Revolution Manager User Experience and UI. Help make it amazing.

Quote from: purpler at Aug 17, 2010, 03:13 PM

1. Having that in mind, who know how much bloat was added to other elements which makes whole thing # needlessly crowded.. the backend is really poorly coded IMHO since its possible to make that one single button whole lot more simpler and quicker than this. Whats wrong with simple <a href=""></a> or <button> elements styled via css to look exactly the same as these if wanted?

This is because of ExtJS, the JS framework behind the manager UI, which allows us to do rapid UI development, drag/drop, windows, etc. Their markup has gotten better with each release, and I believe 4.0 will solve most issues.

Settings are really badly organized and not obvious and those found in Evo are far more better solution for majority of people, from UX point of view.

Debatable; I could say a "majority" of people say that finding settings is much easier in Revo, because of the searchability function.

Also, tabs are simply *not* an option anymore, since the # of settings in Revo is much, much larger, and is also not a fixed value. Each Extra can have settings, and when adding 10+ extras, this gets huge. A searchable, filterable grid, to be honest, is the only way to scale this.

And what i find worst than everything is that little floating Save bar which constantly gets on my way. It doesn’t make sense that such menu stays there when there is bunch of free space on other places which could be used better to make menu more accessible and distraction free.

Again, debatable - I find this much more usable than leaving the save buttons at the top, where I have to scroll up every time to save. Now, as for their position, that’s definitely up for discussion.

Quote from: bretbouchard at Aug 17, 2010, 03:27 PM

I would like to be able to easily have multiple items in different tabs. If I want to have a page, a template and chunk open in tabs I have to open a page from the top drop down menu ( i.e. Manage user, system settings, etc) in a new tab, then back into the chunk or template.

Already done, in windows - see "Quick Update/Create".

Doing tab-based causes many problems and makes the app more JS-heavy. Quick update/create is a much more lightweight solution to this.

Quote from: purpler at Aug 17, 2010, 03:13 PM

I have usability concerns since first impression is that application is way too much code bloating the base.
<snip>
My other frustration is unbelievable amount of JS code used since it really makes hard for people with no brand-new computers and components to accomplish the task with constant hiccups from buttons which do not react on clicks to hung document saving and eternally lasting "Please Wait, Saving" window where only browser page reload helps.

These are valid concerns tied to ExtJS generated UIs as Shaun and others stated. For now there’s not a lot we can do about it but we are aware and it will get better over time. Thanks for your feedback (and see my previous post for one option).

1.- @Shaun

Quote from: charliez on Today at 10:18:00
4. I create new tabs and TVs and then move the TVs and some fields to the new tab. It would be great to be able to select the tab where the new TV would go and select the action(s) instead of setting all the rules one by one.

4. Can you elaborate on this?

For example:
In all my sites I create a new SEO tab, then create around 10-12 TVs related to Metatags, Sitemap and GAnalytics.
Then I move all the TVs to the new tab and I also move description and alias, to this tab to have everything together.

With MM I would do this with two or three lines of code.
With the new FC rules it takes a lot of time and repeating...

Why do I do this?
I hide all unused stuff and just leave what the client will need in the manager.
So it looks like the client is just filling some forms... works great!
[The new TV tabs could modify this, I have not finished my first Revo site yet!]

Suggested solutions:

1) When I create a new TV, have a drop-down with the new tabs (if they exist) and actions (multi-select)
to select. So in essence I would be creating the new TVs and its rules at the same time. All in one time.

2) Package the FC Rules, new tabs, etc in PackMan so then all is set after installing the distribution.



2.- I like the new settings UI. I just went through all of them one time and now with the "section" filter
can find almost everything really fast. A minor issue is what already has been mentioned, when changing a
setting there is no clear way to see if it is saved or not. I think that it is when the small red triangle
disappears but sometimes the triangle never appears... for me...

3.- for the floating Save Bar, I still like my idea of the floating side bar. I mocked-up it up here:
http://www.mercologia.com/revo/index1.html. It could be done with onclick or onmouseover, and instead of a
menu, the button row will appear (horizontally as it is now, or vertically on the edge).

Thanks, Jay, for setting up this thread. I feel like, generally speaking, the MODx manager is built for MODx developers. I see the manager as being especially challenging for end users, administrators (non-developers) and designers. Here is some specific feedback:

User Management
In Evolution, creating a "role" that was only able to edit resources was quite easy. You’d create a role, assign permissions (descriptions were all very straight forward written in plain English with little-to-no ambiguity). You’d then assign users to the appropriate role and you were done.

In Revolution, there are "User Groups", "Roles", and "Access Policies." When creating or editing an access policy, permissions are overly complex and cryptic. If I’m not a developer, for example, a permission with the name of "create" and description of "Basic "create" access on new objects" sounds like nonsense. If you want to add a new permission to an access policy, you need to know the permission name ahead of time. Without spending a significant amount of time reading documentation I was unable to set up a user that was only able to view and edit resources.

Creating New Categories
In Evolution, you could create new categories on-the-fly when creating a template. You had the option to choose an "existing category", or specify a "new category." The option to create a "new category" at the time you’re adding an element seems to be missing.

Weblink vs. Symlink
For an end user, I think the distinction between a Weblink and Symlink will be lost and will only create confusion.

JavaScript Select Boxes
I don’t see why every select box in the manager is actually handled with JavaScript/ ExtJS. It seems like a standard <select> element would offer better performance (eliminating the need for an ajax call) and accessibility.

Settings Page
As others have mentioned, the settings page is not user friendly. Unless you know specifically what you’re looking for it’s much more difficult to find a setting, or understand what a specific setting does, when compared to Evolution. Also, it’s not entirely clear how one would edit a particular setting. Right-clicking or double clicking is not intuitive. Using an ajax call to save settings on blur seems to be inefficient and time consuming, especially if you need to edit multiple settings.

Summary
I’d say my biggest complaint is, what seems like, overuse of ExtJS and "bloat." Revo feels like it was designed by developers rather than UX professionals. That’s fine, but I see this as a limiting factor in adoption and use. I, for one, don’t feel comfortable using Revo for client-managed sites. It’s just overwhelming.

Evo felt like a CMS + CMF. It feels like, in Revo, the focus was entirely on the framework and capabilities that would be offered to developers rather than making a system that would be easy for non-technical users to administer and use.

I’m not sure if I’ll continue to use MODx or not. But I’d be willing to donate $100.00 if I was given assurance that my donation would be used specifically for the purpose of hiring a UX designer for the next iteration of the manager UI. If others were willing to donate for the same purpose, perhaps you could establish a decent budget for UX/ UI?

Disclaimer: This was written prior to my second cup of coffee. If it’s a bit incoherent, I apologize in advance.

Quote from: splittingred at Aug 17, 2010, 03:42 PM

This is because of ExtJS, the JS framework behind the manager UI, which allows us to do rapid UI development, drag/drop, windows, etc. Their markup has gotten better with each release, and I believe 4.0 will solve most issues.

I hate to be overly critical here, but I don’t know that "rapid UI development" justifies a poor user experience - and maybe that’s not what you’re saying. Then again, it really depends on what your goals are and who the intended audience is.

As far as the settings page goes, I agree that it’s kind of frustrating to locate settings, but I also agree that tabs probably aren’t a good idea. Here are a couple suggestions:

1) Have an option for the number of settings per page. I like to see 100-200 settings on one page because I’m pretty quick with scrolling to what I need. Some people might only want 10. So make a pulldown box with some options.

2) Perhaps the filter could also locate sections instead of just specific settings? I often myself wanting, say, the the TinyMCE settings, but if I type "tinymce" into the filter I only get settings that explicitly contain that text. It’d be great if I typed "tinymce" and it showed the whole section.

Charlie, these are great suggestions for FormCustomization enhancements. I’d definitely like to improve this section a lot. Can you start up a new thread with your suggestions, and we’ll dialog on a solution for Revo 2.1? I’d like to separate it from this thread as it’s a pretty big topic.

Quote from: Compeek at Aug 17, 2010, 06:19 PM

1) Have an option for the number of settings per page. I like to see 100-200 settings on one page because I’m pretty quick with scrolling to what I need. Some people might only want 10. So make a pulldown box with some options.

Great suggestion. Can you file it here: http://bugs.modx.com/

2) Perhaps the filter could also locate sections instead of just specific settings? I often myself wanting, say, the the TinyMCE settings, but if I type "tinymce" into the filter I only get settings that explicitly contain that text. It’d be great if I typed "tinymce" and it showed the whole section.

This already exists - filter by namespace. Click on where it says ’core’ and change to ’tinymce’.

Quote from: splittingred at Aug 17, 2010, 06:36 PM

Quote from: Compeek at Aug 17, 2010, 06:19 PM

1) Have an option for the number of settings per page. I like to see 100-200 settings on one page because I’m pretty quick with scrolling to what I need. Some people might only want 10. So make a pulldown box with some options.

Great suggestion. Can you file it here: http://bugs.modx.com/

Sure thing.

Quote from: splittingred at Aug 17, 2010, 06:36 PM

2) Perhaps the filter could also locate sections instead of just specific settings? I often myself wanting, say, the the TinyMCE settings, but if I type "tinymce" into the filter I only get settings that explicitly contain that text. It’d be great if I typed "tinymce" and it showed the whole section.

This already exists - filter by namespace. Click on where it says ’core’ and change to ’tinymce’.

Actually, I knew that. I’m not sure what I was thinking.