Differences between versions.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on March 5, 2014 at 3:36pm

It depends on the change I think. If it genuinely makes things better perhaps the long term benefits outweigh the short term drawbacks. Change for the sake of change is not good, but change for the sake of improvement is. I realize that there are costs to every change and that the invalidation of existing training material is often the biggest one. However I'm not willing to subscribe a priori to either extreme (i.e. "don't change, ever" vs. "change whenever you feel like it") and rather make each decision separately.

As a UI designer, I try to focus mostly on intermediate and expert users. Beginners are never beginners for long, they either drop out in which case I don't care about them or they move on to become intermediates.

Also note that GH only recently went from alpha to beta software, and that the interface is quite experimental. However it is impossible to know whether a certain interface decision works until it actually goes out and user response/critique comes back. 

Is there a specific change that prompted this post or is it an accumulation of annoyance?

--

David Rutten

david@mcneel.com

Permalink Reply by djordje on March 6, 2014 at 3:49am

I miss the old pre 0.9.0014 boolean toggle design. It was kinda more appealing, with those two separate rectangles. The new one is a bit robust (personal opinion).

Permalink Reply by Anders Holden Deleuran on March 6, 2014 at 10:58am

+1, it was visually similar to sliders and parameters. In fact I will often use a True/False value list due to the design of the new boolean toggle/button. The less fonts and colors the better, in my Dieter Ramsian/Scandinavian Minimalist opinion ;)

Permalink Reply by djordje on March 6, 2014 at 6:13pm

Yes, agree on the preference part about toggles being similar in looks with sliders.

Permalink Reply by Jimmy McLauclain on March 6, 2014 at 9:05am

Hi.

There's no specific change I had in mind. Every day I'm using few cad/graphic/modeling software products. Every now and again (mostly yearly) updates appear and it always takes time to get use to changed functions. Adding new options is always an advantage but in my opinion changing or combining functions may not be the best idea.

I remember when Autodesk changed Autocad and added ribbons, but they also kept option for classic 'old view' and I've noticed that most of old users changed to old view straight away. I understand that this is strictly visual and it can not work like that when it comes to button functionality.

Maybe there should be a topic for people to put their ideas what options or functionallity is missing to improve GS?

By the way, i think GS as a software is amazing and so are the creators for doing it.

Permalink Reply by Michael Pryor on March 6, 2014 at 10:51am

I think you have to remember that Autocad is not a beta. GH is a beta. 

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on March 6, 2014 at 11:36am

I've noticed that most of old users changed to old view straight away.

The "Come Overs" to the Isle of Man have a joke about the local "Yessirs" it goes like this:

Q. How many Manxmen does it take to change a light bulb?

A. None. They all fear change!

Every single time Windows has brought out a significant update everyone I have ever met has greeted it with disdain, yet I couldn't imagine using the interface to windows 95 again... and I certainly couldn't imagine going back to using Explicit History again.

Personally I try to embrace the changes, but I often find that for a few of them several weeks will go by before I hate it or love it... and then give feedback.

I think air your view on specifics and you will get a lot of discussion from both sides of the equation so don't be afraid to speak up about it.