The first problem with the article here is that some of the buttons (Move To, Copy To) did not exist previously. They are also extensions of existing functions (Move, Copy) - so concluding that half the UI is covered by buttons that were not used is an inaccurate assumption.
Secondly, the actions are being moved from the context menu to the ribbon. Most new computer users find it very hard to remember additional, non intuitive actions like right clicking & context menus. Each of these is a 'modifier' that power users are used to, but which make the mental model of file manipulation much harder for beginners to wrap their heads around. They have to remember to apply these modifiers to see if the functions they want exist. Moving the functions into a contextually aware ribbon will make life much easier for these users.
Third, Move, Copy, Delete & Rename occupy the center of the ribbon. These are the most used commands (by far) and rightfully occupy center stage. Power users will call it clutter, but it will be extremely helpful for beginners.
[Disclaimer: MSFT Employee, but I do not work on Windows]
Most new computer users find it very hard to remember additional, non intuitive actions like right clicking & context menus
I didn't realize this. In fact, if I were asked to guess, I would have answered that most new users would pick up pretty quickly how to use context menus, especially if the context menus had related commands like file manipulation if in Windows Explorer (is it still called that?), or formatting if in a text document, etc.
Hell, rats in a cage can learn what to push in order to eat, so I would have thought that people would be able to learn this. Of course, it would help if they were told somehow and didn't have to discover it.
According to Microsoft's data, more than 85% of the command usage in Explorer is through keyboard shortcuts or context menus. Clearly, it isn't that hard to get used to using context menus and keyboard shortcuts.
It seems to me that a lot of people here on HN are simply using this issue to talk about how much better they are at using a computer than the ordinary person, who is apparently quite inept. Unless there is convincing evidence that people that incompetent are still a significant fraction of the userbase, we should stop designing desktop software to accommodate people who are not able to master the use of an iPad.
The "copy to" and "move to" buttons, seem to be some variation on the old "send to" command, which is currently available via both right-click and menu bar. (For those not familiar with Windows: if I select a file, the "send to" options are: compressed folder, create desktop shortcut, documents, fax, email, burn to DVD, network directory.)
Personally, that's an command that I never use; not sure how popular it is with the Windows userbase in general.
Came here to say this, only I don't work for Microsoft. He takes you guys' research that says most people use it from the context menu and uses that to say that it should continue to be that way. It's like, since when are companies not allowed to try to improve their UI? Just because most people use it there doesn't make it the best option.
Methinks that kind of summarizes the issue: Microsoft doesn't seem to realize it's not 1995 anymore. "Beginners" are no longer a big market, and people are more comfortable with "discovering" software interfaces, as proven by the success of web apps, Apple, etcetera.
What makes you think that new computer users who can't remember "non intuitive" concepts like right clicking and context menus will know what cut/copy/paste on files does?
I don't understand how there can be so many posts here defending this UI. Is this a concerted effort by Microsoft to flood hacker news with their viewpoint? I just don't see how this is a defensible UI, at all.
Seriously, it's overwhelming. The UI is constantly shouting commands at the user, regardless of what the user is trying to do. UIs like these are exactly where the problem my parents have with computers come from. They go in with an idea of what they want to do, let's say they want to find a note they wrote previously. As soon as they open the window, they are bombarded with commands. Move! Copy! Save as! Select! Select all! It's a cacophony of nonsense to them. Copy? Copy what, where? Nothing in there helps them find their note.
Really. "Easy access." What does that button do? I have no idea what might happen when that's pressed. It sounds a bit dirty, but accepting that it's probably accessibility related and not an invitation to intimacy, I still can't figure out what it might do. Ridiculous.
The new Windows 8 tile-based interface will be the default way to interact with your files and applications, Explorer will be only for when you need to do some advanced file management. Your parents will most likely never have to use it.
It's hard to claim that the context menu is good UI. The fact that so few people use the menu bar means that it's currently useless and needs to be reworked. It's not as if they're replacing the context menu with the ribbon, they're replacing the currently-unused menu bar.
That's not the problem here - it's that they are cramming literally hundreds of different actions into the ribbon. They're taking a bad design, and making it many times harder to navigate and far more confusing.
Everyone I know loves managing their files, so it's great that Microsoft is finally improving Windows Explorer!
WRONG!
For the hundreds of nerds complaining that they don't have access to the file system on their iPads, there are millions of normal people who are delighted by a computer that they can use rather than manage.
How much longer can Microsoft keep making a 20th century operating system? What's going to be the great innovation of Windows 9? Yet another reshuffled toolbar driven by all of their wonderful data?
I was just thinking this myself. Windows 8 is moving towards a tablet-like structure, they need to go all the way on this and get rid of the filesystem for 90% of users.
Open almost any Windows laptop, and you'll see users who basically think of the hard drive as a file dumping ground. You'll see files stored on the Desktop, or everything just goes into one big directory. How many conversations have you had where you ask "Where did you save the file?" and the reply is "I don't know, just the place that it says when I press save"?
Windows should have had a services infrastructure, where programs explicitly define an export (how to access files the program has generated) and import (which files the program can handle). Users don't really think of files by directory but by type, either Word documents or photos or whatever. The file system should just be a dialog box which is essentially a search. "Show me Word documents I edited in the last 5 days." "Show me all my photos that I took in Hawaii." That's how users think about data.
Yeah, many users even don't understand the file system metaphor. MS unleashing the full fury of cut/copy/paste/files isn't really helping user experience.
But MS is a highly engineer dominated tribal culture. I don't see how they can overcome that. I guess the windows explorer will survive another decade.
The takeaway from the data isn't that you should focus on people using context menus, because all commands haven't been available in other places. But they used their data and said, "there are the most common desired actions" coupled with their own design sense that said, "if we moved them to the ribbon they'd be easier to use".
To me that makes a great deal of sense.
I feel like this person, Seldo, who wrote this blog post attacked MS without either reading the full MS post or not understanding it. Statements like, "But the more important thing is that the remaining 50% of the bar is taken up by buttons that nobody will ever use, ever, even according to Microsoft’s own research" (which she bolded) simply aren't in the data MS presented. It's as if she misunderstood the distinction between location and action.
And later she says, "Again, this is Microsoft’s own research, cited in the same post: nobody — almost literally 0% of users — uses the menu bar, and only 10% of users use the command bar." Again she seems to not understand that the most common actions were only available from the context menus.
Everything I had to explain to my ex-boss about dealing with files is there in one click. I could hide it if I wanted and have my usual experience. I really don't see the problem.
I actually think that overall this a big improvement. Minimalism can go screw itself when it costs me hours of free labour :)
The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste. They have absolutely no taste. And I don't mean that in a small way, I mean that in a big way, in the sense that they don't think of original ideas, and they don't bring much culture into their products.
The problem with this idea is that for the majority of users "taste" is the last thing on their mind. Functionality and ease of use are the only things that matter. Having common functions up front in your face is in fact easier to use than having them hidden away.
It takes a certain level of skill using a system before you're capable of appreciating higher level constructs such as "beauty". As an analogy, we all have seen poor coders whose code is poorly formatted, sloppy looking, and just plain ugly. But when you ask them they're just not capable of noticing this. Its that their minds have not elevated past the details to see the big picture. It's the same way with most computer users.
The concept of the ribbon - tabs with buttons grouped by function - has a lot of advantages in theory. Obviously you can have bigger buttons which is always a good thing, and you allow each button to have sub-buttons which actually works out really well. I personally think Microsoft is on the right track from a high level perspective.
The problem comes in the implementation. The graphic design is just horrible. Where is the grid? Where is the white space? What the hell is that round button that replaces the file menu? The title bar just looks awful.
If they could clean it up graphically I really think it could be just as nice as anything on Mac OS X. Ask yourself this, if Apple had come out with the buttons on tabs in the exact same groupings but done it in a gorgeous way, who would be complaining about it? We'd all be heralding it.
I think the ribbon concept is inherently flawed because no human brain can remember such an overwhelming amount of information (what command in which function group in which tab).
This is a grossly-skewed assessment of the interface. Wouldn't the under utilization of features warrant an analysis WHY they are not being used? Wouldn't there also be a UX overhaul to make those features/commands/buttons/menus more approachable? The data and infographics would only be relevant if they were based upon the Win8 redesign.
Before power users criticize the UI, keep in mind the recent study that 90% of computer users didn't know to use CTRL-F to search a document. Things that may be intuitive to you, may not be so to most other users.
Maybe MS did extensive usability testing, maybe they didn't. But that CTRL-F study was so surprising to me that I don't trust my instinct when it comes to judging the effectiveness of a user interface for hundreds of millions of people
In Windows 7, the menu bar is hidden by default, that's why no one uses it. Also, "no one uses" those other commands only because no one knows they exist now. The whole point to the new UI is to change things to be better.
Yes, instead of the menu bar they have this weird bar with "Organize", "New Folder", and "Burn". Not sure why "Burn" on every single explorer window; maybe they think all users are Napster fiends or something...
This prototype is a failure of both design and usability. It's an offense and a joke against anyone who expects to be able to interact with a machine in an efficient and intelligent manner.
- It's ugly as hell
- A beginner is bombarded with way too many things to click on
- An expert is annoyed by useless buttons and waste of space
Sure, you can turn it off, but who wants to configure and reconfigure UI preferences for the rest of their lives (sidenote: reminds me of eclipse)? Sensible defaults, please.
Contrast this with Apple, whose designs often define what good design and usability means. In their apps:
- The appearance is simple, well-designed, elegant
- The only actions present are those deemed most necessary to the user
- Tons of functionality is hidden under shortcut keys, modifier clicks and context menus for expert users (after years on OS X, I still discover hidden elegance as a result of their zealous attention to detail)
iPodObserver site appears to be the only place that was emailed by "Microsoft spokesman Tom Pilla" to say that this was a Microsoft-produced video. Everyone else simply quoted them. So the authenticity of [1] looks highly implausible.
I'm not sure why, but I've never really gotten used to the ribbon. Especially in Office 2010 , I find it incredibly difficult to navigate and, frankly, hugely annoying. To see it brought to something like explorer is horrifying, especially considering the large amount of vertical space it takes up.
Shouldn't there be more intuitive ways of doing these things? Why is there a need for a move button or copy (one or the other) when you have drag and drop? I know it is very much in vogue to abstract the file system away from the user, and it strikes me that this is exactly the opposite, and just might be just a little over engineered.
The writer of this blog uses a picture of the Golden Gate bridge as the background image on the page. As someone who lives near the bridge, I can affirm that at any given time, more than 50% of the bridge is empty; that is, less than half of the bridge's surface is covered by cars or pedestrians. Clearly this is a complete waste of resources, and we should just get rid of the empty half.
Also, what is up with those suspension towers and all those cables? Does anyone actually cross the bridge at those great heights? I say cut them up and stick them underneath as support piers, so that they're not obstructing the view or (more likely) sticking out of a fog bank and creating a hazard to passing aircraft.
What people often miss in Ribbon UIs is that they are in fact very much for the power user. Here are a couple of reasons why:
Every button or command on the Ribbon can be accessed via polymorphic hotkeys. Every command can be accessed as a chain of key presses. There is zero need for mouse usage -- even in PowerPoint.
This is huge. This was not doable in previous versions of Office! There were some commands you could not access via anything else than the menu, and to those of us that are vim users, you know how bad that can be! I do a lot of PowerPoint presentations and besides designing arrows or shapes I have no need for a mouse. And PowerPoint is a WYSIWYG editor!
The other reason is that you can hide the Ribbon. See the screenshots? That chevron symbol (^) means that you can essentially auto-hide the Ribbon and bring it back, while still retaining its usability via hotkeys.
I'm by no means an all-guns-blazing MSFT fanboy, but I need Office at work, and instead of jumping on the silly bandwagon of bashing all that is Ribbon, I found my inner vim user and learnt to god damn power use the hell out of it.
To those that actually need Office daily, I recommend opening it and pressing Alt. Let the funny stuff unfold.
This makes me wonder how often I fall into the same trap when designing UIs.
"Not enough people are using this feature" can lead you to think "Let's make that feature's UI more prominent" instead of what it (normally) should: "Let's scrap that feature". Simplicity, minimalism, and elegance seem to be completely elusive to Microsoft, even with their brand new developments.
The best way to 'fix' Windows Explorer is to focus on improving usability of the OS such that Windows Explorer isn't something average users needs to use. Focusing on improving it is focusing on the wrong problem, IMO.
Having said that, I think the author of the post seems to ignore the fact that Microsoft's research shows that not many use the menu bar currently (because currently, the menu bar is hidden by default). By adding the ribbon, I assume their goal is to improve that statistic, and in turn make it easier for users.
The simple answer is that MS had to add all those buttons in the ribbon to make the UI more touch friendly. You cant right click on a tablet with your finger.
Moving to this design is a step in the right direction. They need to do more - like ax the filesystem altogether (rendering this step meaningless), but that's another story.
There are more elegant ways to add touch-usable capabilities than gobbling up real-estate (iOS implements the "context menu" as a long-click meta-mode). You could also use persistent buttons like PalmOS/Android.
Discoverability is a prime way to keep things elegant (ie, don't push it in a user's face - let them find it easily).
Of course, if Microsoft wants to address BOTH touch and desktop, then I wish them well... that's a herculean task and I don't think any solution work well for either.
[+] [-] varunsrin|14 years ago|reply
Secondly, the actions are being moved from the context menu to the ribbon. Most new computer users find it very hard to remember additional, non intuitive actions like right clicking & context menus. Each of these is a 'modifier' that power users are used to, but which make the mental model of file manipulation much harder for beginners to wrap their heads around. They have to remember to apply these modifiers to see if the functions they want exist. Moving the functions into a contextually aware ribbon will make life much easier for these users.
Third, Move, Copy, Delete & Rename occupy the center of the ribbon. These are the most used commands (by far) and rightfully occupy center stage. Power users will call it clutter, but it will be extremely helpful for beginners.
[Disclaimer: MSFT Employee, but I do not work on Windows]
[+] [-] dhimes|14 years ago|reply
I didn't realize this. In fact, if I were asked to guess, I would have answered that most new users would pick up pretty quickly how to use context menus, especially if the context menus had related commands like file manipulation if in Windows Explorer (is it still called that?), or formatting if in a text document, etc.
Hell, rats in a cage can learn what to push in order to eat, so I would have thought that people would be able to learn this. Of course, it would help if they were told somehow and didn't have to discover it.
[+] [-] wtallis|14 years ago|reply
It seems to me that a lot of people here on HN are simply using this issue to talk about how much better they are at using a computer than the ordinary person, who is apparently quite inept. Unless there is convincing evidence that people that incompetent are still a significant fraction of the userbase, we should stop designing desktop software to accommodate people who are not able to master the use of an iPad.
[+] [-] woobar|14 years ago|reply
Nobody knows about them for one reason - they are useless.
Screenshot: http://i.imgur.com/5e5xN.jpg
[+] [-] hernan7|14 years ago|reply
Personally, that's an command that I never use; not sure how popular it is with the Windows userbase in general.
[+] [-] raster_blaster|14 years ago|reply
But they had to be put there by the user. :)
[+] [-] azylman|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rickmb|14 years ago|reply
Methinks that kind of summarizes the issue: Microsoft doesn't seem to realize it's not 1995 anymore. "Beginners" are no longer a big market, and people are more comfortable with "discovering" software interfaces, as proven by the success of web apps, Apple, etcetera.
[+] [-] unknown|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] perlgeek|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] leon_|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kwpolska|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dendory|14 years ago|reply
People who use Windows are, for the most part, not new computer users. More and more the new users go to a Mac, tablet or smartphone.
The point of that article is that people already use hotkeys and context menus. So building a bigger menu and toolbar is crazy.
[+] [-] krig|14 years ago|reply
Seriously, it's overwhelming. The UI is constantly shouting commands at the user, regardless of what the user is trying to do. UIs like these are exactly where the problem my parents have with computers come from. They go in with an idea of what they want to do, let's say they want to find a note they wrote previously. As soon as they open the window, they are bombarded with commands. Move! Copy! Save as! Select! Select all! It's a cacophony of nonsense to them. Copy? Copy what, where? Nothing in there helps them find their note.
Really. "Easy access." What does that button do? I have no idea what might happen when that's pressed. It sounds a bit dirty, but accepting that it's probably accessibility related and not an invitation to intimacy, I still can't figure out what it might do. Ridiculous.
[+] [-] atomicdog|14 years ago|reply
>What? Most users are familiar with CTRL+C, CTRL+V these days? LALALA NOT LISTENING!! ADD MORE RIBBONS!!
[+] [-] DanElectrode|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] encoderer|14 years ago|reply
It's hard to claim that the context menu is good UI. The fact that so few people use the menu bar means that it's currently useless and needs to be reworked. It's not as if they're replacing the context menu with the ribbon, they're replacing the currently-unused menu bar.
[+] [-] Triumvark|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stephen_g|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] martingordon|14 years ago|reply
WRONG!
For the hundreds of nerds complaining that they don't have access to the file system on their iPads, there are millions of normal people who are delighted by a computer that they can use rather than manage.
How much longer can Microsoft keep making a 20th century operating system? What's going to be the great innovation of Windows 9? Yet another reshuffled toolbar driven by all of their wonderful data?
[+] [-] Lewisham|14 years ago|reply
Open almost any Windows laptop, and you'll see users who basically think of the hard drive as a file dumping ground. You'll see files stored on the Desktop, or everything just goes into one big directory. How many conversations have you had where you ask "Where did you save the file?" and the reply is "I don't know, just the place that it says when I press save"?
Windows should have had a services infrastructure, where programs explicitly define an export (how to access files the program has generated) and import (which files the program can handle). Users don't really think of files by directory but by type, either Word documents or photos or whatever. The file system should just be a dialog box which is essentially a search. "Show me Word documents I edited in the last 5 days." "Show me all my photos that I took in Hawaii." That's how users think about data.
[+] [-] leon_|14 years ago|reply
But MS is a highly engineer dominated tribal culture. I don't see how they can overcome that. I guess the windows explorer will survive another decade.
[+] [-] sid0|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] crenshaw|14 years ago|reply
MS says, "Only 2 of the top 10 commands customers invoke in Explorer are available in the Command bar, the main UI element for invoking commands."
And have this picture, http://blogs.msdn.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/communit...
The takeaway from the data isn't that you should focus on people using context menus, because all commands haven't been available in other places. But they used their data and said, "there are the most common desired actions" coupled with their own design sense that said, "if we moved them to the ribbon they'd be easier to use".
To me that makes a great deal of sense.
I feel like this person, Seldo, who wrote this blog post attacked MS without either reading the full MS post or not understanding it. Statements like, "But the more important thing is that the remaining 50% of the bar is taken up by buttons that nobody will ever use, ever, even according to Microsoft’s own research" (which she bolded) simply aren't in the data MS presented. It's as if she misunderstood the distinction between location and action.
And later she says, "Again, this is Microsoft’s own research, cited in the same post: nobody — almost literally 0% of users — uses the menu bar, and only 10% of users use the command bar." Again she seems to not understand that the most common actions were only available from the context menus.
[+] [-] kingofspain|14 years ago|reply
I actually think that overall this a big improvement. Minimalism can go screw itself when it costs me hours of free labour :)
[+] [-] eddieplan9|14 years ago|reply
The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste. They have absolutely no taste. And I don't mean that in a small way, I mean that in a big way, in the sense that they don't think of original ideas, and they don't bring much culture into their products.
[+] [-] hackinthebochs|14 years ago|reply
It takes a certain level of skill using a system before you're capable of appreciating higher level constructs such as "beauty". As an analogy, we all have seen poor coders whose code is poorly formatted, sloppy looking, and just plain ugly. But when you ask them they're just not capable of noticing this. Its that their minds have not elevated past the details to see the big picture. It's the same way with most computer users.
[+] [-] WayneDB|14 years ago|reply
If Microsoft has no taste, Apple certainly has rotten taste in my opinion.
[+] [-] krschultz|14 years ago|reply
The problem comes in the implementation. The graphic design is just horrible. Where is the grid? Where is the white space? What the hell is that round button that replaces the file menu? The title bar just looks awful.
If they could clean it up graphically I really think it could be just as nice as anything on Mac OS X. Ask yourself this, if Apple had come out with the buttons on tabs in the exact same groupings but done it in a gorgeous way, who would be complaining about it? We'd all be heralding it.
[+] [-] kaishin|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] codingsolo|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DevX101|14 years ago|reply
Maybe MS did extensive usability testing, maybe they didn't. But that CTRL-F study was so surprising to me that I don't trust my instinct when it comes to judging the effectiveness of a user interface for hundreds of millions of people
[+] [-] sp332|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hernan7|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sliverstorm|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Mavrik|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] devth|14 years ago|reply
- It's ugly as hell
- A beginner is bombarded with way too many things to click on
- An expert is annoyed by useless buttons and waste of space
Sure, you can turn it off, but who wants to configure and reconfigure UI preferences for the rest of their lives (sidenote: reminds me of eclipse)? Sensible defaults, please.
Contrast this with Apple, whose designs often define what good design and usability means. In their apps:
- The appearance is simple, well-designed, elegant
- The only actions present are those deemed most necessary to the user
- Tons of functionality is hidden under shortcut keys, modifier clicks and context menus for expert users (after years on OS X, I still discover hidden elegance as a result of their zealous attention to detail)
[+] [-] aik|14 years ago|reply
Are these two statements different or restating the same thing with a different perception:
>> after years on OS X, I still discover hidden elegance
and something like:
"It takes me years to find some features because they're so well hidden, and perhaps unintuitive."
[+] [-] alanfalcon|14 years ago|reply
"Microsoft Designs the iPod Package:" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9HfdSp2E2A
[+] [-] jdp23|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] huhtenberg|14 years ago|reply
[1] http://www.ipodobserver.com/ipo/article/Microsoft_Confirms_i...
[+] [-] icarus_drowning|14 years ago|reply
Shouldn't there be more intuitive ways of doing these things? Why is there a need for a move button or copy (one or the other) when you have drag and drop? I know it is very much in vogue to abstract the file system away from the user, and it strikes me that this is exactly the opposite, and just might be just a little over engineered.
[+] [-] anigbrowl|14 years ago|reply
Also, what is up with those suspension towers and all those cables? Does anyone actually cross the bridge at those great heights? I say cut them up and stick them underneath as support piers, so that they're not obstructing the view or (more likely) sticking out of a fog bank and creating a hazard to passing aircraft.
[+] [-] chetan51|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Ironballs|14 years ago|reply
Every button or command on the Ribbon can be accessed via polymorphic hotkeys. Every command can be accessed as a chain of key presses. There is zero need for mouse usage -- even in PowerPoint.
This is huge. This was not doable in previous versions of Office! There were some commands you could not access via anything else than the menu, and to those of us that are vim users, you know how bad that can be! I do a lot of PowerPoint presentations and besides designing arrows or shapes I have no need for a mouse. And PowerPoint is a WYSIWYG editor!
The other reason is that you can hide the Ribbon. See the screenshots? That chevron symbol (^) means that you can essentially auto-hide the Ribbon and bring it back, while still retaining its usability via hotkeys.
I'm by no means an all-guns-blazing MSFT fanboy, but I need Office at work, and instead of jumping on the silly bandwagon of bashing all that is Ribbon, I found my inner vim user and learnt to god damn power use the hell out of it.
To those that actually need Office daily, I recommend opening it and pressing Alt. Let the funny stuff unfold.
[+] [-] epaga|14 years ago|reply
"Not enough people are using this feature" can lead you to think "Let's make that feature's UI more prominent" instead of what it (normally) should: "Let's scrap that feature". Simplicity, minimalism, and elegance seem to be completely elusive to Microsoft, even with their brand new developments.
[+] [-] psychotik|14 years ago|reply
Having said that, I think the author of the post seems to ignore the fact that Microsoft's research shows that not many use the menu bar currently (because currently, the menu bar is hidden by default). By adding the ribbon, I assume their goal is to improve that statistic, and in turn make it easier for users.
[+] [-] siromega|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wisty|14 years ago|reply
Moving to this design is a step in the right direction. They need to do more - like ax the filesystem altogether (rendering this step meaningless), but that's another story.
[+] [-] r00fus|14 years ago|reply
Discoverability is a prime way to keep things elegant (ie, don't push it in a user's face - let them find it easily).
Of course, if Microsoft wants to address BOTH touch and desktop, then I wish them well... that's a herculean task and I don't think any solution work well for either.