Recommended Posts

The most stupid thing I've ever found is this - U need to scroll to select file types

Hmm, that does seem odd. I imagine they will fix that in the final product - there is a lot fo white space un-used. If used, there would be no need to have a scroll list...

Firstly, a lot of people out there do not use their eyes and look around properly. If you move your mouse around the user interface and click on anything which is clickable (reading tooltips in order to see what the button does first of course), surely you will easily be able to find out where all the options are and you'll know for future use then. This doesn't take long and shouldn't cost much, if any, money to a company.

The simple fact is that most users aren't don't understand "computers" well enough that they can deduce how to do something. Many users are even terrified of using software and afraid that the whole computer will blow up in their face if they do anything other than press the exact things they know how. They lack the ability to be able to just look around and figure out how things work, an ability that most people here proabably take for granted.

It's also not given that people will be able to remember how to do something if they just stumble upon it by randomly pressing things (likely under some stress). There has to be a system they can memorize without necessarily fully understanding what they're doing or the underlying concepts.

Many users also have other things to do. A nurse may not have the option of spending an hour hunting for an option and figuring it out on their own if they have to be back with the patients in 20 minutes. The only viable option is to take them out of their job and teach them. This costs money. Big money.

The simple fact is that most users aren't don't understand "computers" well enough that they can deduce how to do something. Many users are even terrified of using software and afraid that the whole computer will blow up in their face if they do anything other than press the exact things they know how. They lack the ability to be able to just look around and figure out how things work, an ability that most people here proabably take for granted.

It's also not given that people will be able to remember how to do something if they just stumble upon it by randomly pressing things (likely under some stress). There has to be a system they can memorize without necessarily fully understanding what they're doing or the underlying concepts.

Many users also have other things to do. A nurse may not have the option of spending an hour hunting for an option and figuring it out on their own if they have to be back with the patients in 20 minutes. The only viable option is to take them out of their job and teach them. This costs money. Big money.

Okay, I agree with you on the issue of training. Your example of the nurse is spot on - a nurse would not have time to look around for ages for an option; she would need to know where that option is. This is why I completely understand if businesses do not deem it feasible to upgrade, no matter the benefits - if it works for them and they will not be able to take advantage of those benefits then there is no point in wasting the money.

The same with any user. If you are not going to be able to take advantages of the new benefits of something then there is no point wasting the money to upgrade.

However, there is a difference between people saying "This new version is stupid", "Why did they change it all?", "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" etc and them not wanting to upgrade because they can't take advantage of the new benefits and this is what aggrevates me the most. People who say such things are too lazy/not interested to look for the benefits. You're right, there are many people who don't understand computers, are too scared to use software unless they know what they are doing and who lack the ability to look around and figure out new things; however, the problem is a lot of those same people use the phrases I have stated above when they come to use this new software. This is what I have a problem with. If a user doesn't understand computers and doesn't have the ability to look around and recognise how new things work, very well, surely they should understand this and not complain about new software just because they can't comprehend how it works/the benefits? Do you see what I am saying? :) That is the beef I have; not people who understand the benefits but don't upgrade, people who do not have the ability to understand the benefits/new interface and yet complain. It may not be their fault that they do not have this ability, but in no way do they have a right to complain. If they are not very good at using computers, they should either keep quiet about things like that or not use a computer at home.

Reason for edit - a typo.

Edited by Calum
no

I'd say it depends on what you do with it.

If you don't use or rely on unique-to-your-Office plug-ins (in short, you have a *vanilla* version of Office 2007 SP2 or earlier), it most certainly is stable enough to replace Office 2007 (especially if doing an up/crossgrade to the 64-bit version of the Technical Preview). This is definitely true if (like me) Outlook is the most-used (or second-most-used) application of Office.

However, if you have a large number of plug-ins that are specifically for Office 2007 or its applications (in fact, if you have ANY plug-ins that are specifically for Office 2007 or its applications) or have not upgraded to Service Pack 2, hold off.

I'm a decided *odd duck*; Outlook is the most used application of my Office install (it was true with 2007 SP2, and is equally true with Office 2010) and I use it for POP3/SMTP mail, not Exchange. (Word is a close second, followed by Excel.) For that reason, the simultaneous up-and-crossgrade from the 32-bit-only Office 2007 to the 64-bit Office 2010 made sense; however I wouldn't (and couldn't) have done it if it weren't for the fact that my Office 2007 configuration was surprisingly vanilla, other than Service Pack 2.

I've been running into quite some problems with Word. Once you start using all functionality (and I really really do) it gets kinda messy. And I don't like the new Office button menu, it's just toooo big.

I've been enjoying the experience. I haven't found any bugs yet, but i didn't use it much and I don't use many programs contained on the whole suit.

I think I'm going to pass it for now, because i can't get the spelling check for my language... (It used to be possible to install proofing tools from older versions of Office, but it won't work now).

If anyone has any ideas on how to install a differente spelling check language, please tell me.

I've been enjoying the experience. I haven't found any bugs yet, but i didn't use it much and I don't use many programs contained on the whole suit.

I think I'm going to pass it for now, because i can't get the spelling check for my language... (It used to be possible to install proofing tools from older versions of Office, but it won't work now).

If anyone has any ideas on how to install a differente spelling check language, please tell me.

Get Office 2007 in your language (the one you need proofing tools in) and then your 2010 should be able to check that language too.

*checked again, stopped working for me... Must've messed something up or maybe it's just flimsy support...

Outlook works just fine in a exchange environment and with pop/smtp servers. But I've been running into serious problems with Visual Studio 2008 previously installed on the computer. VS 2008 freezes no matter which version 32b or 64b is installed. I have tried it on a clean install and in an upgrade from Office 2007 to 2010 32b - same results. You can open VS, then you can open the WEB site and on the next step when you try to open a file in design, editor mode it stucks.

I must say that I like the direction they're taking with the new full window Office menu. The advantage is they're stripping away some legacy dialogs and popups. Sounds a bit like what they're doing with Windows 7.

Let's look at an example. Here's the new Print page.

Word%202010%20Print%20Screen.png

The old Print Options dialog and Print Preview consolidated into one page. Clever idea. (Y)

Another example is the Properties dialog. Before it was a dropdown box above your document, now it's a separate page and you can choose what appears here.

Word%202010%20Properties%20Screen.png

And there's the New Document screen. No need for a separate dialog to popup on screen.

Word%202010%20New%20Document%20Screen.png

I'll find more examples as I come across them.

The splash animation's really cool as well. :p

Edit: Inline equation editor for OneNote... FINALLY. It was quite a PITA to copy and paste images of equations from Word 2007 into Office 2007.

Edited by rm20010

Also this. Artistic effects that you'd usually find in an image editor are also here:

Word%202010%20Picture%20artistic%20effects.png

And this. Automatic magic wand-style background removal. Just draw lines indicating background and foreground objects and it figures out the rest.

Word%202010%20Background%20Removal.png

Edited by rm20010

Great trend started by rm20010 so I'll join in too and add stuff as I find them (and the time to share :p)

This new screenshots tool is very cool.

post-16763-1242607340_thumb.png

I must say that I like the direction they're taking with the new full window Office menu. The advantage is they're stripping away some legacy dialogs and popups. Sounds a bit like what they're doing with Windows 7.

I really like this approach too. I look forward to the day when legacy dialog boxes are out of Windows, Office and Visual Studio for good. It makes so much more sense to use the whole interface for the Office menu; let's face it, you're not going to need to see your actual document when you are carrying out the tasks they place in this menu. It just allows for more information and options to be put in that menu. The example of the new printing options is perfect. Everything to do with printing is now included in the same place, in an intuitive layout; including 'Print Preview'! It's fantastic!

Also this. Artistic effects that you'd usually find in an image editor are also here:

< snipped >

And this. Automatic magic wand-style background removal. Just draw lines indicating background and foreground objects and it figures out the rest.

< snipped >

It's very nice to see such image editing features being added to Office 2010! Some were added to the 2007 version, but these new ones are even more useful to me. I have always wanted to be able to easily edit the background out of an image I am using for a Word document; rather than having to wait for Photoshop to load and edit the image in there, I will now be able to do it very easily whilst I'm doing my work - all inside Word.

I'll find more examples as I come across them.
Great trend started by rm20010 so I'll join in too and add stuff as I find them (and the time to share :p)

Please do. The screenshots you have both provided in your two posts, above mine, have been very useful to me. I'm surprised at some of the new features and extremely happy - they're going to come in very handy. Thanks for the information and screenshots, guys (Y) :)

This new screenshots tool is very cool.

Does the 'Screenshots' function automatically take screenshots from your current active windows or do you have to press 'PrtSc'/'Print Screen' with a particular window active first?

Reason for edit - dyam typos again :/

Edited by Calum
Does the 'Screenshots' function automatically take screenshots from your current active windows or do you have to press 'PrtSc'/'Print Screen' with a particular windows active first?

All auto! It includes them by default when you open the window and hitting the "screen clippings" option allows you to take a segmented screen clipping like the snipping tool. Very nice.

All auto! It includes them by default when you open the window and hitting the "screen clippings" option allows you to take a segmented screen clipping like the snipping tool. Very nice.

Thanks for the quick reply :) That's brilliant news. Microsoft impressed me no end with the improvements in Windows 7 and now these improvements in Office 2010... wow! I just look forward to seeing what they've done with Visual Studio 2010 now :p

Great trend started by rm20010 so I'll join in too and add stuff as I find them (and the time to share :p)

This new screenshots tool is very cool.

Ahh nice.

It could use some work on Windows 7 though. It inserts a screenshot with Aero Basic enabled. :ermm:

Word%202010%20Screenshot%20glitch.png

Also why can't the Office team use Vista/7 styled close dialogs? Grrr.

Word%202010%20close%20dialog.png

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Python programmers in a nutshell. Now, guess what lang most AI programmers use... :-)
    • There was nothing whatsoever wrong with Vista as an OS after the SP1 update. People who claim it wasn't were using ancient machines for some silly reason. Not kidding, no hyperbole/exaggeration. Vista was good.
    • Windows ME was worse.
    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      443
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!