RE: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Austin Meredith]

 The kind of UI thing that bugs me is this: You have two documents tiled on the
 screen. You are in the left side document with your cursor in a paragraph that
 you want to retag. You slide your mouse over to the docked paragraph catalog
 (which is open on the right side of the screen) and click on a paragraph tag
 to apply it. Instead of applying it in the left hand document, you new tag is
 applied in the right hand document. Maddening!

I have had to learn that to get my cursor over to the dock at the right, I must
first take the cursor up or down into the margin so as the cursor moves to the
right it *never passes across* the right hand document. (Every once in awhile I
forget and then DAMN, FrameMaker did it to me yet again!)___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Austin Meredith]

> The kind of UI thing that bugs me is this: You have two documents tiled on the
> screen. You are in the left side document with your cursor in a paragraph that
> you want to retag. You slide your mouse over to the docked paragraph catalog
> (which is open on the right side of the screen) and click on a paragraph tag
> to apply it. Instead of applying it in the left hand document, you new tag is
> applied in the right hand document. Maddening!

I have had to learn that to get my cursor over to the dock at the right, I must
first take the cursor up or down into the margin so as the cursor moves to the
right it *never passes across* the right hand document. (Every once in awhile I
forget and then DAMN, FrameMaker did it to me yet again!)
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

Re: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Robert Lauriston]

Adobe's OWL UI doesn't look or feel much like Office 2010 to me.

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 8:19 PM,  qui...@airmail.net wrote:
 The interface on all the other products, even those that support the Mac OS
 are slavishly devoted to Microsoft design efforts.
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Craig Ede]

The kind of UI thing that bugs me is this: You have two documents tiled on the 
screen. You are in the left side document with your cursor in a paragraph that 
you want to retag. You slide your mouse over to the docked paragraph catalog 
(which is open on the right side of the screen) and click on a paragraph tag to 
apply it. Instead of applying it in the left hand document, you new tag is 
applied in the right hand document. Maddening!

Craig

 Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 08:28:40 -0800
 Subject: Re: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?
 From: rob...@lauriston.com
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 
 Adobe's OWL UI doesn't look or feel much like Office 2010 to me.

  ___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Re: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Mike Wickham]

Craig, if you haven't already, you should report that bug. I checked in 
my copy of FM10, and get the same behavior. You can report it here:

http://www.adobe.com/misc/bugreport.html

Mike Wickham

On 3/5/2013 9:45 AM, Craig Ede wrote:
The kind of UI thing that bugs me is this: You have two documents 
tiled on the screen. You are in the left side document with your 
cursor in a paragraph that you want to retag. You slide your mouse 
over to the docked paragraph catalog (which is open on the right side 
of the screen) and click on a paragraph tag to apply it. Instead of 
applying it in the left hand document, you new tag is applied in the 
right hand document. Maddening!


___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Craig Ede]

The kind of UI thing that bugs me is this: You have two documents tiled on the 
screen. You are in the left side document with your cursor in a paragraph that 
you want to retag. You slide your mouse over to the docked paragraph catalog 
(which is open on the right side of the screen) and click on a paragraph tag to 
apply it. Instead of applying it in the left hand document, you new tag is 
applied in the right hand document. Maddening!

Craig

> Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 08:28:40 -0800
> Subject: Re: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?
> From: robert at lauriston.com
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> 
> Adobe's OWL UI doesn't look or feel much like Office 2010 to me.


-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.frameusers.com/pipermail/framers/attachments/20130305/32da3b8c/attachment.html>

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Mike Wickham]

Craig, if you haven't already, you should report that bug. I checked in 
my copy of FM10, and get the same behavior. You can report it here:
http://www.adobe.com/misc/bugreport.html

Mike Wickham

On 3/5/2013 9:45 AM, Craig Ede wrote:
> The kind of UI thing that bugs me is this: You have two documents 
> tiled on the screen. You are in the left side document with your 
> cursor in a paragraph that you want to retag. You slide your mouse 
> over to the docked paragraph catalog (which is open on the right side 
> of the screen) and click on a paragraph tag to apply it. Instead of 
> applying it in the left hand document, you new tag is applied in the 
> right hand document. Maddening!

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Robert Lauriston]

Adobe's OWL UI doesn't look or feel much like Office 2010 to me.

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 8:19 PM,   wrote:
> The interface on all the other products, even those that support the Mac OS
> are slavishly devoted to Microsoft design efforts.

Re: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[quills]

You have to understand that even what UI experience they had with the 
Mac they threw away when they orphaned the Mac OS on FrameMaker. It's 
been solid windows since Version 8. They took the Microsoft design 
philosophy to heart and are busy fixing things that aren't broken. 
Including the UI.


The interface on all the other products, even those that support the Mac 
OS are slavishly devoted to Microsoft design efforts.


Scott

Karen Robbins wrote:

I don't think Adobe's UI work has anything to do with Macs. In fact, it
seems to be the antithesis of Mac UI design! :-)

Recent/current versions of FM's UI (and those of other Adobe products)
apparently do not make comprehensible use of usability research! The
complaints I read on this list frequently point to how the bad UI
interferes with and requires extra steps to workflow. For the complex
projects of Adobe's target FM users, one would think that exceptionally
efficient and intuitive workflow would be demanded and required. From a
user's standpoint, consistency at the expense of usability is, at best,
ineffective.

As long as we keep using this (and all) Adobe products--and do so
without creative and instructional criticism, their UIs will continue to
be designed ineffectively. Only when users speak up with voices and
dollars [insert your local currency here] is there a chance for the UI
to improve.

--Karen
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as qui...@airmail.net.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/quills%40airmail.net

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.



___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[qui...@airmail.net]

You have to understand that even what UI experience they had with the 
Mac they threw away when they orphaned the Mac OS on FrameMaker. It's 
been solid windows since Version 8. They took the Microsoft design 
philosophy to heart and are busy fixing things that aren't broken. 
Including the UI.

The interface on all the other products, even those that support the Mac 
OS are slavishly devoted to Microsoft design efforts.

Scott

Karen Robbins wrote:
> I don't think Adobe's UI work has anything to do with Macs. In fact, it
> seems to be the antithesis of Mac UI design! :-)
>
> Recent/current versions of FM's UI (and those of other Adobe products)
> apparently do not make comprehensible use of usability research! The
> complaints I read on this list frequently point to how the bad UI
> interferes with and requires extra steps to workflow. For the complex
> projects of Adobe's target FM users, one would think that exceptionally
> efficient and intuitive workflow would be demanded and required. From a
> user's standpoint, consistency at the expense of usability is, at best,
> ineffective.
>
> As long as we keep using this (and all) Adobe products--and do so
> without creative and instructional criticism, their UIs will continue to
> be designed ineffectively. Only when users speak up with voices and
> dollars [insert your local currency here] is there a chance for the UI
> to improve.
>
> --Karen
> ___
>
>
> You are currently subscribed to framers as quills at airmail.net.
>
> Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
> or visit
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/quills%40airmail.net
>
> Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
> http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
>

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Reng, Dr. Winfried]

Hi,

OK. It  should never happen, that some features do not work.
Or that features/shortcut keys get broken.
However, the new interface really offers some very useful
dialogs. For example:
o Checking all references with the Insets pod.
o Checking cross-references with the Cross-references pod.
o Checking occurences of conditional text with the Add/edit conditional
  tag pod.

I like it that such information is at hand and ordered at the bottom
or at the right of my monitor. Yes. Some steps could be more
intuitive. However, that's not the end of the world.
(I use FrameMaker for 20 years now and work with FrameMaker 10
for a year.)

Best regards

Winfried

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-
> bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Karen Robbins
> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 8:14 PM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Re: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?
>
> I don't think Adobe's UI work has anything to do with Macs. In fact,
> it seems to be the antithesis of Mac UI design! :-)
>
> Recent/current versions of FM's UI (and those of other Adobe
> products) apparently do not make comprehensible use of usability
> research! The complaints I read on this list frequently point to how
> the bad UI interferes with and requires extra steps to workflow. For
> the complex projects of Adobe's target FM users, one would think that
> exceptionally efficient and intuitive workflow would be demanded and
> required. From a user's standpoint, consistency at the expense of
> usability is, at best, ineffective.
>
> As long as we keep using this (and all) Adobe products--and do so
> without creative and instructional criticism, their UIs will continue
> to be designed ineffectively. Only when users speak up with voices
> and dollars [insert your local currency here] is there a chance for
> the UI to improve.
>
> --Karen



This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information intended for the 
use of the addressees named above. If you are not the intended recipient of 
this e-mail, you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or 
take any action in respect of any information contained in it. If you have 
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail 
and immediately destroy this e-mail and its attachments.

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Robert Lauriston]

Thinking about the bizarre UI bugs Rick Quatro reported today, I'm
wondering how the product got to this sad state.

FM started out on Unix, and a lot of dialogs seem like they haven't
changed since then, or at least not since the original Mac and Windows
ports in 1990 and 1992. But that stuff was pretty much rock-solid up
through FM8.

My impression is that the UI changes Adobe introduced in FM9 were made
using the Adobe OS Widget Library (OWL), which is designed to provide
a consistent UI for the Mac and Windows versions of Adobe's products.

Unlike most of those products, FM has no Mac version. If Adobe's QA is
done primarily on Macs, that could explain why the product has been
getting buggier and weirder with each release. All the cross-platform
apps could benefit from a shared library of tools, while FrameMaker
and any other Windows-only apps would need additional work that the
budget might not allow.
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Re: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Shmuel Wolfson]

I have never been pleased with the pods that FM introduced in FM9. 
They are not standard Windows dialog boxes, which limits the use of 
automation tools like AutoIt and are not as stable as the standard 
dialog box method. It's sad that Adobe chose to put look and feel 
ahead of functionality. When someone is using a program for several 
hours a day, they want it to work well. I don't think they give a darn 
as to whether it looks like other Adobe products.


Please get your act together Adobe; trash the pods and go back to 
standard Windows dialog boxes.


Regards,
Shmuel Wolfson
Technical Writer
052-763-7133


On 26-Feb-13 9:28 PM, Robert Lauriston wrote:

Thinking about the bizarre UI bugs Rick Quatro reported today, I'm
wondering how the product got to this sad state.

FM started out on Unix, and a lot of dialogs seem like they haven't
changed since then, or at least not since the original Mac and Windows
ports in 1990 and 1992. But that stuff was pretty much rock-solid up
through FM8.

My impression is that the UI changes Adobe introduced in FM9 were made
using the Adobe OS Widget Library (OWL), which is designed to provide
a consistent UI for the Mac and Windows versions of Adobe's products.

Unlike most of those products, FM has no Mac version. If Adobe's QA is
done primarily on Macs, that could explain why the product has been
getting buggier and weirder with each release. All the cross-platform
apps could benefit from a shared library of tools, while FrameMaker
and any other Windows-only apps would need additional work that the
budget might not allow.
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as shmue...@gmail.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/shmuelw1%40gmail.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.



___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Re: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Yves Barbion]

I can understand that Adobe tries to have the same consistent UI across all
its products. And yes, we all go with the flow as software and UIs evolve,
so I have grown accustomed to the new look, but my main concern is
productivity. Each new version of FrameMaker seems to require more clicks
to get something done:

   - Click Apply (hate that button)
   - Close pods/panels/consoles
   - More submenus (e.g. Table  Format  ...)
   - Slower, longer or broken shortcuts: F9, F8, CTRL+1... To see a
   master page in Fm 10, it takes ALT+v+m; in Fm 11 this takes ALT+v+m+m+ENTER.
   - Are you sure you want to reset this workspace to its original
   layout? Sure I am, why do you think I chose the Reset Workspace command?
   - Preferences  Interface  Use GreyScale Application Icon. Huh?
   Really? I guess/hope this is some kind of easter egg?

I hope Adobe will pay some more attention to this for the next (patch)
release.

Cheers


Yves
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Jack DeLand]

I started using Frame at version 9.  I found the previous interface(s) to be
awkward, weird, and intimidating, as did some of my colleagues. I tried at
version 4 and put it away. I'm not delighted with everything about the pods
interface, and the bugs are definitely troubling, but it seems to me that
Adobe was trying to please (impress?) a new crop of users. It worked with
me. In general, I enjoy the flexibility of the new interface, and I can
always reset the workspace to my liking. It's a major improvement from my
point of view.

Just one person's opinion. C'est la vie.

Jack DeLand, CSM | 734 972 3026 (cell) | jack.deland (skype) |
www.linkedin.com/in/jackdeland

___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Re: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Karen Robbins]

I don't think Adobe's UI work has anything to do with Macs. In fact, 
it seems to be the antithesis of Mac UI design! :-)


Recent/current versions of FM's UI (and those of other Adobe 
products) apparently do not make comprehensible use of usability 
research! The complaints I read on this list frequently point to how 
the bad UI interferes with and requires extra steps to workflow. For 
the complex projects of Adobe's target FM users, one would think that 
exceptionally efficient and intuitive workflow would be demanded and 
required. From a user's standpoint, consistency at the expense of 
usability is, at best, ineffective.


As long as we keep using this (and all) Adobe products--and do so 
without creative and instructional criticism, their UIs will continue 
to be designed ineffectively. Only when users speak up with voices 
and dollars [insert your local currency here] is there a chance for 
the UI to improve.


--Karen
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Reng, Dr. Winfried]

Hi,

OK. It  should never happen, that some features do not work.
Or that features/shortcut keys get broken.
However, the new interface really offers some very useful
dialogs. For example:
o Checking all references with the Insets pod.
o Checking cross-references with the Cross-references pod.
o Checking occurences of conditional text with the Add/edit conditional
  tag pod.

I like it that such information is at hand and ordered at the bottom
or at the right of my monitor. Yes. Some steps could be more
intuitive. However, that's not the end of the world.
(I use FrameMaker for 20 years now and work with FrameMaker 10
for a year.)

Best regards

Winfried

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-
 boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Karen Robbins
 Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 8:14 PM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Re: why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

 I don't think Adobe's UI work has anything to do with Macs. In fact,
 it seems to be the antithesis of Mac UI design! :-)

 Recent/current versions of FM's UI (and those of other Adobe
 products) apparently do not make comprehensible use of usability
 research! The complaints I read on this list frequently point to how
 the bad UI interferes with and requires extra steps to workflow. For
 the complex projects of Adobe's target FM users, one would think that
 exceptionally efficient and intuitive workflow would be demanded and
 required. From a user's standpoint, consistency at the expense of
 usability is, at best, ineffective.

 As long as we keep using this (and all) Adobe products--and do so
 without creative and instructional criticism, their UIs will continue
 to be designed ineffectively. Only when users speak up with voices
 and dollars [insert your local currency here] is there a chance for
 the UI to improve.

 --Karen



This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information intended for the 
use of the addressees named above. If you are not the intended recipient of 
this e-mail, you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or 
take any action in respect of any information contained in it. If you have 
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail 
and immediately destroy this e-mail and its attachments.

___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Shmuel Wolfson]

I have never been pleased with the "pods" that FM introduced in FM9. 
They are not standard Windows dialog boxes, which limits the use of 
automation tools like AutoIt and are not as stable as the standard 
dialog box method. It's sad that Adobe chose to put "look and feel" 
ahead of functionality. When someone is using a program for several 
hours a day, they want it to work well. I don't think they give a darn 
as to whether it looks like other Adobe products.

Please get your act together Adobe; trash the "pods" and go back to 
standard Windows dialog boxes.

Regards,
Shmuel Wolfson
Technical Writer
052-763-7133


On 26-Feb-13 9:28 PM, Robert Lauriston wrote:
> Thinking about the bizarre UI bugs Rick Quatro reported today, I'm
> wondering how the product got to this sad state.
>
> FM started out on Unix, and a lot of dialogs seem like they haven't
> changed since then, or at least not since the original Mac and Windows
> ports in 1990 and 1992. But that stuff was pretty much rock-solid up
> through FM8.
>
> My impression is that the UI changes Adobe introduced in FM9 were made
> using the Adobe OS Widget Library (OWL), which is designed to provide
> a consistent UI for the Mac and Windows versions of Adobe's products.
>
> Unlike most of those products, FM has no Mac version. If Adobe's QA is
> done primarily on Macs, that could explain why the product has been
> getting buggier and weirder with each release. All the cross-platform
> apps could benefit from a shared library of tools, while FrameMaker
> and any other Windows-only apps would need additional work that the
> budget might not allow.
> ___
>
>
> You are currently subscribed to framers as shmuelw1 at gmail.com.
>
> Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
> or visit 
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/shmuelw1%40gmail.com
>
> Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
> http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
>

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Steve Rickaby]

At 11:28 -0800 26/2/13, Robert Lauriston wrote:

>Thinking about the bizarre UI bugs Rick Quatro reported today, I'm
>wondering how the product got to this sad state.

I remember being told a long time ago that the pre-Adobe versions of FrameMaker 
were so efficient on the limited hardware of those days because a lot of the 
code had been optimized in Assembler. This and other factors would make it a 
very different application internally to something that has been designed from 
the ground up using a more modern code base and techniques, such as InDesign.

With this as a starting point, it might go some way towards explaining why the 
attempts to 'Adobify' FrameMaker post-FM8 have been hard for the guys doing the 
work.

None of this would justify poor UI design or testing, though.

-- 
Steve [wondering why he bought FM10]

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Yves Barbion]

I can understand that Adobe tries to have the same consistent UI across all
its products. And yes, we all go with the flow as software and UIs evolve,
so I have grown accustomed to the new "look", but my main concern is
productivity. Each new version of FrameMaker seems to require more clicks
to get something done:

   - Click Apply (hate that button)
   - Close pods/panels/consoles
   - More submenus (e.g. Table > Format > ...)
   - Slower, longer or broken "shortcuts": F9, F8, CTRL+1... To see a
   master page in Fm 10, it takes ALT+v+m; in Fm 11 this takes ALT+v+m+m+ENTER.
   - "Are you sure you want to reset this workspace to its original
   layout?" Sure I am, why do you think I chose the Reset Workspace command?
   - Preferences > Interface > "Use GreyScale Application Icon". Huh?
   Really? I guess/hope this is some kind of easter egg?

I hope Adobe will pay some more attention to this for the next (patch)
release.

Cheers


Yves
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Jack DeLand]

I started using Frame at version 9.  I found the previous interface(s) to be
awkward, weird, and intimidating, as did some of my colleagues. I tried at
version 4 and put it away. I'm not delighted with everything about the pods
interface, and the bugs are definitely "troubling", but it seems to me that
Adobe was trying to please (impress?) a new crop of users. It worked with
me. In general, I enjoy the flexibility of the new interface, and I can
always reset the workspace to my liking. It's a major improvement from my
point of view.

Just one person's opinion. C'est la vie.

Jack DeLand, CSM | 734 972 3026 (cell) | jack.deland (skype) |
www.linkedin.com/in/jackdeland

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Karen Robbins]

I don't think Adobe's UI work has anything to do with Macs. In fact, 
it seems to be the antithesis of Mac UI design! :-)

Recent/current versions of FM's UI (and those of other Adobe 
products) apparently do not make comprehensible use of usability 
research! The complaints I read on this list frequently point to how 
the bad UI interferes with and requires extra steps to workflow. For 
the complex projects of Adobe's target FM users, one would think that 
exceptionally efficient and intuitive workflow would be demanded and 
required. From a user's standpoint, consistency at the expense of 
usability is, at best, ineffective.

As long as we keep using this (and all) Adobe products--and do so 
without creative and instructional criticism, their UIs will continue 
to be designed ineffectively. Only when users speak up with voices 
and dollars [insert your local currency here] is there a chance for 
the UI to improve.

--Karen

why is FM's UI so weird and buggy?

[Robert Lauriston]

Thinking about the bizarre UI bugs Rick Quatro reported today, I'm
wondering how the product got to this sad state.

FM started out on Unix, and a lot of dialogs seem like they haven't
changed since then, or at least not since the original Mac and Windows
ports in 1990 and 1992. But that stuff was pretty much rock-solid up
through FM8.

My impression is that the UI changes Adobe introduced in FM9 were made
using the Adobe OS Widget Library (OWL), which is designed to provide
a consistent UI for the Mac and Windows versions of Adobe's products.

Unlike most of those products, FM has no Mac version. If Adobe's QA is
done primarily on Macs, that could explain why the product has been
getting buggier and weirder with each release. All the cross-platform
apps could benefit from a shared library of tools, while FrameMaker
and any other Windows-only apps would need additional work that the
budget might not allow.