Thread: [Declined] Please switch GUI to match JD1
View Single Post
  #11  
Old 05.02.2014, 15:57
McFrog
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pspzockerscene View Post
If you guys wqant, you can make suggestions for better default settings BUT keep in mind that our goal is NOT to make JD2 look like JD1.
Hi psp!

You are the 'first defensive line' here so you will have to admit, that there are a lot of questions, problems and discussions coming up, which finally lead to the cognition, that there are no bugs or missing functions. The users just don't find what they need (especially not where they are used to find it in JD1).

I agree with you concerning questions like 'why do i find ... at the bottom now? I liked it better in the menu-bar where it was before'. But almost 30 years as a developer and project-manager helped me to learn a lot as to design upgrades or new versions of software. IMHO you should think about the following:
  • JD1 is a strong going program with millions of installations and users.
  • The development to make JD1 the success it is took years - years of experience, knowledge and enhancements with the help of the community-feedback.
  • There's no need to throw it all away. The lessons learned in the past are your most important and valuable assets.

I know that developers often tend to handle previous versions like a 'piece of shit' because it's not their own baby. But if they act this way, they should better go back to the sandbox and play. If there is no improvement or technical reason for a change, you should always try to keep things 'as is'.

If you disable and move standard-functions, that are regularly needed and were 'always on top and visible' in JD1, to a sub-sub-sub-menu, this means forcing millions of users to search for them and to configure JD2 (and means millions of swearings as well). So in my opinion the default settings should always provide a JD2 'looking as much like JD1 as possible'. Or at least assure, that the user can find the things he is used to without endless searches and configurations.

Same thing with (sub)menu-commands. In JD2 there is a huddle of functions (especially in the right-click-menus of the linkgrabber) that are given other names, even new icons and - to make matters worse - additionally are moved to other places or even sub-menus. There is absolutely no logical or technical need for those changes and each and every like (sorry) like this turns millions of users nuts.

So if there is no technical requirement or at least a little improvement, that leads to a change or a new design, you should always try to keep the look and feel of JD1. It was developed over years, is well-proven and millions of users are used to it's handling.

Reducing the changes to the necessary will help the users to concentrate on the handling of the new features of JD2. This way they will be able to see and enjoy the progress from the beginning of it's usage. If they all have to search first for the things they miss, they will be angry before they have a chance to see the benefits.

There is no need to prove, that JD2 is a new development by nonsensically changing as much as possible - even if the developer thinks it's smarter or way more beautiful (what might be discussed). What would you think, if Mercedes, Toyota, Volkswagen ... would come up with the idea of finding a new place and design for the blinker-switch in every new car they develop. Even if it looks more modern or sophisticated...

Maybe developers too often forget, that they don't just work for themselves. There are a few people out there, that have to deal with the things they do. And not just what they do, but even the way they do it.

Sorry guys - nonetheless you do a real great job. Just don't be so vain...

Just my 2 cents
McFrog
Reply With Quote