Help! I hate new format!
Answers
-
rotkapchen said: 9. Is a new feature. Click on the ID and there's a copy function that appears (took me a while too.0
-
Jeff Wiseman said: I think K.D. is saying that she wants to copy both the person name and ID number at the same time. Something that we USED to be able to do using standard copy/paste techniques that has been eliminated by the fancy PID copy popup/fake link/whatever "improvement" that was added.
If download speed was so important, why did they add all the extra support for the little popups on every PID in the view which now prevents anyone from doing a normal drag-selection for copying things?0 -
Don M Thomas said: I apologies, Alex Sellers.0
-
m said: "Editing vital data is now TOO easy! It will get changed inadvertently just trying to view what sources are associated..."
2nd this.0 -
m said: My point is that the divergence in the path which is opposite of the competitor websites MIGHT be like a company saying "let's start using VHS even though the competitors use Blu-Ray/DVD."
Maybe when a group of competitor companies all take a certain path it is a better path.
Maybe diverging from that path will in the long run turn out to not work and a reversal in course will happen.0 -
Scott Hill said: This supports might theory - same applies to how they altered the formatting of the city, county, state, country to be slightly different to require editing that slows down our work.0
-
m said: Technical up-grade but the user-experience is that it FEELS like a down-grade.0
-
m said: An example:
A car manufacturer can make a car with driver in back seat/passengers in front seats even though all competitor car manufacturers make cars with driver in front seat/passengers in back seats.
It is possible. BUT, car manufacturers don't take that divergent path which is the opposite of competitor car manufacturers. The reason is that common path is taken by all competitor car manufacturers because it is a better path.
The car structure with driver in front is an agreed-upon common path of car manufacturers (for a reason).0 -
Don M Thomas said: Wholeheartedly agree.0
-
Don M Thomas said: Sounds like the United Order. I have a Chevrolet Corvet that is real fast, but I have to give it up and settle for a Ford Model T.? - With the old interface it was all on one page, and now with the new interface it takes 3 pages and a lot more clicking. Sounds and feels like I am being punished because of my fast speed.0
-
Pioneer42 said: I have been saying that forever. With new program they went back to stone age on other tabs that are links and not tabbed windows, like memories0
-
Pioneer42 said: Ron the problem with the new interface is the tabs and links they are all the real "hassle". Nobody in there right mind wants to go to a tab for sources, collaboration maybe, but not sources. Every single time you have to correlate a name or a date with a source you have to then memorize that info before you go into the source tab now, and then yo have to go back to vital screen and have now lost the retention in your brain. It is always faster to scroll to look at both at same time, I am sorry that baby boomers are not computer saavy. This is a big problem to all advanced work such as what i know to do. All this has done now is slow down the work and made it visually inadequate. Whenever you click like memories now or show all changes, the load times to open another window and back and forth now is such a delay, takes forever to do a simple change that the history button could have done in the same window from before. There also would be as much of a problem on this system too, if people would stop submitting there huge gedcoms, its just ridiculous. Anyways i digress, all the duplicates fixed and then more added. Unreal.0
-
m said: Car design, airplane design, building design, website design...
Structure and agreed upon structure path commonalities across competitors are usually there for a reason.
A company can take the opposite structure path of all competitors and build a car with driver in the back seat, but it is not done for a reason.
You can build a skyscraper on stilts----someone actually did build a skyscraper on stilts----but it is not done for a reason.0 -
Jeff Wiseman said: m,
I understand your reasoning here. "Structure begets structure" and "form follows function" are some of the truths that I believe you are referring to, and I also agree with.
But sometimes it can legitimatly become a little more clouded though when complex engineering is involved. For example, if statistically it were shown that most people injured in car accidents are sitting in the front seat, and statistically it were shown that over 90% of the time, only the driver's seat is occupied. It may then be REASONABLE to place the driver in the back seat as a mitigation to reduce injuries.
Now obviously, these new benefits would have to be (i.e., SHOULD BE) analyzed against the benefits of having the seat in the front (e.g., better view, simpler steering construction, etc.) to come up with reasonable solutions. I.e., solutions that do not exceed an overall predefined risk threshold.
Long experience in the automotive industry has shown that improving the protection for the front seat positions (e.g., crumple zones, air bags, etc.) are far better mitigations
This can produce "innovations" that are surprising, and if a proper risk assessment has not been performed, the "innovations" may very well turn out to be handicaps in areas that were traded off. Frequently, new design can be focused on solving a single problem, forgetting other issues. This is why a thing call "regression testing" exists in other parts of the industry to make sure that not only new components in a product work correctly, but that the previously existing features still meet specifications (i.e., they have not been compromised by the addition of new features and changes)
And buildings on stilts? Why would anyone want to waste all that space under their house and have to go to the extra costs of reinforcing such a multiple level building?
Well, all the neighbors we had in Carolina beach just south of Wilmington this very day are quite glad their homes and apartments were on stilts! :-)0 -
m said: SKYSCRAPER on stilts. (Someone did build a skyscraper on stilts!)0
-
W David Samuelsen said: Like this one in New York City?
https://secretsofmanhattan.wordpress....0 -
m said: Yes, that's it!0
-
Jeff Wiseman said: Here's one I used to live near and it only has one "leg". But it's supposed to be earthquake resistant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Qub...0 -
Tom Huber said: Interesting, the Seattle Space Needle, a relic of the 1962 world's fair, went through a large earth quake. (Added: Actually four of them, one not included in those mentioned in the next paragraph.)
If you look at the structure, it looks like it should not have survived. Ironically, one of the local television stations was broadcasting from the top of the needle at that time. Everything survived. The landmark is still standing and used to this date, now over forty years later. It has survived three major quakes since it was built: 1965 Puget Sound (6.7), 1996 Duvall (5.1), and 2001 Nisqually (6.8). I believe it was the 6.7 quake that involved the broadcast.
Regardless, there were several reasons (some likely not revealed) for the new user interface, which Ron Tanner gave earlier in this thread.
Despite ongoing complaints (which have become nothing more than irritating noise and not useful to anyone, in my opinion), the change is here to stay (and that was stated the day of or the day after the rollout took place).
What is important is that all areas that appear to be or even feel like user downgrades need to be reported with positive results expected when the issues are resolved or the internal code finalized. Some areas, like the increase in loading speed, the way the tabs work, are works in progress and as result, the end result may be a user experience that is unexpected.
Take, for instance, the sources now being on a separate tab. According Ron Tanner's information that he shared, there are several things to expect with regard to the source tab -- first, it will eventually stick on where you last were at when you go to another tab, so when you go back to it, it won't be at the top of the source list (and where there are thirty-some sources, that becomes very important).
Second, it is possible that some kind of arrangement may be made, such as a new browser window opened that can be moved around on the screen while working with the original page open under it.
We simply do not know what the final product will look like, but for now, bemoaning what appears to be going back to the "stone age" may actually allow us to take two very large steps into the future.0 -
Tom Huber said: One more factoid about the Seattle Space Needle. It is built to withstand winds of up to 200 mph (320 km/h) and earthquakes of up to 9.1 magnitude.
Yes, it looks futuristic, even after over 40 years, but consider that any advancement may be like a step back if we are not looking to the future and imagining what can be done.0 -
Robert Wren said: Golly gee, FS hierarchy governing this forum actually followed some users' suggestions - I notice they have designated this topic as "NOT PLANNED
perhaps they next will be using "Under Consideration" for some of the USER suggestions.0 -
Jeff Wiseman said: Heh. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. That part is an improvement directly from a suggestion :-)
The original question in the thread was bring back the old format. It was stated a couple times up front that a return to the old interface will not happen. Now they are using the tool's capabilities to formalize it. There are now 2 discussions that have been marked as not planned in the last 6 years, and it looks like they've both been marked since the suggestion was made.
It also should have some effect of quieting this thread some as it continues to get new followers who just haven't log into FS for a couple of weeks and are just now getting the shock.
This does seem positive to me! :-)0 -
Jeff_Luke said: There is no logical reason why the user interface can't be changed back to having the sources on the same tab as the vitals while still reducing the amount of data loaded at first view of a page.
All they need to do is put a 'sources' header in the same location on the page as it was before, but simply don't load any details by default. If the user wants to see the sources they could click on the 'sources' text to start the loading process.
Once they are loaded there is no penalty for keeping them on the same tab.
This would satisfy both the 'issue' with loading the sources at page load, and keeping them visible so they are easily usable without tabbing back and forth (or buying 2 monitors and painstakingly keeping the 2 screens on the same person all the time).
And I don't understand the explanation that putting sources on a separate tab reduces page download by 2.5MB. Many people have no sources attached. Does loading those pages which have no sources still save 2.5MB? If so, how is that possible? Even when there are sources, it is a relatively small amount of text. I can't see why a few lines of text in a table requires loading 2.5MB of data.0 -
Robert Wren said: I think that is what I said, Jeff!! (Or at least what I meant)
And I now note another topic is "Under Consideration"
Yes, it is positive (but, regrettably, I tend toward being a cynic. I'll try to repent☺)0 -
Terri Kay Dinwiddie said: This comment might not be very professional, but Joe still looks like he did when we were his neighbor in college! Great guy and family! Joe we love you and I LOVE Family Search until this last change! Happy to see your still listening to our needs and watching out for family search users.0
-
m said: Jeff_Luke, please make this good and very technical idea into its own thread.0
-
m said: That Qube building hovering on a single leg looks so unstable. I hope it really is earthquake resistant!0
-
Chas Howell said: Jeff_Luke, Interesting. Could you please make this exact comment into a separate thread with a more appropriate Title. I’m afraid the issue of Sources on the Vital and Family Relationship page is lost and buried too deep in this catch all “I hate new format” thread to get the proper attention and vetting.0
-
Jeff Wiseman said: It better be! I know for a fact that there is a minor fault that coming off the St. Andrea's fault line that passes right through the middle of the Vancouver West End less than a mile from that building (if I remember correctly. I haven't been there for years).0
-
W David Samuelsen said: Created new thread dealing with this new glitch/programmer error
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...0
This discussion has been closed.