4 ms·
Bingo... This is what I was thinking about while reading the article, He cites 1 other blogger who has complained about this. Personally, I generally use the sh
by awa 15y ago
Bingo... This is what I was thinking about while reading the article, He cites 1 other blogger who has complained about this. Personally, I generally use the shortcuts for copy-paste but I do appreciate having the ability to avoid right-clicking to do some of the other tasks
- cemery 15y agoYou appreciate not having to right click? Right click is on your mouse, where as in order to use the ribbon you have to go up to the top. This seems like pulling the most useful feature out from under your finger to duplicate it somewhere further away. How does this make sense?
- steverb 15y agoBecause generally you don't merely right click. You right click and then have to navigate a small menu of options to find the one you want. The big button on the ribbon is a huge target and is generally easier for users to hit and click. And for some reason, I personally find right-clicking with a track-pad much more difficult than right clicking with a mouse, although I haven't taken a lot of time to analyze why as I generally use a desktop machine with mouse.
- contextfree 15y agoOr right click and have to navigate a huge menu of options, if enough third-party shell extensions have had their way with your context menu ...
- gldalmaso 15y agoIf you live in a non-english speaking country, you'll learn that Microsoft does us the favor of "translating" the shorcuts. So, in portuguese, CTRL + S means "save" in about every program you'll encounter, but for Microsoft products, it means "sublinhar" (underline). CTRL + A is not "select all" but "abrir" (open). Well, that's just messed up... thanks a lot Microsoft...