ANN: Use Word 2003 menus and toolbars in Word 2007

C

Cindy M.

If you've installed Word 2007 and are missing the old
menus, or being able to customize and float toolbars,
there's a new utility you may want to check out:

http://www.toolbartoggle.com

If you decide to buy, you can get a 5% discount on any
order using the coupon code MVPCINDY

-- Cindy Meister
 
B

Bob Buckland ?:-\)

For folks still on dial up, please note that the trial copy of "ToolbarToggle" for Word & Excel 2007 is a 68MB download :)

==============
If you've installed Word 2007 and are missing the old
menus, or being able to customize and float toolbars,
there's a new utility you may want to check out:

http://www.toolbartoggle.com

If you decide to buy, you can get a 5% discount on any
order using the coupon code MVPCINDY

-- Cindy Meister >>
--

Bob Buckland ?:)
MS Office System Products MVP

*Courtesy is not expensive and can pay big dividends*
 
C

Cindy M.

Hi Bob,
For folks still on dial up, please note that the trial copy of "ToolbarToggle" for Word & Excel 2007 is a 68MB download :)
Ooops, right. As soon as we live in the "jet propelled" lands, we do tend to forget that.

How long did (or would) it take you? On what connection speed?

Cindy Meister
 
P

Patrick Schmid [MVP]

S

sales

Hi Patrick,

Good point.

First, there are two version of the program in that zip.
ToolbarToggle and ToolbarToggleLite which the user may install
seperately. Also, we support XP, XP SP2, Server 2005, VISTA, and we
can't count on machines having all the necessary Microsoft system
files.

So rather than possibly confusing people making them decide between
between two different versions of the application, for two different
applications, for X number of operating system components - we
compromised on size and made a one size fits all.

Our genuine apologies to those on dial-up. For users on slow
connection, perhaps if you do it at night - we promise the applicaiotn
is worth it! :)


(e-mail address removed)
 
P

Patrick Schmid [MVP]

I just got the zip file. You have a copy of the .net framework in the
zip twice. Quite frankly, that's a bit excessive. Why don't you have the
setup bootstrapper of each add-in get the .net framework as well as
Windows Installer on demand if necessary directly from MS? That would
save you a lot of space and get the files down to a reasonable size
while still working for all configurations.
Also, you only need extensibilityMSM.msi from KB908002.

Patrick Schmid [OneNote MVP]
--------------
http://pschmid.net
***
Office 2007 RTM Issues: http://pschmid.net/blog/2006/11/13/80
***
Customize Office 2007: http://pschmid.net/office2007/customize
RibbonCustomizer Add-In: http://pschmid.net/office2007/ribboncustomizer
OneNote 2007: http://pschmid.net/office2007/onenote
***
Subscribe to my Office 2007 blog: http://pschmid.net/blog/feed
 
S

sales

Patrick, you have a point but its not completely accurate to say we
have the .NET framework in the zip file twice.

What we do have is two separate installers because ToolbarToggle and
ToolbarToggleLite are completely separate programs which users may -
or may not choose to install on the same machine. Hence, each is a
stand-alone installer for a stand-alone application.
From what we have been told,
High speed downloads average 1-4 minutes.
56k dial-ups between 21 and 30 minutes.

We completely empathize with any complaints that dial up users have
and if we could significantly improve the download speed while trying
to provide bullet proof installers we would. That said, if for any
reason a ~25 minute download (or even if it were a 1 hour download)
somehow prevents a user from benefiting from what ToolbarToggle offers
- we totally respect their opinion and hope they will look past the
pain of the initial download.

ToolbarToggle can be so helpful for users by easing their migration to
Office / Word / Excel 2007 and returning the UI capabilities power
users want as well like creating their own toolbars / menus with drag-
and-drop AutoText and Macro buttons. It would be unfortunate if the
download size prevented people from missing these features and not
getting the full benefits that Office / Word / Excel 2007 has to
offer.


(e-mail address removed)
 
P

Patrick Schmid [MVP]

Patrick, you have a point but its not completely accurate to say we
have the .NET framework in the zip file twice.

What we do have is two separate installers because ToolbarToggle and
ToolbarToggleLite are completely separate programs which users may -
or may not choose to install on the same machine. Hence, each is a
stand-alone installer for a stand-alone application.
Each self-extracting EXE file contains the .NET Framework as well as
Windows Installer 3.1. As the zip file contains two self-extracting EXE
files, that means you have the .NET Framework and Windows Installer 3.1
in the zip file twice. My statement is accurate.


Patrick Schmid [OneNote MVP]
--------------
http://pschmid.net
***
Outlook 2007 Performance Update: http://pschmid.net/blog/2007/04/13/105
Office 2007 RTM Issues: http://pschmid.net/blog/2006/11/13/80
***
Customize Office 2007: http://pschmid.net/office2007/customize
RibbonCustomizer Add-In: http://pschmid.net/office2007/ribboncustomizer
OneNote 2007: http://pschmid.net/office2007/onenote
***
Subscribe to my Office 2007 blog: http://pschmid.net/blog/feed
 
T

Tony Jollans

From what we have been told,
High speed downloads average 1-4 minutes.
56k dial-ups between 21 and 30 minutes.

I think you have been told wrong.

Of course actual speeds can vary but 4 or 5 minutes per megabyte is about
what I would expect on a 56K dialup and 68 meg is going to take of the order
of 3 hours. if the connection fails after, say, 2 hours (as they often do)
then, well you get the picture. For most people on dialup this is too big a
download to be realistic.
 
T

Terry Farrell

I can't see this suggested, but forgive me if it has: why not provide two
separate downloads, one for the Lite version and a separate one for the full
version.

And by the way: Microsoft assure me that you won't sell any of these because
users never edit their toolbars! <g>
 
S

Stan Brown

Fri, 13 Apr 2007 01:01:05 -0700 from <"Bob Buckland ?:-\)"
For folks still on dial up, please note that the trial copy of
"ToolbarToggle" for Word & Excel 2007 is a 68MB download :)

Good heavens! I'd be disinclined on principle to download something
so large relative to the task it has to accomplish.

Does anyone know *why* it's so large?
 
S

Stan Brown

Sat, 14 Apr 2007 08:20:28 +0100 from <"Tony Jollans" <My forename at
my surname dot com>>:
If they are separate applications, they should be separate downloads.
The only justification for having them in the same download is if
neither one works without the other.
 
S

sales

Terry -

I really appreciate all the feedback people have given on this
regaring the size of the setup program. And your suggestion is
excellent - So that we implement this correctly I'd really appreciate
any feedback on these questions:

Please try and anwser these from the perspective of the very non-
technical user.


Background
----------------
1. Currrently, inside one zip file, we have two sef-extracting
EXE's. One EXE is the installer for ToolbarToggle and the oher is for
ToolbarToggleLite.
2. Each EXE has a copy of the .NET 2.0 framework 9in case the use
decideds to put one app on one machine and the other app on the other
machine) - this won't change - we don't want the user dynamically
downloading versions of the framework for a number of reasons.
3. We have a few KB fixes we must install if the user hasn't already -
this can't change.

So together - that comes to 35mb


Questions
---------------

1. How should we offer the downloads? 1 Combined zip or 2 separate
EXE's? or 2 separate Zips? (each seperate ZIP / EXE will be 35mb and
the combined will be 70mb)
2. If your answer above is seperate downloads, what is a way to
explain it that is less confusing to the non-technical user? If you
know of any sites that explain this well that would help?
3. Should we have text telling people the size and expected download
times - does that help?
4. What else is needed but wouldn't be confusing for the non-technical
user?



Currently,
1. Should we offer a zip download
 
S

sales

Okay. Thanks. I just responded with some questions to Terry - would
love to get your feedback on those.
 
S

sales

And by the way: Microsoft assure me that you won't sell any of these because
users never edit their toolbars! <g> <<

LOL! yeah - I know, we totally missed the obvious, huh? :)

but now that I do think of it - we also must've totally missed that
although our installed program is only 12mb, the size of the setup
program would overshadow the most important point which is a program
that solves what people have been screaming about! Guess we are 0 for
2, huh?
 
S

Stan Brown

14 Apr 2007 09:43:02 -0700 from said:
Okay. Thanks. I just responded with some questions to Terry - would
love to get your feedback on those.

To whom do you refer by "your"?

Posting a followup with no context is just as bad as posting one and
quoting the entire preceding article.
 
D

Daiya Mitchell

1. How should we offer the downloads? 1 Combined zip or 2 separate
EXE's? or 2 separate Zips? (each seperate ZIP / EXE will be 35mb and
the combined will be 70mb)

I'm a Mac user and not your target market--but I would imagine that
users can handle seeing that there are two options, Toolbar Toggle and
the Lite version, looking at a page that compares the features in an
easy to understand matrix, and picking which one they want to download.
I see this exact progress on a lot of small developer sites.

I would be much more confused to download something and then discover
that there were two programs and have to investigate what I wanted to do
with them at that point--especially since, as I surf the web, I'm in
"investigate, gather info, make a decision" mode. Once I've downloaded a
program, I'm in "install and experiment" mode, not decide whether I want
the Lite or Full version.
2. If your answer above is seperate downloads, what is a way to
explain it that is less confusing to the non-technical user? If you
know of any sites that explain this well that would help?

This is deep overkill for you plus a complex program, but an example I
was just at yesterday:
http://devon-technologies.com/products/devonthink/comparison.html

But an FAQ "what's the difference between full and Lite" would be plenty.
3. Should we have text telling people the size and expected download
times - does that help?

Absolutely! Probably just the size is enough, as times vary. Anyone
still on dialup probably has a sense of how their system works. I'd link
to "why so large?" because people are concerned about downloading spyware.
4. What else is needed but wouldn't be confusing for the non-technical
user?
I find the downloadable PDF FAQ annoying. Make it a webpage, and make it
more prominent, as it has some of what I suggest above, but chop it
up--some of it belongs under Support, some under Benefits. How to
Install belongs under both Trial and Support. Etc. As is, people
effectively have to read the entire FAQ before even deciding if they
want to download, that's silly. Consider the stages a potential user
will move through--"what is this and do I want it? now that I have it
how do I use it? ai-yi-yi it went wrong, what do I do? how do I remove
it?" and give them supporting information at each stage, not all at once.

People on dialup don't view Demos, making the Benefits page effectively
useless for them, they can't even focus on those moving toolbars. Also,
Why, Benefits, and Features all speak to the same issue "what does this
program do" and thus the person who comes to the page trying to
investigate this doesn't know which one of those to click on.

People have also said they wanted better and bigger screenshots of what
the program looks like installed.

And, in general, I don't like programs with only a 10 day trial. 30
days is much more common (in my Mac world), and anything under two weeks
just seems cheap. Especially since your target market probably includes
people who only open Word/Excel once a week.

Hope that's useful--an attractive site, though the inability to link
directly to a Features Page is annoying.

Daiya
 
P

Patrick Schmid [MVP]

2. Each EXE has a copy of the .NET 2.0 framework 9in case the use
decideds to put one app on one machine and the other app on the other
machine) - this won't change - we don't want the user dynamically
downloading versions of the framework for a number of reasons.
Why not? Dynamically downloading the framework & Windows Installer 3.1
is a viable approach. No single user of my add-in has complained about
any problems with that to me. If you want to be on the safe side, offer
the main download without the framework and windows installer packaged
while you also have an alternate download that has the two things
packaged.
3. We have a few KB fixes we must install if the user hasn't already -
this can't change.
You don't. As long as you package Microsoft.Office.Interop.Word.dll,
Microsoft.Office.Interop.Excel.dll, office.dll,
Microsoft.Vbe.Interop.dll, stdole.dll and extensibility.dll in your MSI
(and I think you won't get away without registering extensibility.dll in
the GAC, the others I know you don't have to), you'll be fine. The
KB908002 you are currently installing is only needed because it contains
extensibility.dll. MS changed the KB to list that it applies to Office
2007 too, because I asked them too. I only figured out recently when I
went from a VS setup program to a wix based one, that all the KB helped
with was extensibility.dll. I still need to ask MS to change the KB to
reflect the real situation.

If you don't want to change to dynamic downloading of the Framework and
the Windows Installer, why don't you package it all into one
self-extracting EXE? Name one setup program setupToolbarToogle.exe and
the other setupToolbarToogleLight.exe. Then write a tiny native
setup.exe program that presents the user with a choice of either
installing ToolbarToogle or ToolbarToogleLight. Depending on the user
choice's, launch the appropriate setup program and you are all set. This
way you cut your size easily into half because you only have the .net
framework and windows installer in there once.

I'd definitely advise to post the size of the download on your website
next to any download link. I personally wouldn't be surprised if a good
number of users start the download and abort it when they see the size.
Announcing it before they start the download might prevent that.
Size is often a perception issue, and add-ins are perceived to be small
things. For example, I had one user complain to me about the download
size of my add-in when it from somewhere around 6 MB to 10 MB for a
particular private build I gave that user. He was very happy to hear
that I got it back down to around 7...

68 MB is simply too large. It is a reason for users to not even try your
add-in.

Patrick Schmid [OneNote MVP]
--------------
http://pschmid.net
***
Outlook 2007 Performance Update: http://pschmid.net/blog/2007/04/13/105
Office 2007 RTM Issues: http://pschmid.net/blog/2006/11/13/80
***
Customize Office 2007: http://pschmid.net/office2007/customize
RibbonCustomizer Add-In: http://pschmid.net/office2007/ribboncustomizer
OneNote 2007: http://pschmid.net/office2007/onenote
***
Subscribe to my Office 2007 blog: http://pschmid.net/blog/feed
 
T

Terry Farrell

I have not installed the trial at the moment, but I will be in the coming
week. I am looking forward to getting it up and running as it is potentially
is what I really need.

I am a great advocate of having a task-orientated toolbar attached to a
template and although I do really like the ribbons, they are too inflexible.
The QAT goes some way towards my goal but again it lacks flexibility.

Terry Farrell
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top