4 ms·

I still despise the ribbon. I really would rather just have the old Office 2003 and previous configurable toolbars, that took up a quarter or a third of the ve

I still despise the ribbon. I really would rather just have the old Office 2003 and previous configurable toolbars, that took up a quarter or a third of the vertical space. The only thing that I hate more than the Ribbon is the way that newer versions of Office products will flash you to a full-screen page when you click on the File menu. All I ever want to do there is do a Save As, and they have shitted up the simple job of popping a save file dialog with all kinds of OneDrive and Sharepoint nonsense.

frosted-flakes 7y ago
I suggest making use of the Quick Access Toolbar. Move it below the ribbon, and put everything you commonly use on it. Then collapse the ribbon. This way, common tools are a single click away, and everything else is two clicks away. Re: the backstage File menu, I agree with you. The app menu in Office 2007 (and the File Explorer) is better because it doesn't change the context—what you're working on is still visible behind the menu. The full-window backstage menu is bewildering.
JohnFen 7y ago
> newer versions of Office products will flash you to a full-screen page when you click on the File menu. I agree -- this is horrible. But I'd take it if it meant no more ribbon.
MikusR 7y ago
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/blogs/jensenh/the-size-of-things https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/blogs/jensenh/the-s... Word 2007 document area: 1007 x 573 pixels Word 97 document area: 979 x 573 pixels Excel 97 document area: 1004 x 581 pixels Excel 2007 document area: 1008 x 534 pixels
- thrower123 7y ago
  With all of the images broken/missing (they appear to be linked to a domain that is owned by some domain squatter that is trying to get me to install a skeezy Chrome extension), it's hard to actually compare, and tell what toolbars are enabled on the old version. But in Word 2003, everything that I ever had on the toolbar would fit into a single row, and Word 2016's ribbon uses the same icons, and is three rows high.
  - frosted-flakes 7y ago
    You can collapse the ribbon. Then pin all your commonly-used buttons to the Quick Access Toolbar.

frosted-flakes 7y ago

I suggest making use of the Quick Access Toolbar. Move it below the ribbon, and put everything you commonly use on it. Then collapse the ribbon. This way, common tools are a single click away, and everything else is two clicks away. Re: the backstage File menu, I agree with you. The app menu in Office 2007 (and the File Explorer) is better because it doesn't change the context—what you're working on is still visible behind the menu. The full-window backstage menu is bewildering.

JohnFen 7y ago

> newer versions of Office products will flash you to a full-screen page when you click on the File menu. I agree -- this is horrible. But I'd take it if it meant no more ribbon.

MikusR 7y ago

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/blogs/jensenh/the-size-of-things https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/blogs/jensenh/the-s... Word 2007 document area: 1007 x 573 pixels Word 97 document area: 979 x 573 pixels Excel 97 document area: 1004 x 581 pixels Excel 2007 document area: 1008 x 534 pixels

thrower123 7y ago
With all of the images broken/missing (they appear to be linked to a domain that is owned by some domain squatter that is trying to get me to install a skeezy Chrome extension), it's hard to actually compare, and tell what toolbars are enabled on the old version. But in Word 2003, everything that I ever had on the toolbar would fit into a single row, and Word 2016's ribbon uses the same icons, and is three rows high.
- frosted-flakes 7y ago
  You can collapse the ribbon. Then pin all your commonly-used buttons to the Quick Access Toolbar.