsoft didn't put rib­bon in VS 2008, and (again, the way I see it) that is exactly this: dif­fer­ent tar­get group. Visual Stu­dio is tar­geted for advanced users who don't care about big icons and who most of the time use key­board shortcuts.

Another con­fus­ing thing about rib­bon is its con­tex­tual nature. Like in Word when you click on a table, a tab on a rib­bon pops out that lets you select options spe­cific to tables, like add a row, add a col­umn etc. That's great, but two things first: There is absolutely NO rea­son why you couldn't do it with menus and tools strips, and: in case of rib­bon, it's not an option: it's neces­sity. Sim­ply rib­bon takes so much space that hav­ing those all tabs and groups open all the time would eat up space on whole nor­mal mon­i­tor. or would require like 3 lev­els of tabs, that would be even more con­fus­ing than tool­strips. And the rea­son why (almost) no one is doing this with tool­strips and menus is that "Why hide it if there's enough room for all of it?".

I per­son­ally thing that over time we'll see some appli­ca­tions with rib­bon, as some appli­ca­tions can really improve user expe­ri­ence by lever­ag­ing rib­bon, but vast major­ity of those will be tar­geted for non-computer peo­ple. I see rib­bon sim­ply as new toy peo­ple want to play with. It's like, in one episode of Dot Net Rocks, if I recall cor­rectly, it prob­a­bly was about WPF, Carl's and Richard's guest said that back in VB3.0 days there were appli­ca­tions that had red forms, sim­ply because they could. I guess what hap­pens with rib­bon now, is a sim­i­lar thing.

Tech­no­rati Tags: , , ,

Comments are closed.