| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | KudoZ - new interface available for testing and feedback Thread poster: Henry Dotterer
|
|---|
| I like the fresh look though | Jan 8, 2020 |
Well, old habits die hard it seems, also on ProZ.com
The look is fresh and appealing (without forgetting ProZ.com traditional colors that I appreciate).
I believe the focus ought to be on what's agreeable while forgetting how we are used to live the site.
On this note, the longer I look at it, the better I like it. Again, a softer white would buy my loyalty to the new design.
G... See more Well, old habits die hard it seems, also on ProZ.com
The look is fresh and appealing (without forgetting ProZ.com traditional colors that I appreciate).
I believe the focus ought to be on what's agreeable while forgetting how we are used to live the site.
On this note, the longer I look at it, the better I like it. Again, a softer white would buy my loyalty to the new design.
Giuliana ▲ Collapse
| | | | Daryo
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:36
Serbian to English
+ ...
| Why am I locked in this experimental /unfinished design? | Jan 8, 2020 |
"Taking a look at a new design" in my understanding doesn't mean ending up locked in a new unfinished design. I simply can not get back to the previous design.
I can't see any substantial improvement, only "cosmetic changes".
In many places italic / bold / underlined tags work no more, so previously published text looks now like a mess. So much for "improved look".
Also, in this version it's impossible to reformulate the question before answering - which oc... See more "Taking a look at a new design" in my understanding doesn't mean ending up locked in a new unfinished design. I simply can not get back to the previous design.
I can't see any substantial improvement, only "cosmetic changes".
In many places italic / bold / underlined tags work no more, so previously published text looks now like a mess. So much for "improved look".
Also, in this version it's impossible to reformulate the question before answering - which occasionally needs to be done, as some questions are the result of wrong parsing, and "as asked" make no sense whatsoever. Can't see that as any kind of "improvement".
How to get back to the version of Kudoz that wasn't broken in the first place? ▲ Collapse
| | | | | I switched you back | Jan 9, 2020 |
Hi Daryo. The link to go back and forth between designs is at the top of the page. I switched you back. Thanks for the feedback, we'll make the required corrections.
| | | | Xanthippe
France
Local time: 01:36
Member (2008)
Italian to French
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER
Hello,
I like this new version of Kudoz.
| | |
|
|
|
Muriel Vasconcellos (X) 
United States
Local time: 16:36
Spanish to English
+ ...
| It ain't broke. Why fix it? | Jan 9, 2020 |
Henry Dotterer wrote:
I switched back because:
[X] The new design is unfamiliar and therefore difficult to use
[X] Legibility is an issue in the new design
[X] I prefer the colors in the old design
[X] I couldn't find something I need in the new interface
I don't see the point. It slows me down. Speed is really important when I'm asking or answering a question.
| | | | | I could get used to it | Jan 9, 2020 |
Admittedly, I like the old version, why fix it?
But it is probably not ideal for everyone.
I work mostly on a large desktop screen, the larger the better, so the new version seems very airy and large-print to me. However, given that most people probably work on smaller screens, and some might even use smart phones for KudoZ, I can appreciate it has to fit the majority.
The current version is definitely better than the first attempts.
Webfonts would certainly... See more Admittedly, I like the old version, why fix it?
But it is probably not ideal for everyone.
I work mostly on a large desktop screen, the larger the better, so the new version seems very airy and large-print to me. However, given that most people probably work on smaller screens, and some might even use smart phones for KudoZ, I can appreciate it has to fit the majority.
The current version is definitely better than the first attempts.
Webfonts would certainly be a help.
I sometimes have time to use the old b and i [ < b >b and < i >i< / i > ] procedures, and they are sometimes useful in an explanation.
They are a pain to insert and check the old way, if you need a lot, so they get skipped most of the time! ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Don't like the new look. The old look is much better. | Jan 10, 2020 |
The old format is amazing. The spacing is great, naturally intuitive. No matter how many discussions within answers or summary section, no matter how many people weigh in, it is all documented with great use of spacing and colors. The old page layout of everything makes it inviting to read/discuss. The peer comment boxes are WAY better in the old format. The lettering in the explanation section is not in your face (like the new one) and it is easier to read.
If there is a way to opt... See more The old format is amazing. The spacing is great, naturally intuitive. No matter how many discussions within answers or summary section, no matter how many people weigh in, it is all documented with great use of spacing and colors. The old page layout of everything makes it inviting to read/discuss. The peer comment boxes are WAY better in the old format. The lettering in the explanation section is not in your face (like the new one) and it is easier to read.
If there is a way to opt for the old one, I would do so. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Alison MacG
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:36
German to English
+ ...
| Desktop versus mobile | Jan 10, 2020 |
Henry Dotterer wrote:
I can see that many of the people who tried the new interface (about 40%) have switched back to the old one. Why did you go back?
I switched back because:
I switched back because:
I use a desktop (never a mobile) and the old interface works well on a desktop. It quite simply provides a better all-round experience than the new mobile-friendlier interface.
KudoZ is quite a complex system and I’m not sure it lends itself well to a simplified design. I’m sure I could force myself to get used to the new version, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. I largely do KudoZ for fun and I don’t think I’ll find it difficult to stop if and when the new version becomes permanent.
Henry Dotterer wrote:
… is a bit simpler, better meets certain modern requirements (like those from Google) and will display better on mobile phones.
While I understand that Google does not rate the existing pages as mobile-friendly and that this affects their ranking in search results, designs intended to help people browsing with their thumbs on smartphones are usually much less pleasing on a desktop.
Giant fonts and white space everywhere - to the sides, between each line of information, between clickable (sorry, tappable) links - leading to a reduction in the content and information visible on screen, thus increasing PgDn operations and scrolling.
Simplified menu options - more clicks/operations are required to access features and everything takes longer.
Icons (sometimes mysterious icons) everywhere - we are translators, we understand words, we actually like words and we can cope with more than a few of them at a time. Some of the old features a previous contributor could not find are in fact hiding behind icons. (For a short time yesterday the link to return to the previous version of KudoZ was even hidden behind an icon!)
A big negative for me is the way the discussion box is currently working in the new interface. I use the following setting:
Discussion board entry order Oldest to newest
However, my Oldest to newest setting is not being applied to the new interface. I don’t know if it’s just me and the way my brain works, but I find it completely unnatural to read a thread upside down. While many people do use the default Newest to oldest setting (you can tell when they say in the discussion See my comment below, rather than above), I don’t know whether that is by choice or whether it’s because they don’t realise they can change it - the option is hidden away in the My KudoZ settings rather than being offered at the discussion board itself in the more conventional manner.
A few more general observations:
The use of time stamps overall is now a little inconsistent. The list page now gives x minutes/hours/days ago on the right (bad) instead of a precise time and date on the left (good), while the page for the specific question still uses the format of the old interface (specific time for the question and number of minutes/hours later for any answers) albeit on the right rather than on the left.
The list page now includes one of the proposed answers even before the question is closed - I’m not sure that this is necessary or helpful.
Some interesting changes have been made to the information that can be obtained about askers and answerers by hovering over and/or clicking links, although there are once again some issues.
1. In the old interface, hovering over the asker’s name gives number of questions, number open, number without valid answers, number closed without grading, number of answers. In the new interface, the number of questions and answers by the asker are listed on screen (good), but you have to click on the more link to find the number closed without valid answers (bad) and the information about questions closed without grading doesn’t seem to be available at all (very bad). It is important to know if an asker has a history of closing questions without grading.
2. One of the items of information available when clicking more is Works in: This then lists up to 3 language pairs. If the member works in more than three pairs, it says and x more. This is misleading, however. When it says, for example, and 7 more, it doesn’t mean 7 pairs as you might assume, but in fact 3 pairs and one monolingual.
Sorry, but you did say feel free to be blunt.
| | |
|
|
|
| Thank you Alison! | Jan 10, 2020 |
Very useful posting! Thanks for taking the time.
Have a nice weekend!
| | | | | Thanks, Sandro and Christine! | Jan 10, 2020 |
Much appreciated!
| | | | Michael Beijer
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:36
Member
Dutch to English
+ ...
Hi Henry,
I actually kind of like the new interface and am using it now. One small point, when drafting my question, and then clicking something (can't remember what), there is a stage before the question gets posted where your text gets run together (i.e. line endings stripped out). However, in the final question they are back as normal. This is slightly disconcerting.
Michael
| | | | | Thank you, Michael | Jan 12, 2020 |
Michael Beijer wrote:
I actually kind of like the new interface and am using it now.
That's great to hear.
One small point, when drafting my question, and then clicking something (can't remember what), there is a stage before the question gets posted where your text gets run together (i.e. line endings stripped out). However, in the final question they are back as normal. This is slightly disconcerting.
We'll fix that.
It is clear that there are many other areas that can be improved. If you have any other requests or suggestions, we'll try to get them in next week.
| | |
|
|
|
Daryo
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:36
Serbian to English
+ ...
| Simply make a version for mobiles? | Jan 12, 2020 |
many sites have two versions - a "normal/standard" version for desktops/laptops and another for smaller mobile phone/tablet screens, the difference being in an added "m." prefix.
Wouldn't that be far better than trying to square the circle with a "one-fits-all" version (not going to happen - what is good on a mobile is a waste of space on a PC and what is good on a bigger screen is too crammed on a mobile, no escaping that!)
| | | | | We are using "responsive web design". You can make proposals accordingly | Jan 13, 2020 |
Daryo wrote:
many sites have two versions - a "normal/standard" version for desktops/laptops and another for smaller mobile phone/tablet screens, the difference being in an added "m." prefix.
Wouldn't that be far better than trying to square the circle with a "one-fits-all" version (not going to happen - what is good on a mobile is a waste of space on a PC and what is good on a bigger screen is too crammed on a mobile, no escaping that!)
There is sort of a way to escape that, albeit imperfectly. What is common these days, and what we are doing, is using "responsive web design". Basically, you make one design that "scales" with the client, so that it appears differently on a desktop than it does on a phone.
To see this in action, you can view a KudoZ term page on a desktop browser, and then gradually reduce the width of the browser. You will see that some items shrink, some move around, some are abbreviated, and some disappear.
If you have specific preferences, it is reasonable to propose here that a certain piece of information in a KudoZ page be made to appear on desktop, for example, without necessarily needing it to appear on a mobile phone.
(Given the apparent appreciation of the density of the old design expressed in several recent posts, I have wondered whether we should be "bringing back" some of the info we have simplified out -- of course only in the wider display mode.)
| | | | | Image upload to be introduced | Jan 14, 2020 |
Hey folks,
We are going to release an image upload option, at least in answers. Feedback appreciated.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » KudoZ - new interface available for testing and feedback | Pastey | Your smart companion app
Pastey is an innovative desktop application that bridges the gap between human expertise and artificial intelligence. With intuitive keyboard shortcuts, Pastey transforms your source text into AI-powered draft translations.
Find out more » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
