MS Word: a love/hate relationship
It's over 40 years old, over-bloated on features, and still lacking in functions. Why?
Gary Bloomer | SHAKING THE TREE # 219
NO! For fuck’s sake!
If you’ve ever tried moving a text element in Microsoft Word you will know this frustration.
Given that it’s been around now since October of 1983, Word ought to work more fluidly now. Sadly, that’s not the case, nor will it ever be.
Back in the mid 1990s, when I was trying to persuade the IT department of the local council I worked for in the UK about my needs for PageMaker or QuarkXpress with which to do what at the time was referred to as desktop publishing, I was told Word would solve all my problems.
It didn’t then and it still doesn’t now: THIRTY. YEARS. LATER!
While Word has undeniable power and is (alas) deeply integrated into professional workflows around the world, its shortcomings make it a contentious, maddening, infuriating tool.
Word is bloated and slow, becoming increasingly heavy in terms of tools over the years, with a vast array of features most users never touch. This bloat slows down performance, especially on older machines or when working with large documents.
Startup times and document rendering lag way behind compared to lighter alternatives (e.g., Notepad++, Markdown editors, or even Google Docs).
Word has an unintuitive and overcomplicated UI. The Ribbon interface, while improved since the 2007 redesign, buries essential features under layers of tabs and menus. This means simple tasks, such as adjusting paragraph spacing or inserting section breaks require unnecessary clicks.
"Clippy 2.0 Syndrome, and overbearing AI suggestions (including Editor Insights or AutoFormat disrupt workflow more than they help.
Word’s unpredictable formatting is a pain in the ass! Word’s *WYSIWYG* (What You See Is What You Get) approach frequently fails.
Pasting text from other sources or adjusting styles often triggers bizarre and needlessly vexing formatting shifts that would test the patience of a saint.
Hidden formatting rules, including automatic list indentation and spacing changes turn Word into a platform to be fought with rather than one that works for you.
Then there are all sorts of compatibility issues that arise when sharing documents across different versions (.doc vs. .docx) or platforms (MacOS vs. Windows).
Word has poor and ineffective collaboration features. While Track Changes and
Co-Authoring exist, they’re clunky tools compared to cloud-native tools such as Google Docs or Notion. Then there’s Word’s version history, which is less intuitive than its competitors, making merge conflicts a common occurrence.
Then there’s the relatively new subscription model (Microsoft 365). Microsoft and Abode’s use of a monthly subscription model mean tools such as InDesign, Photoshop, and now Word are no longer a one-time purchases for most users—in Word’s case it’s part of a recurring Microsoft 365 subscription, which many users resent.
Come on Microsoft, are you THAT hard up for cash? Or are you just greedy?
There’s more, including sudden and inexplicable shifts in typeface, type weight, and formatting. And don’t even get me started on inserting images or graphics into text, but you get the general idea. Sweet baby Jesus!
All of this could be overcome though a simple drag and drop, block-based interface with simpler tools and easier to use functions. Sadly, those things are a long way off.
Microsoft Word remains a dominant force due to its legacy status and deep integration with Office 365, but its bloated interface, forced feature creep, and privacy concerns make it overkill for many users.
While it excels in advanced functions like mail merge and citations, free alternatives (LibreOffice, Google Docs) handle basic tasks just as well, while specialized tools (Scrivener, LaTeX, Markdown editors) outperform it in long-form writing and structured documents.
Unless you rely on Word’s niche enterprise features, switching to a simpler, more efficient alternative could significantly improve your workflow.
Ultimately, Word’s biggest flaw is its inability to balance power with usability—leaving casual users with a frustrating, overcomplicated experience.
Now then, if Substack could just get around to offering a spell-checker and an easy to use range of drag and drop section elements, I’d be a happy bunny indeed.
As always, thanks for reading.
—Gar
Feel free to follow me on Twitter and LinkedIn
If you’ve like what you’ve seen here, why not share this post with a friend?
P.S. Next time on Shaking the Tree: The beginner’s dilemma
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Originally from the U.K., Gary Bloomer is a writer, branding advocate, marketing specialist, and an award-winning graphic designer.
His design work has been included in Creative Review (one of the UK’s largest design magazines). Since 2009, he has answered over 5,000 marketing and business questions in the Know-How Exchange of MarketingProfs.com, placing him among the top 3% of contributors. He lives in Wilmington, Delaware, USA.