[Cyph0n]

The ribbon has been present since Office 2010 (or was it 2007?). I'm of the opinion that it was a great UX improvement, especially if you weren't used to 2003's UI. I don't recall many significant changes to options and features since the introduction of the ribbon, so it has made transitioning to newer versions much easier.

[TylerH]

2007 was the first edition of the ribbon, but 2010 changed the look of it a fair amount.

[slededit]

2010 added support for Ribbon customization. I wouldn't say it changed the behavior dramatically though.

[agumonkey]

Some people linked the notion of user evolution pace. Evolving a system faster than their user is asking for troubles. Even if the ribbon was a beautiful idea, well executed by Microsoft; it imposed a massive relearning phase.

[Cyph0n]

I guess they had to make such a huge change eventually. I'm sure they weighed the benefits of improved UX for new users against the learning required for existing users. In any case, they had (and still have) a near-complete monopoly on office productivity software, so they wouldn't lose much either way. Worst case scenario is going back to the older UI if the backlash was too much.

[glhaynes]

People seem to have kept up.

[TeMPOraL]

Thus the rule oft forgotten in the UX circles - if your user has no alternative to switch to, they will learn the interface.

[__jal]

...Which explains every enterprise software UI ever made.

[mark-r]

I've always felt that the ribbon is much less scannable than the menus in previous versions of Word. I've learned to deal with it like everybody else, but I still don't think it's an improvement.

[Retric]

The ribbon has it's upsides and downsides. I would argue it would have been much better if you could place it on the side not just the top due to a decade of wide screen laptops. Office needed larger icons and lost a lot of functionality. But, they clearly needed larger Icons.

My problem is more when the UI is changed without any benefits.