Am 08.01.2015 22:04, schrieb Francis Lachapelle: Hallo,
The v2 theme hasn't changed for years. It's time to move on.I don't even want to know how much time we waste every year re-training users because someone found it was necessary to "move on". I hope the v3 design will be good enough to stay with us for a couple of years as well.I understand your concern. We hope the interfaces of v3 will last as long as the ones of v2.
I still hope you will be providing a "classic" user interface that follows the direction of the "good old-style paradigm", which is:
- you really can SEE what a button is, because a button is something that can be pressed and as such is elevated (we had "buttons" which cannot be seen as such in Windows8 but also in the era of black-and-white screens)
- you can see what functions a software offers because the functions are offered to the users -- and not hidden in ways like "this function is only shown when you select something in exactly this way". This goes against the direction of showing functions ONLY in a "context-sensitive" way. Context-sensitive showing of functions is something for a context-menu, which is available through the right mouse button-menu or a "gear-wheel" menu.
- you can distinguish icons by its *color* -- the human eye can really distinguish between colors! Many software products and "web applications" of todays time have grayscale icons which are only distinguishable through their shape, not through their color. But searching for the icon "with the red X in it" is so much easyier than trying to find an icon wich may look "like a trashcan".
None is too many, sometimes. Why do we need floating buttons now when we just spent years training users to use the toolbars?I don't think the paradigm is far from the traditional toolbars.
> The goal is really to have an intuitive interface, simpler to use.I hope that this simpler does not mean the same as the Windows8-like or Apple-like "simpler", which does only mean "uglier" and "harder to use".
You have to notice that many users really use this kind of software on a daily basis, so it is not necessary to dumb-down the software or its UI.
Many users have learned for over 20 years now how to use a user interface which is based on menus, toolbars, lists, real buttons etc.
Please do not throw away this knowledge just for "being modern".
That's just my observations with recent "UX improvements" from Google/Microsoft/random webapps copying their styles – or rather, the main things my users complain about to me. It takes too long to identify interactive elements (due to the "everything must be flat and there can't be any elevated elements" craze – Material isn't the worst offender here, thankfully), and when they do, the elements randomly disappear because users try to reach them from a slightly different context, like in Firefox' and Office 2013's context dependant context menus – Firefox doesn't even show keyboard shortcuts any more, so while they still exist, the average user wouldn't know how to look them up.Flat design as it was initially proposed had weaknesses.
> Apple and other software companies have adjusted their user
interfaces since then. We'll do our best to not repeat those errors.
Then PLEASE PLEASE offer an additional "classic style" theme with elevated, really-look-as-if-you-can-click-on-it buttons, real toolbars etc. which does not pop up new things every now and then out of nowhere and which does not use half of the screen for oversized headers (like Google Material Design does.
By the way, just compare the old and new look of the GMail app on Android (Old Android Design vs. "Material Design"):
http://m.c.lnkd.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/p/6/005/073/2ac/2ffbebe.jpgThe old interface shows more content and more information on the same screen -- and the content is not overlapped with some "create new" bubble. Also the "menu bar" offers more functions than now. Also it was easyier to distinguish between two messages because of a darker line between them.
Just an example...
As long as the shiney new presentation doesn't impact productivity, I won't mind. But far too many recent re-designs sacrificed usability to be more impressive in presentations, and I'm more than a bit wary of them by now.We are totally aware that SOGo is a productivity tool and needs a very good usability.
I hope so.On one system, I have to work with Office2010, I still have problems finding some functions thanks to the "Ribbon" design. When using LibreOffice, which respects the users preference for real menus, it is easier for me to find functions and options. Just another example.
Kind regards, Anna Christina Naß
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Kryptografische Unterschrift
