Posted By: GoddersUK | Aug 30th @ 12:19 PM
page 1 of 1
Comments: 23 | Views: 844
GoddersUK
GoddersUK
I CAN has cheezburger and you CAN'T has stop me!

Yes, you read that right - PowerPoint will now render all presentations using DX and your GPU.

 

I'm really not convinced that this will hold any benefit for my presentations whatsoever, but just provide more crap for PowerPoint n00bs to abuse - we don't just get dodgy cash register and applause sounds with each side, followed by annoying animated GIFs and letter by letter text transitions - we can now have full 3D animation used destroy our sanity.

 

Another concern I have is what happens if you're trying to project on non-DX compliant hardware (I don't know if this exists, but it wouldn't surprise me if some netbooks have it). Are you relegated to Open Office?

 

That said some of the stuff that can be done with it does look pretty cool - check this teaser video - which, although it looks more like a video is actually a powerpoint presentation:

 

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/powerpoint/archive/2009/08/25/a-brand-new-slide-show.aspx

 

It really does seem to me that this is just adding technology for technologies sake (not that I have anything wrong with that in principle), with no tangible benefit.

 

So... overkill or not?

blowdart
blowdart
Peek-a-boo

It really does seem to me that this is just adding technology for technologies sake

 

Well they add animation after animation for no bloody good reason whatsoever. So why not add tech on top?

The tangible benefit is the animation in presentations aren't jerky and unchanged since the 80s, and its up-to-par with Keynote.    Obviously D3D hardware isn't required, that would be ridiculous? 

brian.shapiro
brian.shapiro
things go on as always

Some types of animation in presentations are cool, but I think most visual transitions are lame gimmicks, in the same league as 3D text.

 

It would be nice if Microsoft focused on building in sleek quality animations instead of gimmicks.

Bass
Bass
www.s​preadfirefox.c​om/5years/

The idea isn't new. Both Keynote and OOo already have hardware accelerated slides (OpenGL). Keynote is well known for its exploding shader bar graphs with fire coming out of the top.

 

But the animations in PowerPoint are so ridiculously old they pretty much had to do an upgrade. It looks pretty good, IMO.

W3bbo
W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

The thing with KeyNote presentations is how their users, being Mac users, can be trusted not to screw up their presentations: keeping them simple and to the point. Windows users, however, have no sense of pretentiousness, so yes, we're doomed.

 

(TBH, I'm not sure if I was being honest, serious, or facetious there)

 

Anyway, having seen that trailer video I'm not impressed: whilst it's an improvement over "2D" PowerPoint it still felt gimmicky, what happened to that research into data visuation MSR did a few years ago? This would be a great time to implement it, but instead I see simple effects applied to standard graphics. I'm just not seeing how it tries to compete with KeyNote.

I like it. Dazzle your attendees with bullshit. 

CannotResolveSymbol
CannotResolveSymbol
{insert caption here}

It's worth noting that a lot of this is already in the tech preview if you want to try it out (there are a couple transitions that aren't in the preview, but most are).

 

I'm personally not a big fan of transitions; simple cross-fades ("fade smoothly" in PPT parlance) are my personal preference when it comes to animations.  If they're going to focus anywhere, I'd like them to focus on design templates; I like the templates built into Office 2007, but there aren't enough of them (and templates from Office Online generally aren't as high quality:  many won't respect color schemes, for example, as they were originally built for Office 2003).

QFT

 

Templates and tutorials, guidlines, and tips on how not to create a presentation all integrated into the default template content. Maybe if you put it in front of them, people will not make eye gouging presentation. Right. Wishful thinking.

JoshRoss
JoshRoss
A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent.

> Yes, you read that right - PowerPoint will now render all presentations using DX and your GPU.

 

The only surprise here is that is has taken so long.  Microsoft has been invested in gaming for more than 25 years.  Heck, Microsoft was producing a Flight Simulator before Larry Osterman arrived.  You would think some of the tech would have transferred years ago.

 

>I'm really not convinced that this will hold any benefit for my presentations whatsoever, but just provide more crap for PowerPoint n00bs to abuse - we don't just get dodgy cash register and applause sounds with each side, followed by annoying animated GIFs and letter by letter text transitions - we can now have full 3D animation used destroy our sanity.

 

I don't know what you do with PowerPoint, but I use it to sell.  When you are selling something, it is as important to make an emotional appeal as it is to present the cold hard facts and logic.  If your presentation is boring or doesn't make a small emotional appeal to your audience, you wont have a chance.  People love good design, they know it when they see it.  The reverse is also true, people despise bad design.

 

There will always be people who have little taste and even less ability.  However, enabling the entire population to more easily transfer their ideas into a high-fidelity reality, is more likely to widen the gap between capable people and inept people.  And when the gap is wider, people at the lower end of the spectrum would be less likely to present their masterpiece, knowing that someone else nearby could do a much better job.

 

> Another concern I have is what happens if you're trying to project on non-DX compliant hardware (I don't know if this exists, but it wouldn't surprise me if some netbooks have it). Are you relegated to Open Office?

 

Render the animations to movies.  Use Powerpoint as a video jukebox.  Problem solved.

 

 

-Josh

I'd like to see a feature that detects when a user is thinking of creating a 3D pie chart -- it's important that it be able to act preemptively, well before the user's mouse pointer begins moving toward the relevant controls -- and, upon so detecting, creates arms that reach out of the monitor to begin strangling the user until he or she promises to never contemplate doing such a thing again.     I guess it's probably too late to squeeze this in for 2010, but maybe in the next version?

ManipUni
ManipUni
Proving QQ for 5 years!

I too was a little underwhelmed by the example.

 

I think there is space for 3D rendered graphics in PP Presentations. There are too many interesting things you can do with 3D that would take countless hours doing in 2D. They will need to keep it simple to use however since traditionally 3D packages aren't....

It's no different than doing hardware desktop composition with the DWM, where windows get indirectly rendered onto 3D geometry.  Saying you are rendering in 3D doesn't mean 3D perspective, it just means you're not doing raster-based rendering and instead setting up geometry on the GPU.  The benefit is there are no rendering glitches and eveything is smooth.  PowerPoint needed this badly, the animations are currently jerky with low framerates and tearing artifacts, and it struggles embedding video.  It was probably clear the rendering stack needed an overhaul, and they opted to take advantage of hardware acceleration, which more programs should be doing IMO.  Games have been doing this for many, many years.  And game developers know a thing or two about smooth animation and pushing pixels.

Put me in the "about damn time" camp.  As mentioned, Keynote has had this ability for a while, and while it's certainly not the sole reason for it, it helps in making presentations looks far more professional if the right hands are on the job.  PP's wipes & fades are laughably archaic.

 

All the slides in An Inconvenient Truth were done on Keynote - years ago - it they certainly looked far more professional than anything I've seen done in Powerpoint.  As CreamFilling notes above, it's not just about adding more gaudy effects, the point is to make the existing effects smoother and use less CPU.  Of course the demo video will be somewhat over-the-top, it's got to show the dramatic differences in capabilities - if you're using 4 different fade effects over 4 different slides, the you clear need less sugar. Smiley  For showing what the product can do though, it's fine - I thought the globe map with the pushpins and video pop-ups was pretty damn slick actually.

Hah, yeah intelman - hence our dissapointment with Vista after seeing all these awesome next-gen GUI/app demos using 3D.

 

Something like that incorporated into the next Windows Live Photo Gallery would be incredibly slick, but unfortunately after seeing the next Live Movie Maker (which thankfully got back up to speed on features at least), it doesn't appear the Live group is ready to jump into WPF/Direct3D interfaces just yet. 

 

DirectAnimation under W7 might be the ticked, but it hasn't been back-ported to Vista yet, and there are still tens of millions of active XP users out there as well.  I just wish MS would enhance more of their own apps to use their own API's they tout as the next big thing, but hell we've all seen that argument played out here before.

exoteric
exoteric
I : Next<I>

One man's overkill is another man's underkill. There's really no point to this argument that this new graphics power is "overkill". It's like any other tool. It can be used and abused. It all depends on circumstance.

 

Also, DirectX has a software renderer. So unless running on very poor or old hardware and operating system, it should be pretty nice. It would of course be cool if there was some kind of auto-dumb-down mechanism to seamlessly turn off too compute-intensive transitions.

 

Powerpoint is presentation. It needs powerful graphics. So I agree with ManipUni on this.

W3bbo
W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

WPF didn't live up to expectations because WPF makes it hard to produce attractive and consistent UIs. The framework lends itself more towards applications that are visually unique from everything else, which is a bad thing as far as HCI is concerned, then factor in how most devs are useless with Photoshop and the inherent ugliness of the default WPF controls... it just leads to a mess.

 

Why couldn't WPF be more like Apple's own 3D UI approach?

I imagine they need to keep the GDI renderer in order to support printing.  Not to mention DirectX isn't going to be guaranteed to work over TS, especially not on XP.  Then of course, hardware support.

W3bbo
W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

Ohh good point. Those much-hyped "network projectors" are really nothing more than glorified RDP clients. I wonder how they'll work around that.

 

What if PP2010 is actually using WPF for rendering? that way you can pipe those commands to the client.

I don't think its anymore difficult than using Win32 common controls or WinForms.  If anything its easier.  Yes WPF is incredibly powerful lets you easily control the look and feel and do all these fancy animation effects and the kitchen sink, but it doesn't mean you HAVE to.

 

Out of the box the WPF controls look just like regular Windows controls, the only difference is, they handle DPI scaling, databinding, and loads of other things properly.  And you don't have to write your OnPaint() just because you need a ListView with animated icons inside it, or a simple button with both text AND an icon, etc.

Minh
Minh
WOOH! WOOH!

Mmmmm...

 

Hello?

 

Flamming deamon head slide transition?

 

yeah, WPF, for me, is all about composability and data binding.  I've never tried to do anything visually fancy with it.

page 1 of 1
Comments: 23 | Views: 844
Microsoft Communities