• Add a Comment
  • Edit
  • More Actions v
  • Quarantine this Entry

Comments (96)

1 localhost commented Trackback

Please get rid of the chevrons. They really are too hard to distinguish on hi-resolution setup. I think the circles are fine. BUT, I don't like toning them down so much color wise. Everything is blending a wee bit much for me. Make it the old blue so it stands out somewhat.

I feel the same about the reply and forward icons. They are a little too muted color-wise too, not quite enough to catch the eye like I think they should.
My problem might be that I work with a fairly high resolution, but everything is blending too much for me.
Any, my vote is to drop the chevrons and return to the circles.

2 localhost commented Permalink

Give us back the circles. Vote 4.

3 localhost commented Trackback

Since, as I've told you guys before, I think the column all the way to the left with the open vs. closed envelope is pretty useless, my inclination would be to make it useful by combining these columns. Perhaps by creating colored/shaded versions of the envelope that conveys the same information as the "to-ness" icon does. Shouldn't be difficult. And I'd bet that the "to-ness" is irrelevant once the message has been read, though that would need a round of usability testing, of course.

4 localhost commented Trackback

I prefer to the old circles.


5 localhost commented Permalink

The concept -- a series of '<' marks -- is fine, but I cannot see the logic in how its been carried out. Why does <<< mean that I am the only recipient, yet < means that I am one of more than 2 recpeients (or cc)? Isn't that backwards? When I started using that version, I spent a half hour trying to find a way to turn that around, thinking that I'd somehow configured it wrong. A single < should mean I'm the only recipient. << could mean that I am one of 2, and <<< could mean that I am one of lots. That makes sense. Is it better than the circles? I think so. Not perfect, but the circles were far from perfect too. They remind me of the circles Consumer Reports uses in their reviews. I spend half of each review looking down to see what each means.

6 localhost commented Permalink

@Robert - more chevrons = more important to you

7 localhost commented Permalink

I like to move mine to the left of the subject.

The problem with the current setup is that the chevrons look like arrows pointing at something. If I move them to the left of the subject, they look backwards. If I keep them in the default position, they look like they are pointing at blank space in narrow mode.
Also, for users who enable bidirectional locales, I'm guessing the chevrons orientation isn't being mirrored along with all the rest of the UI, even though perhaps it should?
If you use symmetrical icons, then these issue goes away...

8 localhost commented Trackback

Circles, somehow bolder than that screenshot. I can't argue color schemes because I'm not a designer, but if those items aren't more visually distinctive there's no reason for them to exist at all.

And I know you said that we can customize our views, and of course we can, but I'm sure you're aware that many corporations refuse to customize IBM's templates to avoid problems on upgrades. So can you please explain the justification for putting those columns on the far right? Experienced email users don't look to the far right, because all the important information starts on the left. The only way your eyes get all the way to the right is if you finish reading the subject, choose to read all the way out to the AM/PM section of the date column, and then for some reason want to keep moving them in that direction. Maybe for people who live with the preview pane open on the right, that is a typical viewing pattern. But those people are currently non-existent in the Notes universe and until everyone has widescreen monitors that probably won't change.
So why did you move them to the right, and why not put them back on the left? I've been using the beta since the day it was available (and I know you folks have had it much longer), but I still haven't been able to train myself to look all the way over to the right for the recipient icons OR the forward/reply indicators. For some reason, the attachment one I can work with. Maybe because it's near the size column.

9 localhost commented Permalink

I like Nathan's idea - how about red envelope icon for only recipient, yellow for CC and green or something for one of lots.

10 localhost commented Permalink

I vote for the old circle icons. Even on my crusty old resolution of 1024x768, the chevrons don't exactly stand out much. This could be age talking here but I actually find myself occasionally counting the number chevrons to determine the "to-ness". If there are a bunch of emails with chevrons clustered together, it is easier to distinguish 3 lines from 2 lines. However, I sometimes see a "chevron'ed" email in patch of "non-chevron'ed" emails and, without that contrasting, I'm not always certain with a quick glance as to whether there are 2 or 3 chevrons. That's when I find myself counting 'em up which detracts from the "at a glance" value that Notes 7 introduced. Furthermore, I also agree with those asking to not tone down the circles if they end up being used.

11 localhost commented Trackback

Change back to the old circles. But don't tone the colour down too much - otherwise they blend into irrelevance.


12 localhost commented Permalink

I vote number 4. And the muted colors are fine with me.

13 localhost commented Permalink

# 4 GO back to the Circles

14 localhost commented Trackback

Gotta be the circles -- or something else entirely. The chevrons make NO sense to me.

@David, if it has to be explained, it's not intuitive. And the chevrons just aren't.

15 localhost commented Permalink

Vote for #4 - the circles it is.

The chevrons are reversely intuitive as they are (3 should be 1 and v/v), less visually appealing and distinct, and less intuitive than the circles even if the order was reversed.

Add a Comment Add a Comment