CellarTracker Main Site
Register for Forum | Login | My Profile | Member List | Search

Features vs. Eye Candy

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Cellar Talk] >> CellarTracker Support >> Features vs. Eye Candy Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/13/2008 10:47:33 PM   
ebohling

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 11/13/2008
Status: offline
I've visited CT many, many times over the last year or so but have never created an account because I could not get past the unattractiveness of the website. Tonight I actually created an account and started nosing around a bit. There is no doubt that the features and capabilities of CT will make managing my ~300 btls of wine a snap. Much easier than my current, custom built (with Expression Engine) website...being able to search and leverage metadata already entered by others is fantastic.

However...

are there plans to ever improve the looks of the site or will features continue to outweigh the visuals?

If this site looked more like the cork'd (or similar) site i'd happily drop $60-100+ a year.

--Mr. Shallow--
Post #: 1
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/13/2008 11:07:25 PM   
Eric

 

Posts: 5740
Joined: 10/10/2003
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline
It has been oft discussed here. I am underway (about 2 months) into a significant redesign effort. It will be pretty, hopefully the middle of next year.

_____________________________

Cheers!
-Eric LeVine

(in reply to ebohling)
Post #: 2
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/16/2008 4:52:14 AM   
JohnNezlek

 

Posts: 218
Joined: 12/14/2006
From: Gloucester, Virginia
Status: offline
Eric,

I guess that as an old computer programmer (from Big Blue mainframe days), I have tended to value function over form, or perhaps more accurately, substance over style. I find the CT to be perfectly accessible, and in fact, I enjoy and appreciate the lack of "eye-candy". For example, Zachy's just changed its website from a more utilitarian style to one that is more "eye-candyish". The result is a meaningfully less efficient site. In the past, you could display about 15-20 wines on a page. There were prices, ratings, etc., and a link to a more detailed product page. Now, you get less than 10, with no more additional info, just some prettier pictures and fluff. Similarly, the "New Fedex" interface is considerably less efficient than the standard/old Fedex. They offer the option of staying with the existing model, and I have not switched .

If you change the site, please provide (if possible) an option to retain the "classic" (i.e. present) format. I want efficient information management, no more, no less. As a software user, I find the constant updates offered by many providers to be simply a way to sell new prodcut with little added vlaue (MicroSoft being the king of this). For example, I use Office97 because I find newer versions to be filled with all sorts of options that do not and will not apply to me and that get in the way of doing what I want to do -- write a paper. When I open Word, I want to write a paper, not open a television station in Brazil.

I recognize that unless someone develops software we will never have it, but the software industry has forgotten (or chose to ignore for various reasons), the old maxim "If it ain't broke don't fix it". CT is far from broke.

You are the head honcho, and if it changes, it changes, but I ask you to offer the "classic" interface if that is at all possible.

Cheers,

John


_____________________________

Too many wines, too little time.

(in reply to ebohling)
Post #: 3
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/16/2008 10:40:40 AM   
Colonel Lawrence

 

Posts: 2093
Joined: 4/24/2006
From: Arabia
Status: offline
"significant redesign efffort"
Now why shouldn't these few words worry me?
L.

(in reply to Eric)
Post #: 4
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/16/2008 11:00:49 AM   
NiklasW

 

Posts: 509
Joined: 10/13/2007
From: Finland
Status: online
I'm with John here. It works great, who needs it to look pretty??

(in reply to Colonel Lawrence)
Post #: 5
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/16/2008 12:07:47 PM   
JohnNezlek

 

Posts: 218
Joined: 12/14/2006
From: Gloucester, Virginia
Status: offline
It looks pretty now -- pretty effective.

_____________________________

Too many wines, too little time.

(in reply to NiklasW)
Post #: 6
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/16/2008 4:37:59 PM   
Eric

 

Posts: 5740
Joined: 10/10/2003
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline
Guys, trust me, I am a person who believes that "if it ain't broke then don't fix it." That said, while I know that there is a certain efficiency, simplicity and density to the current user interface, trust me I can do a lot better. For example, comments like these are not at all unusual:

https://twitter.com/gsherman/status/988802275

I am still a long way off from implementation. No one needs to be worried. I am not doing this to be gratuitous but rather to make the site cleaner, more efficient, prettier, more modern and much more approachable.


_____________________________

Cheers!
-Eric LeVine

(in reply to JohnNezlek)
Post #: 7
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/16/2008 5:59:43 PM   
Eric K

 

Posts: 85
Joined: 2/16/2008
From: Atlanta, GA
Status: offline
I was using my own access database before discovering the much superior cellartracker.  I think the site looks fine just how it is.  Maybe there could be a flashier home page to attract more users, but the My Cellar page,custom sorts, and reports don't need much of anything.

(in reply to Eric)
Post #: 8
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/16/2008 6:27:47 PM   
JohnNezlek

 

Posts: 218
Joined: 12/14/2006
From: Gloucester, Virginia
Status: offline
Eric (Sr. Eric ),

I do trust your judgment in the broad sense -- after all, it was your insight that led to CT. My primary concern is that by modifying the site to attract more people such as the moronic gsherman (please, what an a-hole), you will degrade the quality of what you have now -- a lean, mean, fightin' machine. One must consider the priorities of someone who judges tracking software by some esoteric set of undefined qualities instead of functionality. The proof is in the pudding [the expression is actually "the proof is in the eating (of the pudding)]. As I understand it, CT membership has grown by leaps and bounds, and not infrequently, wine merchants use CT ratings in their copy. By catering to the likes of gsherman (did I mention he is a moron), CT membership may increase, but who will these people be? Will they judge wine by how pretty the label is, or how nice the glass was in which it was served, or the smile of the waitress who served it? Putting aside differences of opinions about certain wines, we seem to have a collection of  intelligent and thoughtful people (even Serge ) who enjoy wine from a variety of different perspectives.

The barbarians are at the gates. Do we admit them in the hope that they will become civilized? Perhaps. Or do we ask the most minmal and simplest of concessions -- that they endure an interface that any computer-savvy eigth grader could master in 30 minutes?

Eric, my guess is that somehow you will find a way to civilize them. We, your humble servants, just want you to know that we care how this is done.

Cheers,

John


_____________________________

Too many wines, too little time.

(in reply to Eric K)
Post #: 9
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 3:03:24 AM   
Colonel Lawrence

 

Posts: 2093
Joined: 4/24/2006
From: Arabia
Status: offline
I don't know how computer savvy an eigth grader is, but I'm definitely below that standard, and I find CT pretty easy to navigate around.
If I go wrong Eric tells me which of the rules I missed and it all works.
I rarely read the rules first and I can even use CT with that level of ignorance.
I wonder what gsherman expects?
Perhaps he's a big game player?
L.


< Message edited by Colonel Lawrence -- 11/17/2008 3:04:22 AM >

(in reply to Eric)
Post #: 10
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 3:30:59 AM   
Serge Birbrair

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Boca Raton, Florida
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Colonel Lawrence

"significant redesign efffort"
Now why shouldn't these few words worry me?
L.


Eric, don't be a shmuck.
"Eye Candy" is for the sissies and not serious CT users.

I have only 3 arguments against redesign.

#1 - How much money are made from this very simple design?
(In billions of dollars, please)

#2 - How much money were lost from this this eye candy design
In  millions of dollars, please.

#3 - yours truly retired in 3 years from using this very simple design.






_____________________________

Do you really think you understand terroir!? -

(in reply to Colonel Lawrence)
Post #: 11
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 6:09:49 AM   
Wrighty

 

Posts: 768
Joined: 10/3/2005
From: Hong Kong
Status: offline
Eric,

I'm with the others (on the forum - not Twitter).  We're here for a reason, and the reason is a fantastic site.  Yes, you probably could improve the interface but these things can go the other way and unless members are leaving or not joining then please keep any changes minimal.

Wrighty

(in reply to Serge Birbrair)
Post #: 12
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 7:10:38 AM   
fingers

 

Posts: 731
Joined: 8/26/2006
From: Santa Ana, CA
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: ebohling

... have never created an account because I could not get past the unattractiveness of the website. --Mr. Shallow--


Right!

< Message edited by fingers -- 11/17/2008 9:45:48 AM >

(in reply to ebohling)
Post #: 13
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 7:48:46 AM   
annerk

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 10/16/2008
From: Central Florida
Status: online
Former web designer who specialized in GUI and usability concerns weighing in on this one.

Cellar Tracker is a tool for a specific purpose--maintaining and tracking a wine collection, and obtaining information on various wines under consideration for purchase.  I agree with Serge, the Google model is a great example of why something works.  No extra clutter, just information.  It's not a search engine/portal
rolled into one, and that's part of what makes it fast--and is why Google is my computer's "Home Page" and Yahoo sucks--and I don't use the term "sucks" in the marketing/Vincent Flanders sense.

I regularly access CellarTracker on my Blackberry, and the simplicity of it allows me to download the information I need quickly, without being slowed down by useless "eye candy" graphics.

I use the Internet for information and tools that help me manage various aspects of my life and foremost, and entertainment a distant second.  I see CT as a management tool, just like online banking.  I want those tools to work fast and without excess clutter. 

I've recently been on pages that even with my fast connection took over 30 seconds to load because of all of the graphics and useless "eye candy" clutter on them.  I have not returned to any of them, and won't.  Time is money, and my time is too valuable to spend waiting for loads of crap to load so I can read the one sentence of information I'm looking for.  I'll find it elsewhere, thanks.

A decade ago the "eight second rule" prevailed.  I believe that the current standard is four seconds, and it's my belief that four seconds might be actually generous in many circumstances before page abandonment occurs.  The more "eye candy" that has to be downloaded, the slower the load time, and the more clutter the harder it is to find what you are looking for.  I vote for speed and usability over "eye candy" in this application--and most others as well.

< Message edited by annerk -- 11/17/2008 7:54:02 AM >

(in reply to fingers)
Post #: 14
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 9:39:33 AM   
Eric

 

Posts: 5740
Joined: 10/10/2003
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline
Speed, usability, more logical organization, greater readability, easier drilldown to edit wines, all are top priorities. Trust me, this is not about "eye candy" but rather about entering the modern age of the Internet. I am not rushing into anything. The designers I am working with are very thoughtful and deliberate. No one likes change and especially change for the sake of change. I would not be focused on site redesign if I did not hear the need very often from people who love the site and from people who were 'turned away' by the current raw design. All I ask is that people be patient with me and show and open mind once we get down to this next year.

_____________________________

Cheers!
-Eric LeVine

(in reply to annerk)
Post #: 15
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 10:16:26 AM   
NiklasW

 

Posts: 509
Joined: 10/13/2007
From: Finland
Status: online
Hey Eric, perhaps you might like to invite some (or all) of us critical ones to test the beta version once it is ready for testing? If ya get us on board, nobody will complain...  I'm certainly willing.

(in reply to Eric)
Post #: 16
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 10:27:50 AM   
annerk

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 10/16/2008
From: Central Florida
Status: online
Eric,

Anytime we can get to the data we are looking for with less clicks (ie drilldown) I'm all for it! 

Constructive criticism--getting to "My Tasting Notes" while on the Blackberry is less than intuitive.  I stood there fumbling around trying to figure out where it was for a good 15 minutes one day while out shopping and trying to recall a vintage.

(in reply to NiklasW)
Post #: 17
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 10:40:48 AM   
Eric

 

Posts: 5740
Joined: 10/10/2003
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline
Niklas, I will certainly do what I can as we get closer to be as transparent as possible with the new design. We will be using the local to Seattle CellarTracker community for usability testing (apologies, we filled a our slots within a matter of minutes of me emailing the 485 people who have filled out their CellarTracker profile and list themselves in Washington State, Oregon, Vancouver and Victoria BC), but we may add a larger focus group or some way to gather feedback from all of the other locals who wanted to be involved. And of course, I recognize that there are thousands of people who are not local who might well want to see and provide feedback on the evolving designs. And so without trying to make my own life more difficult I do want to do what I can.

BTW, re-reading my very terse and flippant response to the original question, I can see why people are hopping in here with concern. I should have been more thoughtful and eloquent in the reply. The current CellarTracker UI, for btter or for sworse, has evolved to where it is largely organically as I have evolved the underlying functionality over the past 5 years. As is abundantly obvious, I am much more of a FUNCTION guy than a FORM guy, but there is a place for both. There are a billion things that I want to add to the site (and which so many of you haev asked for), but often the hardest challenge for me is "where to stick" the link. And so much of what I have added over time is undiscovered to so many of you. It amazes me how often people have no idea of the advanced search functionality that already exists. I know that can be exposed in ways to make it both more discoverable and easier to leverage for both the beginner and the advanced user.

Also keep in mind that there are really two very distinct constituencies of users on the site:
  • Those who are interested in managing a cellar. We make up less than 10% of the population, yet the people using CellarTracker as a productivity tool are the lifeblood of the site. Trust me, as a guy who spent 15 years working on desktop productivity tools at Lotus and Microsoft, I will not lose sight of you. Keep in mind, I feel your pain. I am using this site to track nearly 4,000 bottles myself and depend on it daily. I can do a LOT better here in terms of visual appearance and productivity.
  • A new and rapidly growing base of users are those who are almost exclusively browsing the site, looking for wine recommendations, looking to find people near them to trade and socialize with. Many of us who are tracking cellars also want to use the site this way. For this latter set of tasks, the site is a mess right now.
I like cake. I want my cake. I want to eat it to. I am working with some really, really bright people who do nothing but think about usability and design, meat and potatoes stuff. I need their help, as it is just too hard for me to rip away from the day to day of the site and how it has evolved to where it is. I have been working with them for a few months both to leverage their immense skills and their fresh perspective. One of the crucial building blocks of our process has been a disciplined attempt to do some research into who is using CellarTracker and who should be. We have broken these out into somewhat iconic personas so that as we design we are quite explicit about the different types of users, who we are prioritizing and de-prioritizing etc. But the personas will live long past this first attempt on a site resedign and will be a useful tool for generations of the site to come. The next focus is to identify key tasks by persona and very thoughtfully map out 'wireframes' and weigh the strengths and weaknesses of various designs. Then we will be usability testing these with people who match the various personas. Around February we should be wrapping up, and I will likely, for the first time, be hiring someone who really help me code this all up and leverage so much of the cool stuff that has come into being on the web. Serge, your calling out of Google is not lost on me. Early Google and Yahoo were best because of their simplicity, speed, and focus of design. In my own limited way I certainly want to embrace that, and I am certainly quite self conscious of my Microsoft roots and the good and bad things that brings with it.

Above all else, I am trying to be thoughtful and deliberate. I want the site to grow and evolve for decades to come. I have a ton of stuff still to do, and I need a UI framework that can contain this without collapsing under the weight of me tossing more crap around the edges of the screen. Function. Simplicity. Density. ****loads of data. Leveraging that and making it useful for you and the millions of other wine lovers out there. This is what I live by. Trust me.


_____________________________

Cheers!
-Eric LeVine

(in reply to NiklasW)
Post #: 18
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 11:03:23 AM   
Colonel Lawrence

 

Posts: 2093
Joined: 4/24/2006
From: Arabia
Status: offline
Eric I love CT and admire what you've achieved, but I fear you are too US, West Coast, Seattle focused.
The world has to be your oyster; after livĂ­ng and working in six disparate countries I realise that there is so much more that unites the world than divides it (just read the forum for starters).  I admit Fox News and the others don't seem to realise it.
No need for a reply, just wanted you to here the ROTW.
L.

(in reply to Eric)
Post #: 19
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 11:06:48 AM   
Eric

 

Posts: 5740
Joined: 10/10/2003
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline
Colonel, the Seattle focus is purely for getting people in a room to do a usability test, something that can not be done virtually. Trust me, I also want to evolve CellarTracker to consider many more languages and locales in good time. No xenophobia here. Just necessary engineering focus.

_____________________________

Cheers!
-Eric LeVine

(in reply to Colonel Lawrence)
Post #: 20
RE: Features vs. Eye Candy - 11/17/2008 11:14:09 AM   
Colonel Lawrence

 

Posts: 2093
Joined: 4/24/2006
From: Arabia
Status: offline
Take it back.  I guess we remote folk are just a bit jealous.
Cheers,
L.

PS  Not sure how you see CT in terms of serious collectors versus more modest ones, but I confess I now have growing problems keeping my CT inventory in line with actual.  Linkage with my physical stores would be a godsend.  I recognise the challenge, but a point worth making.
Tie up with Octavian UK and you can treble my contribution ;)

(in reply to Eric)
Post #: 21
RE: Here's my vote... - 11/17/2008 3:36:37 PM   
mplsbruin

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 7/29/2008
Status: offline
Hi Eric,
I would also vote for re-design that emphasized "function" rather than "appearance".  Also, I would not want to sacrifice speed.
Finally, what you have here is UNBELIEVABLY FABULOUS!  I spread the word religiously.  The more data/users, the better for all of us - assuming that the server(s) doesn't crash!
-denis

(in reply to ebohling)
Post #: 22
RE: Here's my vote... - 11/18/2008 4:36:23 AM   
Serge Birbrair

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Boca Raton, Florida
Status: online
Yahoo's man behind "Eye Candy Design" steps down
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081118/bs_nm/us_yahoo_yang

_____________________________

Do you really think you understand terroir!? -

(in reply to mplsbruin)
Post #: 23
RE: Here's my vote... - 11/18/2008 10:02:51 AM   
gbm

 

Posts: 229
Joined: 3/12/2008
From: Connecticut
Status: offline
*sigh* 

Just please don't do anything that gets it blocked at work.  I already have to re-read everything Serge posts after I get home. 

(in reply to Serge Birbrair)
Post #: 24
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Cellar Talk] >> CellarTracker Support >> Features vs. Eye Candy Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.281