I tend to like innovative software - software that "thinks
outside the box" and provides users with a way to accomplish a task
in a straightforward, functional manner without providing hours
upon hours of frustration. The best applications let users
accomplish a complex task in a simple way, yet still have the
capability to do more if the user should desire it.
iMovie
Apple tends to be excellent at doing just that. The initial
version of iMovie was amazing - you could edit videos on your own
computer at home without having to buy and learn expensive editing
software. The movie editing software was already on the computer
you bought; all you needed to do was plug in your camcorder and
import your video.
In the age of YouTube, this could be considered something that
should be a standard feature of any computer, but iMovie came out
in 1999. Microsoft's initial response, Windows Movie
Maker, which came with Windows Me in 2000,
was fairly basic and didn't provide users the expanse of
functionality that iMovie had.
Safari
Sometimes applications are just old and stingy - like Internet
Explorer was. Apple's response was Safari (2003), and then came was
Firefox (2004), which took off to the point of seriously capturing
some market share from Internet Explorer. According to
InformationWeek, 14% of Internet users in the US are using
Firefox, and IE accounts for about 79.6%. (At Low End Mac, January
2007 stats show 34% of visitors using Firefox, 30% on Safari, and
26% with IE. Among Windows users, we estimate 40% are using
Firefox, 60% IE.)
Both Safari and Firefox offer better security, tabbed browsing,
and built-in RSS readers. They offer several things that versions 5
and 6 of Internet Explorer didn't, and a lot people switched.
Many Windows users still stick with the old version of IE,
either not caring enough to switch - or fearing the change. Many
haven't updated to IE 7 yet, with 60.7% still using IE 6. (LEM
stats show 1/3 of IE users on version 7, 2/3 on version 6.)
Microsoft Office
Microsoft Office has been one of those stingy, old applications.
On the Mac, Microsoft has been more daring with the window palettes
replacing the old toolbars in Office 2001, and the new OS X-like
interface and transparent Excel graphs and charts in Office
v.X.
On the Windows side, however, features have been added
constantly with no real change in how they are organised. Pulling
down any of the menus reveals a long list of options, many of which
are hard to find. Just changing the page layout and line spacing
not only occurred in two separate places (unlike on the Mac), but
it was placed out of the way in two completely different menus
(File and Format).
A lot of Mac users don't expect innovation from Microsoft. After
seeing Windows Vista, I didn't particularly expect it either (it
acts an awful lot like OS X), but Microsoft Office 2007
(Windows only) far exceeded my expectations.
Firstly, it's a radical departure from Office 2003's very highly
text-based interface. 2007 is very visual - almost like iPhoto -
with just about every command right on your toolbar and a welcome
lack of reliance on buried menu options. For instance, tracking
changes is a simple click of an icon on the "Review" section of the
"Ribbon", as the new "super-toolbar" is known.
Office 2007 is meant to be user-friendly, and I honestly felt
like I was using an Apple application when I first opened it up.
Things are simple, straightforward, and easy to figure out. If all
you're hoping to do is write a simple letter, stay on the Home
section of the Ribbon, and all the options you will ever need are
present.
Some people are up in arms, claiming they will never upgrade -
or "not for a long time". Would some people rather struggle with a
clunky old application that's hard to use and requires classes just
to get the basic idea?
No, what people are afraid of is learning something new. They
don't want to throw out the many hours they spent learning an
earlier version of Office in order to learn to do the same things
in a newer version of the same application. That's somewhat valid,
but they'd soon realise that the much more efficient organisation
of menu options in the Ribbon would make their life easier.
Microsoft was in a position where it's old Office software was
fine for many people. For most PC users, any version from 97-2003
was fine and saved the files in the same format. If you could type
a paper in Office 97, why upgrade to Office 2003 to do the same
thing?
But upgrading to Office 2007 gives people a whole new way to
look at creating documents, and I like that. Microsoft was in a
position where they needed to find some way to increase sales, and
they decided to make user-friendliness the reason to upgrade.
I believe it's a worthwhile upgrade for anyone using a PC.
While you could argue that Microsoft took a page from Apple in
regards to the simplicity of the interface, other companies have
realised that simplifying things can help them sell, too. For
example, Adobe offers its Photoshop Elements application, a more
basic version of Photoshop CS2, to consumers who want to have
access to some Photoshop functionality but don't want to or need to
buy the full application.
But with Office 2007, it's simplified, yet all of the
functionality of previous versions is still there.
It's an impressive piece of software, and the fact that it runs
on Windows and not on the Mac is pretty close to stunning. Sure,
people may put off upgrading. Yes, there's the new file format to
deal with (you can change the default to the old format if you
want), but eventually people will upgrade.
If for nothing else, they'll upgrade if Office 2007 comes
bundled with the next PC they buy.
The Best Is Yet to Come
If this is the Windows version, I can't wait to see what Office
2008, the next Mac version, will be like.
