How to reduce the size of quick access toolbar icons? (Office 2016)

Anonymous
2015-09-22T22:39:10+00:00

With the update to Office 2016 the Quick Access Toolbar icons were enlarged.

I used to have a filled Quick Access toolbar for Excel and now they do not fit defeating the purpose.

Is there any way to reduce the size of Quick Access Toolbar items?

Microsoft 365 and Office | Excel | For home | Windows

Locked Question. This question was migrated from the Microsoft Support Community. You can vote on whether it's helpful, but you can't add comments or replies or follow the question.

0 comments
Answer accepted by question author
Anonymous
2015-11-05T18:00:03+00:00

Folks, our shared UX controls team have been following this thread, as well as your requests on UserVoice and are spinning up some work to address your concerns. I can't promise a specific date for getting this work out to you all, but they recognize the impact this has had on those of you who work with customized QAT and are moving very quickly.

When they're done you'll see the improvement arrive as part of the regular updates we send all subscription customers.

Thanks again for the clear feedback, both here and on UserVoice - keep it coming!

Cheers...pc

Was this answer helpful?

1 person found this answer helpful.
0 comments

138 additional answers

Sort by: Oldest
Most helpful Newest Oldest
  1. Anonymous
    2016-01-14T00:31:04+00:00

    Hey folks, the spacing should now be back to Office 2013 widths. From the early feedback to the update I can see that some of you are disappointed and were hoping for Office 2010 equivalency. The background to this decision is that our UX controls team looked at the reasons for the 2010 -> 2013 change where we had research showing some difficulty with mouse click accuracy, and thus decided to stick with the 2013 behavior.

    Mtn, interesting feedback on the Cleartype(TM) change and I'll have a chat with the UX Control & Word folks (aka the infinite masters of GUIdom)

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments
  2. Anonymous
    2016-01-14T01:46:38+00:00

    Thanks for the followup Patrick.  It is refreshing to get even this pin-hole view into your decision making process.

    I wonder how the mouse accuracy problem in 2010 compared to discontent due to loss of choice with wider button.  I have to question that excuse.  The 2010 QAT buttons are exactly the same size as the small buttons in the ribbon. So, if the buttons are too small for the QAT, then why didn't they fatten up all of the buttons on the ribbon the same amount?  Oh that's right, because then the ribbons wouldn't fit on screen ...

    Plus, if the QAT buttons are "too small" how on earth can they justify the creation and continued existence of the itsy-bitsy-teeny-tiny-minscule "dialog launcher" button? (and their placement on the othewise unclicable group name bar?) It wasn't until some time into 2010 that I learned that they were even clickable! How can they still possibly be part of the gooey?

    I've gotta ask, is the "U" in "UX Controls Team" the same one as in UFO? <grin> That would explain a lot. I always thought that it was that the user groups they used for testing were made up with "little green men", B.E.M's (Bug Eyed Monsters) and other aliens.  Apparently it is the UX team itself.  That explains so many of the decisions they make <grin>.

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments
  3. Anonymous
    2016-01-14T01:59:49+00:00

    Patrick,

    How do those of us on 365 get the updates?

    I ran updates yesterday and again today and have not seen any Office 2016 updates.

    -Dan

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments
  4. Anonymous
    2016-01-14T02:21:48+00:00

    I find this window into the MS soul absolutely fascinating. Like I said, Patrick deserves a raise for just listening to us.  But the take on 3 steps back and one step forward is so apt when it comes to the GUI.  Which is kind of pathetic since they already had it right in 7 and 2010.  I love the idea of a company wasting close to billions to come out with a GUI piece of ****, even though the underlying architecture is vastly superior.  So I like the speed and reliability. But at what cost!!!??? And what is worse, this is a cost that could have been avoided.  The lost profits from 8 could easily have paid for a desktop version (with all the d*** icons and cleartype, thank you). Instead we get this teenager android fantasy, and are expected to bend over in gratitude?  Sorry every time I think about MS I get a little bothered.

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments