• 0

Office 2013 Interface - Really? This is The Best They Can Do?


Question

Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse on the Microsoft Windows 8 world...

Take a look at the new Office 2013. This is a screenshot of Microsoft Word 2013 and Outlook 2013, the final version. My question on my mind is: What kind of drugs were those designers doing when they did this? I got a headache from looking at this for over 5 minutes. This is ridiculously white. Too bright for the eyes and no way to change it to anything acceptable, except for a light gray or dark gray, which are not darker at all and don't make things any better.

adtqW1I6.jpg

acp08WWs.jpg

  • Like 3

Recommended Posts

  • 0

I don't see how the dark grey theme can be considered too bright for your eyes. It's not exactly dark, but unless you literally have your monitors brightness blasted up full, it's very much fine.

  • 0

I like the new look better, personally, its sharp, clean, and simple. I thought Microsoft was too stuck on shading things. White doesn't bother me. A lot of minimalistic websites; Bing, Google, etc. rely mostly on white. Its a change for Office, that's for sure.

I'm not saying that as a fanboy, I like Windows 8 too, but am not afraid to criticize their UI decisions when I don't like them.

  • 0

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder because I think it's great! Soft and easy to view/use, very functional on desktop and tablet. Superb actually. Best Office yet.

Really slick. I would like all my Windows apps (desktop apps) to look and function similarly.

  • 0

I'm going back to Office 2010. This white is driving me crazy. I have a bad headache right now. I can't deal with this sh...t. This is horrible.

Epic fail Microsoft. Sorry fanboys, but this UI really sucks.

What about the Light Gray and Dark Gray options?

  • 0

Excel and OneNote work pretty well in 2013, but I agree with Outlook 2013. That will be the first Outlook, I will not upgrade to because they got rid of the To-Do bar. Metrics probably showed nobody interacted with it, but metrics cannot show that I didn't use it! I need that for my upcoming meetings!

I think the complaints about the white though is because of your monitors. Turn the brightness down and it won't be that bad, and yes, you are supposed to turn it down!

  • 0

But what's killing 2013 for me is the terrible font rendering, and killing off hardware acceleration to "fix" it isn't an option.

It's perfectly possible to disable Words sub-pixel font positioning if you wish, without disabled hardware acceleration. (The Text won't be hardware accelerated anymore of course, but the rest will). Though I personally think it looks much nicer :p

  • 0

I like the new design actually, but just basing this opinion on the screenshots, I have not used it yet on a daily basis.

But I also prefer the simpler, minimalistic approach to UI design. So I like it, a lot actually, based on the screenshots.

  • 0

They don't really help the eyes.

They look fine for me, so I guess I'm having a hard time understanding what is "horrible" about the interface. Can you post a screenshot and maybe point out what is the problem specifically with the Dark Gray option?

  • 0

Excel and OneNote work pretty well in 2013, but I agree with Outlook 2013. That will be the first Outlook, I will not upgrade to because they got rid of the To-Do bar. Metrics probably showed nobody interacted with it, but metrics cannot show that I didn't use it! I need that for my upcoming meetings!

I think the complaints about the white though is because of your monitors. Turn the brightness down and it won't be that bad, and yes, you are supposed to turn it down!

You have valid reasons for being displeased with Outlook based on your usage. It's a shame too. 2013 is the lightest, most well optimized Outlook yet. Outlook accounts for most of our Office Corporate desktop support and I'm happy with where it has gone. Hopefully you can utilize the rest of 2013.
  • 0

You know what was so nice about Office 2010 with a dark theme? It wasn't about the user interface, it was about your content. With the dark theme it feels like the user interface is taking a step back and your content, whatever you're working on, is taking the spotlights. With Office 2013 it's the opposite. Your white page just drowns amidst a whole user interface of whiteness. There is almost no visible separation between content and tools. It is distracting and annoying to work with for longer periods of time.

And seriously, that "dark gray" setting is barely worth. It's not dark, it's just slightly less white.

This is a good content-focused UI. Microsoft had it and threw it away and that was a horrible mistake.

Shrjv.png

  • Like 3
  • 0

It's perfectly possible to disable Words sub-pixel font positioning if you wish, without disabled hardware acceleration. (The Text won't be hardware accelerated anymore of course, but the rest will). Though I personally think it looks much nicer :p

I wonder if there are video card/monitor specific issues because it really looks fantastic to me. Seriously. Whites have never bothered me but I do adjust the gamma and dynamic contrast using my monitor controls and Catalyst Control Panel to get it perfect for me.
  • 0

They look fine for me, so I guess I'm having a hard time understanding what is "horrible" about the interface. Can you post a screenshot and maybe point out what is the problem specifically with the Dark Gray option?

I already posted screenshots. Go back to the first page of the thread.

You know what was so nice about Office 2010 with a dark theme? It wasn't about the user interface, it was about your content. With the dark theme it feels like the user interface is taking a step back and your content, whatever you're working on, is taking the spotlights. With Office 2013 it's the opposite. Your white page just drowns amidst a whole user interface of whiteness. There is almost no visible separation between content and tools. It is distracting and annoying to work with for longer periods of time.

And seriously, that "dark gray" setting is barely worth. It's not dark, it's just slightly less white.

This is a good content-focused UI. Microsoft had it and threw it away and that was a horrible mistake.

Shrjv.png

(Y)

  • 0
Snip

While this doesn't bother me at all, I do see what you're talking about. I can see how it would bother some if they need that contrast.

  • 0

While this doesn't bother me at all, I do see what you're talking about. I can see how it would bother some if they need that contrast.

Thanks for understanding.

This is also one of my issues with the lack of transparency in Windows 8. I think it's great how Windows 7's windows are transparent. Absolutely not because it looks fancy, but because it pulls focus away from it. The frame isn't important, it blends into the background. It's about what's inside the frame.

  • 0

I already posted screenshots. Go back to the first page of the thread.

(Y)

I actually thought the dark option in 2010 was way too dark, so our opinions are the opposite on the topic for this thread. But, for me to say 2010 was "horrible" is a stretch to say the least especially considering the Silver option worked great for me. So I was just curious if it was something actually horrible with the UI or you just have a preference for a darker appearance.

  • 0

Actually Office 2013 is not that bad... but it really needs the light gray theme, also, for those of us that are really bothered by all the white on nights, we can use f.lux to reduce eye strain considerably... it really works.

ofice2013.png

  • 0

I am using the 60-day trial, but how do I change it [Word] from all white? I am using the desktop version, not the ****ty Metro version!

File->Account->Theme

  • 0

Also 2013 preview really clashes with the rest of my setup:

and a sneak peek at the review I'm working on!

post-361542-0-63958700-1353184635.png

  • 0
It's perfectly possible to disable Words sub-pixel font positioning if you wish, without disabled hardware acceleration. (The Text won't be hardware accelerated anymore of course, but the rest will). Though I personally think it looks much nicer :p
I wonder if there are video card/monitor specific issues because it really looks fantastic to me. Seriously. Whites have never bothered me but I do adjust the gamma and dynamic contrast using my monitor controls and Catalyst Control Panel to get it perfect for me.

It's always possible, a random web search shows others getting the same issue, and others who don't. For me anyway it's totally ignoring ClearType and looks pretty bad, where 2010 correctly renders fonts as expected.

And seriously, that "dark gray" setting is barely worth. It's not dark, it's just slightly less white. This is a good content-focused UI. Microsoft had it and threw it away and that was a horrible mistake.

Exactly -- I use the silver version myself which still draws your eyes to where the content is. Personally this is what I'd prefer out of the default 2013 look instead of the stark white. It's white but still has easily defined separation in the various areas, and the content is still the main focus. (Scaled wayyyyy down.)

sshot1hf.png

Personally Visual Studio 2012 got the "desktop Metro feel" done a lot nicer. Again, drastically scaled down.. you get the general idea. The main focus is white, the rest is a bit darker and everything has easy to see boundaries. Has the Metro "flavor" (minus the menus that YELL at you, turned those off), but it's easier on the eyes.

sshot1me.png

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The proportion (or number of iterations) has nothing to with this aspect of Copyright I am describing. In short, it doesn't matter how many times the manager tells you to change something or how. Your work product is always YOURS until and unless you then assign that to the person representing the client/company, usually for financial compensation -- either in salary or as a subcontract work for hire payment. if iterations determined copyright, then businesses would have learned to just keep making changes until they could claim they owned the copyright, without having to compensate the artist for their work. And that would be BAD. The only place where the amount of changes does have a role is in how much does a human modify a previous public domain work (from any source) before it is considered fair use or their own work, etc. For example, if a human makes substantial changes to a public domain (re: AI, by definition) work, then they can then claim that derivative work as their own...but NEVER the original version, of course. That's why anyone can make a movie about Dracula, for example, as long as it is based on the public domain novel, but not if they take new ideas from copyrighted movies made afterwards. As one of the people who personally advised the US Copyright Office on their recent ruling on these very issues, be assured that I specifically used the terminology precisely -- though I made it simple enough for laymen to understand it. If I made this confusing by doing so, I apologize. But, to be clear regarding your assumption that I would agree to your second statement that I quoted above -- the answer is NO. If AI does the work, no matter how much "direction" you give it, it cannot be copyrighted. All AI generated content is in the Public Domain and therefore the copyright cannot be assigned to ANYONE, even you -- until and unless substantial modifications are made to it BY A HUMAN BEING (yourself or a contracted artist/writer/etc.) and then that copyright on the derivative work is legally (in writing) transferred to you. This is a critical distinction. And it is important that people, especially AI sloppers, understand this. For example, YouTube is not paying AI slop generators for the copyright, etc. of their AI slop. What YouTube is doing is sharing AD REVENUE for permission to publish your AI slop. Copyright/ownership/rights never come into it. Importantly, that means that anyone can copy any AI slopware on YouTube, etc. and rehost it anywhere they want, even back on YouTube, and there is nothing legal that YouTube can do about it with regards to copyright protections, ownership, DMCA, etc. Anyone is legally free to use any AI slopware in any way they want. When this ruling was pending, I warned Disney legal of all of this before they did their OpenAI deal -- that it would literally dilute their entire IP portfolio forever. They ignored that warning for the PR and stock bump. But that is why, when the ruling came down last year, Disney quickly extricated themselves from that OpenAI deal, even eating the initial upfront fees -- followed closely by OpenAI ending their entire AI video generating business model. They adjusted their PR release dates to make this less obvious to shareholders, of course. Phew. I hope that this clears up the key distinctions for you and anyone reading. If you have any additional questions or even hypotheticals about AI and Copyright, please feel free to ask.
    • Each of the devices displayed on this page now has a little volume meter next to it to show if there is audio actively playing. About time.
    • Owing to the nature of Windows feature enablement updates, it was distributed over Windows Update services as a complete system upgrade rather than as an ordinary cumulative update
    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2, urges IT admins to prepare for release by Usama Jawad Windows 11 typically follows an annual update cycle, but Microsoft recently broke that tradition a bit by releasing a "26H1" version in the first half of this year as a "scoped" build for select new silicon PCs only. This version was not available for customers using 24H2 and 25H2 builds, as Microsoft is busy preparing version 26H2 for them, confirmed officially for the first time. In a Windows IT Pro blog, Microsoft has urged IT admins to prepare for the upcoming release of Windows 11 version 26H2. The company has confirmed that this will be a small enablement package (eKB) that will simply light up certain disabled features that are already present in the operating system's code base. This means that the "refined" Windows update and deployment experience will be simpler and quicker, with minimal disruptions, as the feature update will simply toggle a few flags rather than performing a complete replacement. Microsoft has explained that this is all possible because the standard Windows 11 releases share the same servicing branch and hence, the same source code. However, this also means that Windows 11 26H1 users won't be able to upgrade to 26H2 as that is a different branch, but this is something we have known for a while now. Similar to previous annual feature updates, Windows 11 26H2 will offer the following support cycles: 24 months of support for Home, Pro, Pro EDU, and Pro for Workstations editions 36 months of support for Enterprise, Education, IoT Enterprise, and Enterprise Multi-session editions Microsoft has not confirmed a concrete release date for Windows 11 26H2, but noted that it is "coming soon". If we go by the ongoing release cadence, we can expect it to begin rolling out in early October 2026. As such, IT admins have been encouraged to begin validating Windows Insider releases in the Experimental Channel, plan rollout rings, and strategize the utilization of their existing deployment tools.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Skeet Campbell earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Sharbel earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      576
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      188
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      79
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      78
    5. 5
      neufuse
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!