Why did UI’s turn from practical to form over function?

E.g. Office 2003 vs Microsoft 365

It’s easy to remember where everything is with a toolbar and menu bar, which allows access to any option in one click and hold move.

Seriously? Big ribbon and massive padding wasting space, as well as the ribbon being clunky to use.

Why did this happen?

8 points

no, I’m willing to die on the hill that the ribbon UI is one of the greatest UIs period - especially how it was done in office 07 and 10. As a computer noob at the time, it was a huge improvement over the previous office 2003 UI.

The icons always gave you a good idea what something was doing, important functions were bigger and when you for example selected a table the table tab was visible and with a different color so you knew that you could do things with that table.

I think however many 3rd party programms did the ribbon UI poorly or had not enough features for it to make sense.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

I will stand with you on the hill defending the Office 2010 UI, it was beautiful, clear and easy to work with.

The flat design of 2013+ was a mistake.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I think the 2013+ design was fine at time but 10+ years of doing the same flat minimalist design over and over makes me hate it now!

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I always hated the ribbon context menu system. It ruins the way I learn watch involves where something is just as much as what it’s called, kinda like remember where on a physical page something is even if you don’t remember the page.

Static, nested menus are superior.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Yea, I agree that Office 2003 was the pinnacle of Office UI design. And I’d go so far as to say that about Windows 2000.

Having controls in predictable shapes and locations really contributed to “ease of use”. One of my pet peeves is the more recent trend where clickable elements aren’t obviously so. Such as a string of text that one has to hover across and see the cursor change shape to know that it’s clickable.

As others have said, I think a significant part of why the UIs have changed since then is to accommodate touch screens and “webification”.

'Glad to see your posting. I thought I was just being curmudgeonly :)

permalink
report
reply
1 point

Not sure I follow, even in the example above there’s many icons that are interactive but aren’t enclosed in a button, do you have any other examples?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

To me, buttons and icons provide the visual cue that “clicking here does something”, without having to mouse over them to discover that they’re clickable.

It’s the unadorned text strings that aren’t as obvious.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I bet it’s capitalism.

The answer for enshittification of the entire reality seems to always be

capitalism.

permalink
report
reply
16 points

Part of the problem is that people who grew up on phones and tablets are now old enough to start entering the tech industry as UI developers.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

o no

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.1K

    Posts

  • 130K

    Comments